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
323154362
label
[George] Bush General Background 1989-1990 [OA 8486]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323154362
contentType
document
title
[George] Bush General Background 1989-1990 [OA 8486]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13843-003
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Backup Alphabetical Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323154362
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
18e9f94d6ba8cad6
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:
Alpha File, 1987-1991
OA/ID Number:
13843
Folder ID Number:
13843-003
Folder Title:
[George] Bush General Background, 1989-1990
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
23
2
7
Robert Jay Kaufman
Fight Baseball's TV Fadeout
175 games a year). Reaching barely 58 per-
when virtually every team slashes local
By CURT SMITH
cent of all homes, cable should be baseball's
coverage. For Americans sans cable, base-
television icing, not the cake.
ball will - unbelievably - be blacked out in
F
OR 37 years, the "Game of the Week".
qMost cruelly, the CBS arrangements
the most crucial part of the season.
has been Saturday's national Main
scent of Social Darwinism - survival of the
Next, local television: its facts mock those
Street, a televised grandstand linking
richest - and disenfranchise those who love/
who contend that individual broadcasts by
baseball to provinces hundreds of miles from
need baseball most: the poor and elderly, the
clubs can somehow supplant the "Game."
the nearest big leaguercity. It is network tele-
habitants of inner cities, farms, and gentle
Local exposure varies wildly; moreover, few
vision's longest-running sports program; in-
small towns. These Americans lack access to
clubs play - let alone, air - games each Sat-
deed, according to the A. Nielsen Compa-
cable, or the funds to afford it. Nor can local-
urday afternoon, increasingly moving to Sat-
ny, it is the most popular April-August
team broadoasts link them to baseball: in
urday night. (Déjà vu: in the 1960's, baseball
weekly sports series of the 1980's.
huge chunks of America, such coverage does
shifted emphasis from network to local TV.
Yet unless common sense prevails, yester
not exist where it does, local television has
The result? A decade in which the N.F.L. sur-
day's game - incredibly - was the final
proved unable to spur baseball's national
passed baseball as America's most popular
Game of the Week." For under baseball's
popularity Even Ripley would disbelieve: 12
sport. The CBS pact repeats that mistake
new four-year exclusive contract with CBS,
baseball games a year.
Worse, any local increase will do nothing for
to take effect next season, that network will
the millions of fans not part of local net
broadcast - annually, and haphazardly
works.)
the pathetic total of 12 games in 26 weeks.
When the new contract was announced last
Finally, there is cable. Its facts, too, deride
The new. commissioner, Francis T. (Fay)
December, these truths were overlooked. In-
those who talk of ESPN's becoming base-
Vincent Jr.; who, like A. Barlett Giamatti, in-
stead, reports focused on its gargantuan
ball's new TV umbilical cord. ESPN's cover-
herited the pact from Peter Ueberroth, hopes
price tag. Negotiating the contract, Ueber-
age, almost solely after dark, will be off-
to save the "Game of the Week" by reversing
roth lured $1.1 billion from CBS for the entire
limits to young kids. And to reach even
this decision. For its demise will mark the
package, and for the simplest reason. Only
cable's 58 percent penetration, you must be
greatest fiasco in baseball's 69-year broad-
CBS needed baseball's post-season games so
in a room that's wired.
cast history, slashing network exposure and,
desperately- lift October audiences, and
These facts are hardly state secrets
inevitably, maiming its appeal. Only CBS can
promote its flagging prime-time schedule -
Ueberroth knew them - and didn't care.
help Vincent preserve TV's oldest sports in-
that it would pay anything to gain exclusivity.
Like Giamatti, Fay Vincent knows them -
stitution. And must.
and does. Let Pilson, then, allow Vincent to
Consider:
preserve the game. Both have a stake: CBS
qUnder the CBS pact, baseball will become
has gambled everything on baseball; base-
a network nonperson. This year, NBC and
What should we term
ball requires a window on the land. Both
ABC aired 40 major league games; last sea-
know, as Vincent says, that "people are con-
son, pro football boasted 216 networkcasts.
next year's 12-game
cerned, as Bart was, and I am, about the
What should we term next year's 12-game
Game's end - I am searching for a solu-
schedule? The Dirty Dozen? The Twelve
schedule? "The Dirty
tion." The solution is to have CBS air its 12
Days of Baseball? For much of America,
scheduled Saturday games, then explore the
baseball will now be out of sight; how long be-
Dozen?
following options.
fore it becomes out of mind?
CBS can present Saturday/Sunday 10:30
9This contract abandons the network
morning games, bridging Pee-wee Herman
whose baseball reverence is perhaps TV's
and Charles Kuralt with afternoon sports
worst-kept secret; NBC, which has covered
Baseball was something to be used, not loved.
programming. And, CBS can air 8 P.M. East-
the pastime since 1947, wanted to broadcast a
That CBS wouldn't telecast a weekly
ern time, Saturday games, bumping network
"Game" didn't trouble Ueberroth. Nor does
1990. "Game" each Saturday. In contrast,
TV's lowest-viewed lineup (its three regular
CBS's sports head, Neal Pilson, flaunts his
it Pilson, today.
Saturday night series finished 54th, 64th, and
network's baseball nescience by saying,
Yet even then, it troubled those who looked
67th among all 70 network prime-time
"The emphasis on baseball will now be on the
beneath the dollar sign. And in recent
series). Also, CBS can schedule late-night
post-season." (Bart Giamatti often said, "Of
months, the pact's details, becoming public,
Saturday games from the Pacific Coast, pre-
all sports, baseball's regular season matters
have been ridiculed - in print and letters to
empting a Rubik's Cube of old movies, talk-
most.")
the commissioner's office - as a 1990-93
show repeats and assorted fare.
Giamatti, like Vincent, knew that baseball
black hole. Increasingly, the network deal
In each case, the network baseball audi-
and any network need a healthy regular sea-
has become sport's outcast child; no one will
ence would surely equal its replacement:
son for the post-season to prosper. Like read-
claim parentage.
morning and late-night games, especially,
ers deprived of a novel's first six chapters,
Ueberroth stepped down April 1. His suc-
would oppose almost no local TV games. This
October viewers will have to watch some-
cessor was one of the noblest public servants
design would give the network more games
thing they know little of from April to Sep-
of our age. Bart Giamatti loved the pastime
to recoup rights fees; serve fans, who, right-
tember.
and grasped the contract's flaws. Indeed, at
ly, feel abandoned, and preserve baseball's
9History teaches that network television is
the time of his death, Giamatti was prepar-
national identity. It would ensure a "Game"
any sport's best selling tool. It enters every
ing to meet with CBS officials in an attempt
each weekend, if not, necessarily, each Satur-
living room, and shapes the viewing habits of
to preserve the "Game of the Week."
day afternoon.
a nation. The new format mocks that history,
By striving to insure weekly exposure, Gia-
Since 1953, the "Game of the Week" has en-?
and foolishly shifts regular-season reliance
matti acted honorably. By facing indisputa-
larged America's family album of big league:
to cable (e.g., the majors' new ESPN pact,
ble facts, and, thus, preserving the "Game of
fans, becoming a movable feast, available
the Week" - baseball can now honor him.
everywhere. The "Game," says Nielsen, is
First, network facts. Giamatti knew that
spring and summer's most widely watched
Curt Smith's most recent book is "Voices
the new pact burdens the major leagues with
sports series. It deserves to live, so that base-
of The Game," a history of baseball broad-
minor league coverage. CBS's 1990 schedule
ball can thrive, and remain the chosen sport
casting.
lists no September games, the very time
of the American people.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 2, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR SPEECHWRITING STAFF
FROM:
BOB SIMON
Yes, broccoli is starting to get a little stale, but this is
cute.
Kids advise Bush on broccoli
By Lynn Smith
Like it or not, 20 of the 28
Los Angeles Times
students in Sharon Ball's class in
COSTA MESA, Calif. He
Costa Mesa said that they eat broc-
could pretend to chew it but slip it to
coli at home. A mother-pleasing
the dog under the table instead.
majority, 17, said that they eat it
He could put it on his brother's
because they "love it." A fearless
few said that they would rather die.
plate when Mom isn't looking.
"It tastes like grass," said Luci-
He could ask politely to be ex-
na Aguilar, 11.
cused, then flush it down the toilet.
"I think broccoli is sick," wrote
Or, as leader of the free world,
Abel Rodriguez. "You should fill a
President Bush could do what he in
spaceship with broccoli and send it
fact did last week- claim executive
to the sun."
privilege and just say no to broccoli.
Many of the children, recent
Disagreeing with his taste, but
targets of anti-drug programs, com-
empathizing with a 65-year-old man
pared broccoli to drugs, illustrating
finally breaking free from maternal
their letters with crayon drawings
orders to eat dreaded vegetables,
File photo
of a green stalk of broccoli with a
fifth-graders at Costa Mesa's Whit-
President Bush, broccoli hater
red circle and a line through it. One
tier Elementary School sent Bush
boy titled his drawing, "Broccoli
their own advice about what to do with broccoli
Can Kill You!!!" Another read, "Dare to Keep Kids off
Monday.
Broccoli."
The president said last Thursday, "I do not like
Some gently suggested that Bush might grow out of
broccoli and I haven't liked it since I was a little kid and
his dislike of broccoli. "I know how you feel," wrote
my mother made me eat it, and I'm president of the
Reyna Estrada. "I don't like it that much. My mom
United States and I'm not going to eat any more
made me eat it when I was a little girl. Now I am 11
broccoli."
years old and I enjoy eating it a lot."
MEG GREENFIELD
The Broccoli
now "postured" in relation to some circumstance. When he
speaks to the press or directly to the public it is often
almost as if he were reading a third-person news account
Photo Copy Preservation
about what he is saying-as distinct from actually saying
Breakthrough
it. He seems to be writing the news stories for the reporters
as he speaks to them, not so much expressing as reporting
on himself. from their point of view.
I do not pretend to know what accounts for this. You can
view it as surpassingly self-conscious and self-concerned or
How one
as surpassingly self-effacing and modest. That is, it could
equally easily be preoccupation with image or discomfort
famously
with overuse of the word "I" and the presumption of
unpopular
egotism this carries. Put in the descriptive mode, the
things Bush says about himself could be construed by him
vegetable brought
as sounding more detached, impersonal, government-busi-
ness oriented than a lot of conversation about what he
out the best
himself does, thinks, likes, wants.
in the president
There is at least one school of thought (shared by a
number of his conservative critics just now) which holds
that Bush just doesn't have strong feelings about anything
with the possible exception of Dick Gephardt and green
lthough I myself don't have what you would call a
A
vegetables and that this accounts for his oddly detached,
thing about broccoli, if it all disappeared from the
third-person utterance. These critics would explain that
face of the earth tomorrow you would hear no
Bush doesn't directly share his convictions because he
complaint from me. But it is not my shared, if
doesn't have any, being-in this view-wholly a creature
unimpassioned, distaste for the dimly smelly stuff
of technique and process. Another, the psychobabble
that makes the president's direct attack on it so pleasing to
school, has it that his strict upbringing and a heavy dose of
mè. Nor is it this distaste which prompts me to say that I
don't-think-you're-so-hot humility administered by his
don't much care one way or the other whether he is, as his
parents generated his particular public-speaking style. I
critics somberly charge, exploiting this dislike for political
offer the theory that for any much-covered political per-
gain and for the points it wins for hairy-chestedness. I
son, the day-after-day TV and other coverage that converts
mean: so what? The important fact is that, even though it's
your life into a kind of slick story or sitcom must present an
only broccoli we're talking about, it has prompted George
overwhelming temptation to fiddle, edit, manipulate and
Bush to come right out in a direct, forthright, subjective,
direct, so that you eventually come to see yourself precisely
unambiguous, declarative, deeply felt, unashamed, first-
as the central figure in the serial and grow ever more cut
person-pronoun sort of way and tell us what he feels. We
off, at least in public, from the real as distinct from the
know an awful lot about Bush, but we hear rather little of
sitcom you.
this kind from him. I wish we would hear more.
Me-I problem: The few glimpses I have had of the private
There has been a great deal of analysis of Bush's speak-
Bush over the years tend to confirm the picture painted by
ing style lately and an increasing amount of parody, some
his friends of a different kind of man. And it is surely true
of it very funny. The "Bush" who appears regularly on
that whatever the real broccoli hater is like, Bush is far
"Saturday Night Live" is the best presidential imperson-
from being the first or only political figure in our time who
ator I've heard since the hilarious takeoff on JFK by
has had an awkward struggle with the me-I problem of
Vaughn Meader became famous almost 30 years ago. Ev-
recurrent public speech. Some, like Jesse Jackson, go to the
eryone has down pat the verb-poor, pronoun-deprived sen-
royal-sounding "we"; others, as the late Hubert Humphrey
tences, the gestures and inflections, the characteristic
did, tend to describe themselves by name. None of it helps.
diction. This deflating kind of treatment, of course, comes
And others too-Nixon, Reagan and Carter in quite differ-
with the presidency just as surely as "Hail to the Chief"
ent ways-were given to this systematic projection of some
and other inflating perks come with it. But what seems
contrived kind of personage on the big political screen. The
most basic to me in Bush's public-speaking style doesn't get
the attention it deserves. It is precisely this absence of
posturing and the manipulation of symbols from the D-Day
subjective revelation-"I think this
commemoration to the overnight visits with just plain
I
want
that
I
do
not like the other
folks and the studious posing in carefully set places-all of
etc."
this has a full, rich history of exploitation predating Bush.
Having said this, I am prepared for an avalanche of
And yet I think there is something distinctive in this
examples to be thrust my way showing Bush saying what
president's way of talking about himself. He does not fall
he thinks, wants, doesn't like and so forth; and I am sure
into the self-descriptive style, as some of his predecessors
that a wealth of these may be mined from the printed
did, only when he is trying to puff himself up or to concoct
transcripts and taped recordings of his prose, since, un-
an absolutely stellar, Nixon-type I-was-the-coolest-man-in-
avoidably, we all use these formulations from time to time
the-room image. On the contrary, this is, by now, his
in our daily speech. But the key and, to me, distinguishing
preferred and customary public idiom. He is his own one-
feature of Bush's speech is the remarkable extent to which
he does not-the remarkable extent to which he tends to
man running newspaper analysis of the significance of
describe rather than declare himself.
what George Bush really thinks and cares about, which is
Think about what you hear. Bush is always telling you
not the same thing as saying, with the unique authority he
how to look at what he is doing, or what the impression is
has in this matter, after all, what that is. This, apart from
he is trying to create, or where he should be placed on the
the way we most all felt as kids about compulsory leafy
greens, is, in my view, why people found the broccoli burst
scale you may be creating in your mind between two
so engaging. Contrived or not, it was felt and meant. I think
positions or how he and his administration feel they are
what people are saying is: Right, tell us more.
68 NEWSWEEK APRIL 2, 1990
ACHIEVEMENTS
November 6, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR ROGER B. PORTER
THROUGH:
JIM PINKERTON
FROM:
WILLIAM L. EAGLE
EMILY M. MEAD
SUBJECT:
Summary of the President's accomplishments.
This memo is our revised synthesis of the OPD staff
summaries (attached for your examination) of the President's
accomplishments that you requested.
Prosperity
The United States is now in its 84th month of economic
expansion.
Real economic growth has been 2.9 percent.
Since the President has taken office, there have been 1.9
million new jobs created -- an average of 209,000 per month.
Personal income has risen by over $200 billion since January
-- an average of $800 per person.
The President is forcefully promoting the opening of world
markets through the Super 301 provision of the Omnibus Trade
and Competitive Act of 1988.
The Administration has vigorously maintained an
international commitment to an ambitious Uruguay Round of
trade negotiations and has reached an international
consensus through the Steel Trade Liberalization Program.
Fiscal Responsibility
President Bush submitted a budget which met the Gramm Rudman
targets for FY90.
As promised, the President has held the line on taxes.
-2-
The President successfully negotiated a 27 percent increase
in the minimum wage coupled with a training wage provision.
The President is holding his ground on capital gains.
The President has addressed the savings and loan crisis,
assuring the American people that their savings will be
secure and free from further reckless, corrupted
mismanagement.
Environment
The President presented the first revision of the Clean Air
Act in over ten years calling for mandated reductions in
destructive emissions which cause acid rain, urban ozone and
toxic air pollution.
The President's budget included $710 million for the Clean
Coal Technology Program, and $315 million for the Superfund
Cleanup.
The President also banned the export of hazardous waste and
implemented a medical waste tracking program to keep needles
off our beaches.
While maintaining his commitment to "no-net-loss" of
wetlands, the President has also presided over a driftnet
fishing agreement with several Asian nations, as well as an
international ban on the trade of African elephant ivory.
The President has postponed oil drilling lease sales off
environmentally sensitive areas of the California and
Florida coasts.
Crime and Drugs
The President sent The Comprehensive Violent Crime Control
Act of 1989 to Congress, which included additional needed
funds for federal enforcement, an expansion of federal
prison capacity, augmentation of prosecution personnel, and
a ban on certain semi-automatic weapons.
The President unveiled his National Drug Control policy
calling for increased spending of nearly $8 billion for
education, treatment, enforcement and interdiction.
-3-
Conforming to this plan, the Department of Housing and Urban
Development has taken measures to provide for drug free
public housing.
Education
In February, the President proposed his Educational
Excellence Act of 1989, focusing on seven initiatives,
including merit schools, improved math and science
education, and alternative certification for teachers.
As promised, the "Education President" summoned the
governors to a national summit on education in which they
addresed the problems of the nation's educational system.
The summit conferees issued a joint statement laying the
groundwork for educational reform in America based on the
President's principles: the recognition of excellence;
addressing need, flexibility and choice; and ensuring
accountability.
Kinder, Gentler America
Consistent with his call for "A kinder and gentler America,"
the President has transmitted the Working Family Child Care
Assistance Act of 1989 which provides a refundable tax
credit for child care and places choice in the hands of
parents to decide who best can care for their children.
The President requested an additional $250 million for the
Head Start program.
The President has requested full funding for the McKinney
Act to assist homeless families and the mentally ill.
The President has reauthorized the Low Income Opportunity
Board, coordinating federal agencies, and assisting states
in better utilizing federal money to aid the low-income
population.
The Americans with Disabilities Act will provide
unprecedented protection against discrimination for persons
with disabilities -- perhaps the most significant expansion
of civil rights laws in the past two decades.
-4-
The President called upon Congress to reauthorize the
Commission on Civil Rights.
The President signed the Whistleblower Protection Act of
1989 to strengthen the rights of employees in reporting
misdeeds and mismanagement.
To combat infant mortality rates, the President has
requested the Congress to expand Medicaid eligibility of
pregnant women, as well as provide for coverage of childhood
immunizations.
The President has also asked Congress to augment tax credits
relating to adoption expenses.
Though the promotion of wider availability of experimental
and therapeutic drugs such as AZT, the President has
demonstrated his commitment to the eradication of the HIV
virus and AIDS.
Invest in our Future
Concerned with the economic difficulty of our inner cities,
the President has submitted amendments to the JTPA as well
as a proposal to promote enterprise zones.
The President has called for the development of a National
Energy Strategy to provide a plan for a secure and abundant
and environmentally safe energy supply for the nation.
Toward that end, the President ordered the decontrol of
natural gas prices.
The President has made a commitment to the continued
exploration of space through the creation of the National
Space Council, chaired by the Vice President.
In a bold new initiative, the President has proposed the
deployment of Space Station Freedom, the establishment of a
permanent presence on the moon, and a manned mission to
Mars.
Reform
The President has made proposals to Congress for
comprehensive reforms in campaigns and elections, and ethics
in government.
-5-
The President issued an executive order on ethical conduct
covering the employees of the executive branch.
The Office of National Service has been energized by the
President's founding of the Points of Light Initiative to
identify, enlarge, and duplicate successful community
service programs throughout the nation.
The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development has
implemented departmental reform programs to eliminate
discretionary funding, mandate documented accountability,
and increase powers of the Inspector General.
#
312,
96 / 30, 000, 000,000 000
288
120
20
96
240
12
od
9
76/
/
30
THE FEDERAL PAGE
Bush's Speech Writers: Not the Ideological Breed of Years Past
Theodore Sorenson and Richard Goodwin. Lyndon B.
By Ann Devroy
Johnson used Goodwin, Bill Moyers and McGeorge
OIOUNI
Washington Post Staff Writer
Bundy, and Richard M. Nixon had what is generally
As the second year of Ronald Reagan's presidency
began, Tony Dolan, one of his cadre of committed
WHAT THE STAFFING PROCESS WOULD DO
considered the best speech-writing staff in captivity,
with Price, Buchanan, Safire, Bill Gavin and more.
conservative speech writers, came up with the phrase
TO THE GETTYSBURG ADDRESS
Noonan, who sought a speech-writing job in Reagan's
"evil empire" to describe the Soviet Union.
White House because she wanted to advance conser-
Copy
He gleefully stuck it into one Reagan speech over-
vatism, describes in her book an operation consumed
seas, but it was scratched out. Too strident. He tried
much
with the clash of ideas, the language to describe those
again. And again. Finally, nearly a year later, Reagan
our
fathers
uttered the words dreamed by Dolan. The phrase be-
sexual
ideas, and battles to get the words into speeches.
and
nation,
(conceived
in
Under Reagan, some speech writer was always being
came synonymous in the public mind with Reagan's
here
forth
upon
this
continent,
a
new
imagery-
Preservation
Soviet policy.
proposition
that
men,
sounds
accused of trying to "make policy," to make the pres-
all
the
ident a little more conservative by slipping sharp ide-
As George Bush prepares to deliver his first State
to
are liberty created and equal Now dedicated we are in nation great S0
like
talking
ology or nods of approval into his speeches without go-
of the Union address tonight, there may be passionate
partisans lurking in his speech-writing operation, men
nation,
or
pregnancy
ing through the ubiquitous "clearance" process.
any
It is a matter of faith to all presidential speech writ-
who are dreaming the words that capture the essence
whether(that
of the president and his policies. But if there are, they
are hidden. And so, mostly, are their words.
what's
war, conceived testing and so dedicated, can long endure.
and
ers that nameless aides, in endless committee ses-
women
sions, turn the sharp prose of speech writers into oat-
White House communications director David F.
We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have
meal unless heroic battles are fought to save it.
Demarest, who hired and supervises the all-white,
great
all-male staff of speech writers, said he "believes" the
delete.
come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final
sounds
Noonan, in her book, offers up a rewritten Gettys-
burg Address to show what happens when review com-
resting place for those who here gave their lives that
mittees get their way. She describes Bush aides, before
five Bush speech writers are Republicans, but "I'm
this
his nomination acceptance speech, trying to alter one of
not 100 percent sure." He is, however, certain that
none of his speech writers is an ideologue, and equally
that nation might live It is altogether fitting and
just
photo
the few memorable phrases he has uttered: "Read my
lips. No new taxes." Some aide insisted it was unpres-
certain that speeches are a less important form of
regative!
proper that we do sof But in a larger sense, we cannot
idential to talk about body parts, Noonan writes.
communication for Bush than they were for Reagan
dedicate-we cannot consecrate-we cannot hallow this
WOMEN
One major difference between the Reagan years
or many other presidents.
and the Bush White House, insiders said, is that few
"It is safe to say that we don't try to over-rely on
speeches to carry the president's message," said De-
what
ground The brave men! living and dead, poor who power struggled to
battles are fought by writers on ideological grounds.
marest, even though Bush has given more of them in
consecrated
it
far
above
our
unpresidential-
Also, this president puts no premium on moving or
his first year in office than the past two presidents av-
have
striking rhetoric.
eraged. He noted that Bush has used news conferences,
here. add or detract. The world will little note nor long forget
have
This is not to say, officials said, that battles over
speeches are not fought. One White House aide de-
travel, short statements and other devices more than
it
can
never
speeches. "He's awfully good off-the-cuff," Demarest
remember
what
we
say
here
but
scribed the process like this: "The speech writers write
said.
what
they
did
here.
us.
the
living.
rather
to
be
the draft. [Budget director Richard G.) Darman re-
It
is
writes it. Or [domestic policy adviser) Roger Porter
"That," sniffed one administration official, "is because
dedicated
unfinished
work
which
they
Bush does not give speeches. He gives remarks."
here
to
the
rewrites it. Or [national security adviser Brent] Scow-
croft has it rewitten. And a committee here or there
Said a Republican with close ties to Bush: "The
works on it. And then the president gets it. He takes
president's speeches are mediocre at best. They have
"What Saw The Revolution," by Peggy Noonan, ©1990by Peggy Noonan, Random House
out the red meat. And then you ask why it doesn't sing."
no weight. They have no sense of history. They rarely
Demarest says, with some pride, that speech writ-
reach out to America. These are not documents that
ers should be anonymous and listeners should not be
historians will look at to capture the hopes and fears
Mark Davis, 34. A speech writer for former Repub-
speech writer. In 1979, he joined Bush's first presiden-
able to tell the work of one writer from another. He
and dreams of the Bush era.'
lican Party chairman Frank J. Fahrenkopf Jr. Davis,
tial campaign as a member of the field staff and candi-
cited the five speeches Bush gave on his NATO trip
Peggy Noonan, one of Reagan's conservative speech
his resume notes, did partisan speeches for Repub-
date aide, did volunteer advance work and helped at the
last June, each written by a different writer and none
writers who also wrote Bush's acclaimed Republican
lican Cabinet members, members of Congress and
convention. Last year, he was a volunteer.
of them identifiable, as the desired norm.
National Convention speech, agrees that rhetoric is not
to Bush what it was to Reagan. "We are entering, I
governors in his half-dozen years in Washington.
Curt Smith, 38. A speech writer for Richard
Asked to list successful Bush speeches, White
Mark Lange, Speech writer for Ann Dore
Schweiker when he was secretary of health and hu-
House officials often pause. Generally, they cite the
think, an anti-rhetorical age," she writes in her new
McLaughlin and Elizabeth Hanford Dole at the Labor
man services and then for Samuel R. Pierce Jr., for-
book, "What Saw at the Revolution."
speech Bush gave in Mainz, West Germany, at the
Department. Lange, once a senior writer for major
mer secretary of housing and urban development.
end of his NATO trip when he spoke of his vision of
Reagan, she said, "found high rhetoric congenial.
Bush does not. He is less inclined to move people
publications of the Wharton School of Business; ap-
Smith has campaign experience-but for another Re-
the Western alliance; some mention the speech he
parently moved into partisan speech writing through a
publican. He was John Connally's speech writer in the
through words, more inclined to change things, qui-
gave wrapping up his first major foreign trip, to East-
summer internship at the Treasury Department,
short-lived 1980 campaign.
etly, through deeds."
em Europe, last year. Two officials mentioned a mov-
From a party that produced the likes of Patrick Bu-
where he worked for Marlin Fitzwater, now the White
None of the five would fit Thomas Dewey's descrip-
ing tribute to Lech Walesa when the Solidarity leader
chanan, William Safire, Ray Price, Ben Elliott, Tony
House press secretary.
tion of the importance of presidential speech writers.
was here. One mentioned his inaugural address.
Dolan, Landon Parvin and Noonan-true believers
Daniel McGroarty, 32. A speech writer for former
He once said that the "man who writes the president's
White House officials insist there is no danger in
who wrote the fire into the speeches of Republican
defense secretaries Caspar W. Weinberger and Frank
speeches runs the country." Dean Acheson, years lat-
Bush's pedestrian speech making, because of his po-
presidents over the past two decades-now comes
C. Carlucci. Before his work at the Pentagon,
er, complained that the White House speech-writing
litical skills. But others disagree and make the argu-
non-ideological, mostly non-political, anonymous
McGroarty was an editorial writer for Voice of Amer-
operation was "often where policy is made, regardless
ment that Terry Eastland, a former Reagan admin-
speech writers.
ica.
of where it is supposed to be made."
istration official, made in a recent article in the Amer-
The five Bush speech writers agreed en masse not
Edward E. McNally, 33. Worked in Bush campaigns
Policy-makers as speech writers have a long tradition
ican Spectator magazine.
to be interviewed for this article, Demarest said.
and at the Justice Department. McNally, an attorney,
in the White House. FDR's famous "brain trust" helped
"Bush's communications effort," he said, "does not
They include, in alphabetical order, since they have
was an assistant in the U.S. attorney's office in New
craft his speeches; Harry S. Truman had Sam Rosen-
promise to forge the kind of bond with those beyond the
no known ranking:
York before signing up as a full-time White House
man and then Clark Clifford; John F. Kennedy brought
Beltway that is necessary for major domestic success."
Many sides of Bush include Rolodex Man, Secret Agent
By Owen Ullmann
is his courtship of French President
paced schedule. Bush begins his work
The Secret Agent. Bush has a
Like all presidents, George Bush has
Francois Mitterrand, who had contempt
day at 7 a.m., sometimes earlier if he is
penchant for secrecy, and not just be-
unique personality traits that make him
for Ronald Reagan but has become a
George Bush does not
traveling, and he goes non-stop for 12 or
cause he used to be CIA director. His
endearing, comical, strange and difficult
fast friend of Bush's ever since spending
like to sit still," said his
more hours. If a meeting is canceled,
aides attribute it to the elitist leader in
to those around him.
a weekend at the Bush family compound
he'll schedule another one rather than
him who believes he knows best and does
Here is a guide to some of the many
in Kennebunkport, Maine.
press secretary, Marlin
have free time on his hands.
not like second-guessing. Bush is still
sides George Herbert Walker Bush has
Bush is equally charming in wooing
members of Congress and the media.
Fitzwater.
He prefers entertaining to spending
very thin-skinned about criticism, al-
revealed after one year in office:
a quiet evening at home, has set a record
though he hides it better now, and secre-
The Rolodex Man. Bush may have
Once-rare visits to the White House
for first-year travel by a president and
cy helps hold down the criticism. Secre-
the world's largest network of friends
living quarters have become so routine
would rather vacation by playing five
cy is also a sport for Bush, who enjoys
and political contacts, and he stays in
that everyone in town claims to have sat
from the Hollywood glamour of the
different sports in one day than put up
keeping the press in the dark just for
touch with personal notes, telephone
on the bed in the Lincoln Bedroom at
Reagan years. Another aspect of his
his feet to rest.
fun.
calls, White House invitations and pres-
least once.
down-home charm is a vicious assault on
The Gladiator. He may claim to be
The Obstinate One. Bush is at his
idential visits. He has set international
Mr. Unpretentious. Bush may have
the English language. During the cam-
a "kinder and gentler" president, but
least charming when aides are trying to
diplomacy on its head by becoming the
been born with a silver spoon in his
paign his fractured syntax was the ob-
Bush is a fierce competitor on the ath-
advise him. "He is incredibly stubborn
first leader to use the telephone exten-
mouth, but he acts like a native of Main
ject of ridicule but now is viewed fondly
letic field and in the political arena.
and insists on doing things his own
sively. He is so spontaneous that foreign
Street. He has a natural down-to-earth
as an idiosyncrasy.
"He's a different person in a campaign,"
way," said one long-time adviser who
leaders often are shocked to learn the
quality that makes people feel comfort-
The Perpetual Motion Machine.
said one old friend. That is why Bush
gave up trying to "handle" Bush during
president of the United States is calling.
able. Bush's common touch stems from
"George Bush does not like to sit still,"
seemed like a mean slasher against
the 1988 campaign.
Bush also cultivates world leaders
his upper-class training to be humble
his press secretary, Marlin Fitzwater,
Michael Dukakis in 1988 and so concilia-
Owen Ullmann writes for the
with personal touches. The best example
and not put on airs. It is a big change
said in explaining the president's fast-
tory with Congress in 1989.
Knight-Ridder News Service
Photo Copy Preservation
BRIEFINGS
Survey: CEO speechwriters' median salary is $75,000
Senior writers have
Most of the responding speechwriters
considerable influence
said they prepare an average of 30
Base salary levels, CEO speechwriters
speeches per year. Almost nine out of 10
with top management
(88 percent) said CEOs give them feed-
Yrs communications
back on the text of the speech, while 59
experience
12
15
18
Almost one-third of Fortune 250 compa-
20
percent reported getting feedback on the
or
or
or
or
nies report having a "chief executive
actual delivery.
more more more more
speechwriter" whose main responsibility
The survey asked speechwriters how
%
%
%
%
is writing speeches for CEOs, according
much time they spend on a major ad-
Less than $45,000
3
4
4
5
to a survey of corporate speechwriters.
dress. "On average," the report con-
$45,000 TO $59,999
13
7
4
5
More than half of these speechwriters
$60,000 TO $74,999
23
21
21
10
$75,000 TO $89,999
19
earn at least $90,000 and "hold positions
21
25
25
Hours spent writing a major
$90,000 TO $104,999
19
21
17
20
of genuine power in their organizations."
address for the CEO
$105,000 TO $119,999
7
7
8
10
The median base salary for respondents
Research
$120,000 TO $134,999
10
11
13
15
is $75,000.
Rewrite
20
$135,000 or more
7
7
8
10
10
The 25-question survey, responded to
(Base)
(31)
(28)
(24)
(20)
by all but one of the Fortune 250, was
conducted recently by Fairfax, Virginia-
Salary levels for CEO speechwriters are
Approvals
based Quarles & Associates, for Allen
5
closely tied to years of experience.
Miller, manager of public relations at
Corning Incorporated. Its purpose was to
are men, the report noted. Men hold the
gain insight into the speechwriting func-
position in 81 percent of the top-ranked
First Draft
tion and provide corporate practitioners
15
49 companies and 75 percent of the next
with benchmarks by which they could
50. "Women are particularly likely to hold
measure themselves.
the lower-paid staff positions in the public
The study found that larger companies
relations and editorial services depart-
The report concluded that chief executive
with active CEOs and those that market
ment," the survey concluded.
speechwriters spend an average of 50 hours
products or services to other businesses
Only 26 percent of participating women
on a major address.
are most likely to have executive speech-
speechwriters earn $75,000 or more,
writers. More than half (53 percent) of
compared to 57 percent of male speech-
cluded, "chief executive speechwriters
the top 49 firms in the Fortune 250, for
writers. In addition, 21 percent of male
spend 20 hours on research, 15 hours
example, report having such a position.
speechwriters earn more than $105,000;
writing the first draft, 10 hours rewriting,
Among responding business-to-business
no women surveyed earned that much.
and five hours getting approvals."
companies, 77 percent of computer firms
The study noted, however, that salaries
Lower pay for women
and 53 percent of aerospace companies
are closely tied to years of experience.
The study also revealed that responding
have executive speechwriters on staff.
"Women are not paid as well partly be-
women speechwriters earn lower salaries
Nearly half (49 percent) of the compa-
cause they are relative newcomers," it
and are less likely to be senior staff mem-
stated. "Forty percent of women have
Graph/Chart: Quarles & Associates
nies that reported they don't have a CEO
bers than their male counterparts. Seven
less than 10 years of experience, com-
speechwriter said that "no specific per-
out of 10 chief executive speechwriters
pared to 9 percent of men."
son" writes the speeches (30 percent) or
that the CEO writes his or her own
speeches (19 percent). Other job descrip-
Couch potatoes unite
tions of those who write CEO speeches
To help Snyder of Berlin
include corporate communications (30
launch its new kettle-cooked
percent), executive communication or
potato chips, Marcus Public
speechwriting (12 percent), public rela-
Relations, Cleveland, cooked
tions (7 percent), editorial services (2
percent) and public affairs (1 percent).
up an attention-getting public-
Access and influence
ity stunt viewed by 40,000 vis-
itors who attended Pitts-
According to the survey, CEO speech-
burgh's Fall Home Show: a
writers fall into two categories: senior
seven-foot "potato couch"
people who report to the vice presidential
made of more than 500 pota-
level or higher, and mid-level people who
toes. "We were tired of the old
report to managers or directors. "Senior
speechwriters are members of senior
couch potato stereotype," says
Dan Hummel, Snyder's direc-
management who have relatively easy ac-
tor of marketing. "We wanted
cess to the CEO and often act as advi-
sors," the study concludes. "Many ap-
people to know that snacking
Photo: Snyder of Berlin
is great."
pear to have considerable influence."
n
1200
Services 1210
Corporate speechwriting
GED
TION
can take you to the top
ing
-3:30 PM
By CAROL KLEIMAN
Inc., a New York-based executive
M
Chicago Tribune
search firm specializing in corporate
ictors
communications
NOW!
6565
G
OOD POLITICAL SPEECH
Marshall, in business since 1967
writers always are in de
says right from the start, we recruit
mand.
ed speechwriters for major corpora-
Inds 7/31*
Peggy Noonan, a political
tions. The profession got a major
TRAINING?
speechwriter, gave President Bush
boost in the early 1970s, during the
omputer pro-
ectronictech-
the phrase a kinder, gentler na-
heyday of the energy companies
try, nursing,
tion
management,
which built up their speechwriting
ling," building
And Ted Sorenson created for
departments
& blue print
Int. Pell/Top
President John TB Kennedy, 'Ask
Many speechwriters are free lanc
pients,
comed.
not what your country can do for
ers, Marshall notes, but corpora
32) 268-0685
you but what you can do for your
tions tend to want people with a
No Logos
Medical
country
proven track record in another common
Proc.
Corporations have leamed a les
pany, who understand the corporal
3-212-947-5005
son from the politicians: Public im-
policy and infrastructure
16-21
(Eves)
He describes the field as "high
3 CORPS
ronx
risk, high-reward. Salaries range
FOR
If you have
from $50,000 to $130,000. We just
S
completed a search for a major pro-
writing talent,
fessional association in Chicago,
hr
Benefits
where the starting salary was
3 union jobs
you'll find that
$60,000 a year, and another for a
en who are
0 job in the
speechwriter for a major financial
9 Industry.
IES INC
fo)
putting words in
services corporation in Hartford, at
$125,000 a year.
someone else's
The search firm executive says
corporate speechwriters earn their
mouth can be
salaries: "You have to write for the
S
ear, he said.
ТИА
ties
a rewarding way
"A lot of big corporations are put-
ПЕЅ
1400
to earn a living
ting an effort into speechmaking,
I've heard that General Motors'
ecutives give at least 12 speeches a
sale LIC
feel allign-
month," said Robert Friedman, edi-
eft
tor of Speechwriter's Newsletter
published by Lawrence Ragan Come
Y take out
ages matter, especially to chief ex-
IS section
ecutive officers and their
munications Inc. in Chicago
rice nego-
r inquiry.
companies. Chrysler's Lee lacocca
The subtitle of the newsletter says
DD SHOP
is an example of what good
it all: "The weekly voice of the silent
Partners
armation
speechwriters can do.-
profession
tortin
"If corporate officers make a terri-
Friedman, who estimates there:
Gen-
ble impression, no one ever forgets
are fewer than 1,000 corporate
ep Video
LOW rent
it, and it is forevermore associated
speechwriters nationwide, says it's
pty. Own-
Cash Neg.
with the company, said a veteran
hard work
3:30 PM.
corporate speechwriter. "And when
"It takes the ability to get into
Dial II
they make a good impression, it has
someone else's head and Sunder-
ed black-
Deal:
a ripple effect. People forevermore
stand what they want to say, the
or Tina
tell everyone how wonderful the
editor said. "I think of speechwriters
NTEED!
ate entre-
company is."
as NFL running backs: It's an excit-
If you fill
tely your
Corporate speechwriters, once
ing job with about a four year life-
curity #,
known as "ghostwriters" and kept
span."
P.O. Box
1. 06880.
hidden in corporate closets, have
Elizabeth P. Mitchell is one
ase, fully
come a long way in official acknowl-
three staff speechwriters for the
to $4K/wk
pays rent
edgment and recruitment by busi-
American Medical Association It's
nt $45,000.
ness leaders.
171-6947
a happy, creative job and you make
The growing importance of per-
good money, said Mitchell who
change of
sonal communication by officers, in
has been at the association since
for rent.
1-5577
speeches and interviews and on ra-
1987. "I plan to be a speechwriter
dio and television, has led to the de-
for the rest of my life.
your new
Grants &
mand for corporate speechwriters.
A former librarian, public relations
20 record-
(DN3)
They not only write the speeches
consultant, trade press editor and
sy Bronx
but often help determine corporate
independent writer, Mitchell whites
c. Owner
attitudes toward business and com-
avail.
some 60 speeches a year for medile
2156
munity issues.
cal association executives and truster
ERETTE
Many corporate speechwriters,
ees.
elocating.
*ice. Days
who have to work with the strong
She once wanted to be a Presby
1-8116
ego of strong chief executive offi-
terian minister and sees some mis-
ALE
ease, low
cers, have a problem: At an average
sionary work in her present assignt
ng $20,000
salary of $80,000 for topnotch writ-
ment. "I have a lot of the preacheric
ers, speechwriters clearly don't
me and care deeply about medical
make as much money as the hon-
issues, Mitchell said.
CTI
1 vending
762-6868
chos they write for.
Mitchell interviews each personal
Still, corporate speechwriters usu-
she's writing a speech for you
ally manage to hold their own be-
pplies Hot
have to have access to the person
ener
will
cause of the important function they
who's speaking," she said.
fill: Making the executive look good.
A member of the National Associ
LITE
"Speechwriting is not an entry-
ation for Corporate Speaker Adv
ton stops.
ek, Only
level position," warned Tim Kor-
ties based in Dayton, Mitchell also
anda, a corporate speechwriter
belongs to the Chicago Speechweis
OUTE
based in New York, in an address
riters Forum She took seminars in
oint,
Wil-
before the Public Relations Society
speechwriting at Ragan Communi 0
Kly. Only
of America.
cations.
You first have to learn about writ
ing and the world. Getting a shot at
lest oppor-
accident
M
ITCHELL DOES NOT be-r
ys, should
writing a speech usually occurs by
lieve she subverts her
If you like what you're
ative ability by writing
ROUTE
doing, you become a speechwriter."
speeches that other people deliver
30 years,
ruck. A-1
Though corporations have been
"You make a positive contribution
cutting down on in-house public re-
because you want your speakers
ROUIE
lations staffs, they're pumping up
only to say things that make them
Net $1000
their corps of speechwriters.
and the company look good," she
359-3754
"Corporate, speechwriting is on
said. "You want them to sound in-
the increase" saidi Larry Marshall,
formed, interesting and natural. It's
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date: 2-6-90
TO:
Speechwriters
FROM:
CHRISS WINSTON cw
Deputy Assistant to the President
for Communications
Room 122, OEOB, Ext. 2930
The attached is for:
Per our conversation
Per your request
Information
Review & Comment
Direct Response
Appropriate Action
Draft Reply
Signature
File
Other
Please Return By
Comments:
my 1st nomination for
comment of the year. See *!
This is real competition for
Pinkertoris gang.
E. LEO AND MARY ANNE MCMANNUS
12590 N. E. 16TH AVE., NO. 608
NORTH MIAMI, FLORIDA 33161
(305) 891-2918
January 24, 1990
Mr. Chriss Winston
Director, Office of Presidential Speechwriting
The White House
Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. Winston:
I should like to share with you some responses to my short
study of President Bush's prose ("The Very Much Coordinated
President Bush"), which I sent you several months ago, and
to make some observations on the continuing prose style.
One of my former professors, who confessed that he had been
twitted for his own frequent use of the initial "and, "like
President Bush's, remarked that it was one method of
escaping excessively long sentences. "I have not minded
Bush's less formal style," he wrote, "because it strikes me
as in keeping with his unassuming but simpatico
personality. "
On the other hand, a columnist wrote: "His press conferences
reflect exactly the 'casual and unplanned' kind of person he
is. The initial ands and buts suggest a continuous flow of
imprecise thought
A somewhat arcane resemblance between President Bush's style
and that of the 5th-century B.C. Greek political leader and
commander-in-chief, Alcibiades, was noted by a classicist,
Mr. William Vickers of the Ashmolean Museum of Oxford
University, who is writing a biography of the Greek leader.
Fortunately, the resemblance is only stylistic, for, as he
wrote me, "How unlike Alcibiades is George Bush. Alcibiades
was an amalgam of J.F. Kennedy, Oliver North, Vidkun
Quisling, and John Belushi.'
My own observations: the President's Nov. 23 speech on
relations between the East and the West revealed an
excellent variation in sentence types. No longer was the
loose sentence the exclusive type, but now the periodic type
gave variety. The total number of coordinating conjunctions
declined appreciably, and the subordinating began to appear,
even if some were hybrids such as "and as," "so if," "so
even if," "so when, and "so as."
AMERICAN SURVEY
Georgie bear
the outlook is bleak; small towns lost jobs
between 1984 and 1989.
This, too, is not a new conclusion. The
Southern Growth Policies Board identified
economic decline in small towns and rural
areas as a priority in 1987. The lesson from
the west is that such decline is hard to arrest
even when the region as a whole has unique
attractions and a strong entrepreneurial cul-
ture. There is indeed a new western econ-
omy, but resurgence is not quite the right
word. The west's modern urban centres are
doing better than ever. But the old west-
like those Colorado mining towns from
which buses run each morning, ferrying
maids to the ski resorts-is stuck in a slump,
with no obvious way out.
Child abuse
Suffer the children
A
YEAR into his presidency, George Bush is the most popular Republican in the
LOS ANGELES
White House since Teddy Roosevelt, who held the office from 1901 to 1909.
Indeed, the two men have been compared. Roosevelt, succeeding the murdered Mc-
F
OR much of the 1980s, the McMartin
Kinley, was the youngest man ever to become president; George Bush was the fourth
Pre-School in Manhattan Beach, Cali-
oldest. But both came to office committed to softening the edges of capitalism and to
fornia, was a symbol of how vulnerable chil-
preserving the environment; they share bursting energy, love of the outdoors and
dren are to sexual abuse. It may now be a
affection for the patriotic gesture. Mr Bush himself has often expressed his admiration
symbol of how vulnerable adults are to the
for his muscular predecessor. Here, to celebrate Mr Bush's first anniversary in the job,
accusation of abusing children. It certainly
is our comparison of the two men.
demonstrates how hard it is to prove either
guilt or innocence in such cases.
Theodore Roosevelt
George Bush
McMartin was one of a number of nurs-
Social background. education
Yankee; Harvard
ery schools in the prosperous beach commu-
Yankee; Yale
College sport of
nities south of Los Angeles. According to a
Boxing
Soccer
which unlikelv exponent
fervent group of parents, more than 1,000
children at the school were molested and
Toughening western
Dakota Territory
Texas
forced to participate in Satanic rituals. That
experience in
was in 1983. Last week after a record-break-
Distinguished position in
Assistant secretary
Youngest pilot
ing $15m, 21/2-year trial, a jury threw out 52
United States Navy
thereof
therein
charges (and could not agree on 13) against
Slaughterable dumb animal
When young, quail;
of choice
When young, quail;
Mrs Peggy McMartin Buckey and Mr Ray-
later, anything
later, bluefish
mond Buckey, the mother and son who ran
Saint with whom feat
San Juan (Hill)
McMartin. On January 19th Mrs Buckey
of heroism is associated
San Jacinto
(aircraft carrier)
filed a $1m civil-rights suit.
Notable phrase or action
"I took it"
When the accusations of mass molesta-
in relation to Panama
Took it again
tion were first made, they drew national at-
Unusually common method of
tention and were followed by a surge of
"By Godfrey"
"And"
beginning a sentence
similiar reports. In Jordan, Minnesota, in
Typical exclamation
1984, 24 adults were accused of having or-
"Bullv": "Jim-Dandy"
"Hey"; "Gosh"
gies with children, killing some and burying
Intended ameiloration of
Trust-busting
A kinder, gentler America
them in a riverbank. Charges were ulti-
capitalism's excesses
mately dropped against 22; the others were
Basis of claim to be the
Started the
Creating a cabinet
acquitted after a trial. In Bakersfield, Cali-
environment president
national parks
secretary for the environment
fornia, a five-year-old child's accusation
Manner of expressing sense
"All men who feel any power
of danger
"It was Tension City in there."
against a neighbour led to charges of moles-
of battle know what it is like
(of interview by Dan Rather)
tation, ritual child-sacrifices and cannibal-
when the wolf rises in
ism. Seventy-seven adults were charged; one
the breast:" (of Cuba)
was ultimately convicted on one count of
Declaration of triumph.
"Look at all these
"We kicked a
lascivious touching.
with special reference
Spanish dead"
little ass tonight"
Elsewhere people disclosed that they
to southern Europeans
(at San Juan)
(of Geraldine Ferraro)
had been molested as children. Mr Michael
Description of political
"The president [McKinley]
calamity in terms of brown,
"Deep doo-doo"
Reagan, the former president's elder son,
has no more backbone than
announced that he had been abused in a
stickv stuff
a chocolate eclair."
day-care centre. Even Spiderman, a comic-
strip hero, told his own dark secret as a part
24
of a publicity campaign to encourage chil-
THE ECONOMIST JANUARY 27 1990
February 9, 1990
MEMORANDUM TO JIM PINKERTON ET AL
FROM:
SPEECHWRITERS cw mkg mf Duch as
SUBJECT:
"THE NEW PARADIGM"
REMARKS TO THE WORLD FUTURE SOCIETY
Although you have already delivered your remarks, we
nonetheless appreciate the opportunity to review and comment upon
them. The theme is unimpeachable -- your delivery, undoubtedly
impeccable. However, at the risk of cacoethes carpendi, we do
have a few specific concerns with the address:
3,2,1 - "Forgive me for laboring the cliche of the failure of
socialism "
Apology accepted. Though the journey from cliche to
archetype (and back again) is often bewilderingly short, we
believe the word you are searching for is "belaboring." Your
omission of the suffix, while pursuing the paradigmatic, seems
merely enigmatic.
4,2,4 - "I'm here as a representative of the Bush White House and
as a Republican to tell you that we have just as much desire to
end homelessness, improve education, lift up the underclass and
realize the goals of most liberals."
As Porgy & Bess sang, "It Ain't Necessarily So." We take
exception to the idea that we have been hired to realize the
goals of most liberals. Perhaps you mean that while we may agree
with some of those goals (though certainly not with others, such
as the legalization of drugs), our tactics for their realization
differ from theirs -- a difference which is, we believe, the
major theme of the speech. Furthermore, we're deeply troubled by
the insinuation that President Bush harbours within his
administration, or is himself, a Closet Liberal.
4,2,11 - "I am also here to tell you that if we want to improve
the lives of people, then we are going to have to go about
solving them in a different way."
We note the curious construction of this sentence, prompting
us to ask, What is the Solution to Life? The Problem of Death?
This reduction of life to the status of a problem to be solved
is, as you know, perpetuated by the liberal policy agenda of tax-
and-spend, speciously symptomatic solutions -- as if existence
could be perfected by housing projects. Taken with the above-
mentioned sentence, we feel you are teetering on the edge of a
dangerous protrope.
6,1 - A well-written paragraph, filled with many bold allusions
(although we question the prudence of unattributed, false
gerundizations). You aptly touch on the solipsism of existence
among an ignorant army of liberal policymakers. Life's a Beach.
8,2,12 - "Then the opposition was called the Inquisition. Today
it's
called
"
[on to next paragraph]
The writer has obviously neglected this opportunity for some
much-needed humor in the speech, and has left the audience
dangling in mid-air to charge once again into Kuhn's theories.
We suggest finishing the sentence cleverly.
12,1,4 - "The policymaker who tinkers with the economy in the
wrong way, who pushes the wrong button
"
This vague premonition of disaster -- alluding to nuclear
disaster, as it were -- makes us nervous.
15,2,4 - " whether those bureaucracies be a Stalinist
government in Eastern Europe, a stodgy corporation on Park
Avenue, or a sclerotic city hall in Anytown, U.S.A."
Although we applaud the "s" alliteration among the
adjectives of this sentence, we question the use of the medical
term "sclerotic" -- a word at once overly clinical and needlessly
offensive to the elderly community. As the President would say,
"Who researched this?"
16,1,3 - With the mention of Hernando de Soto, we find ourselves
treading an overworn path of (a total of 15) references to and
quotes by white males, many of them Dead White European Males.
We suggest either gender-neutral unattributed quotes, or greater
sensitivity when choosing quotes / meeting quotas in the future.
19,1,7 - "One of the leaders in this effort, has been Governor
Clinton of Arkansas, who has emerged, especially since Governor
Kean's retirement as the most imaginative and energetic force for
educational reform in the country."
It goes without saying that only nonrestrictive appositives
are set off by commas. We're sure this was simply a grammatical
oversight on your part -- despite the fact that you are
highlighting the achievements of a leading Democratic critic of
the administration.
21,2 - The entire paragraph is a brilliant example of epanaphora,
which is of course the rhetorical device of repeating a phrase at
the beginning of a series of diverse clauses. Well done.
We're sorry if our comments are a bit excessive. But as
Horace once said of Homer, "Quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus" --
even the greatest in the field make a few mistakes.
THE NEW PARADIGM
remarks by
James P. Pinkerton
Deputy Assistant to the President for Policy Planning
to the
World Future Society
Thursday, February 8, 1990
Thank you Lindsey. // Good morning.
I'm here today to talk about George Bush, the
first President to govern in the spirit of the New
Paradigm, a concept I'll return to in a moment. But
before I talk about the New Paradigm, we need to
dispose of the superficial Beltway theories about the
Bush Presidency. Some say that the President's
success comes from atmospherics, such as his
personality, or Mrs. Bush, or the puppies. I say
that's wrong. The voters may be charmed, but they
look to the bottom line: peace and prosperity; what
works for them. President Bush is popular because
his policies are working. And the reason things are
going well for the Administration and the country is
that George Bush is truly in tune with the global
(more)
2
Zeitgeist of freedom, decentralization, and a new look
at ways to solve old problems.
In the face of the conventional wisdom, the
President has kept his campaign promises: a Kinder,
Gentler Nation, and No New Taxes. Add the
unprecedented prospect of reduced troop levels in
Europe and decreased military spending around the
world and you have a President and a country perfectly
positioned to benefit from the dawning of the New
Paradigm around the world; the new forces that define
how the world works, cracked the Berlin Wall,
dismantled the Soviet Empire, and brought a new
peaceful integration of the world economy, with the
prospect of a better life for everyone.
These forces go by different names. The President
himself has spoken of the New Breeze of peace and
freedom that is sweeping the globe. The New Breeze is
a metaphor for the learning process that has led
virtually all of us to conclude, as the President has
said, "We know what works. Freedom works."
(more)
3
Just as we now know what works, we have all come
to know what doesn't work. After decades of
collectivization and concentration camps, we have
learned the truth about an ideology whose central
premise is a war against human nature, including the
human desire for voluntary exchange. Socialism
doesn't work. It has obviously failed in Eastern
Europe, but it has also failed when it goes by some
other name. State socialism doesn't work in South
Africa, where it goes by the name of apartheid, and it
hasn't worked in the Third World.
Forgive me for laboring the cliche of the failure
of socialism, but it's important to establish the
context of the international failure of collectivism
before I bring my argument home, to make the point
that the same dream of centralized socialized
bureaucracies has failed here at home in its lesser
manifestations. Here at home, as in the Third World,
the biggest losers under the old system have been poor
people. The Great Society, to pick one obvious
example, has been a continuing, if well-intentioned
(more)
4
failure because it too was based on the false
assumption that experts, wise bureaucrats in league
with university professors and politicians, could
somehow administer prosperity and equality from an
office building somewhere.
Having said all that, am I about to launch into a
critique of all social programs, and argue that we
should do nothing to solve the problems that need
solving? No. I'm here as a representative of the
Bush White House and as a Republican to tell you that
we have just as much desire to end homelessness,
improve education, lift up the underclass and realize
the goals of most liberals. However, as someone with
some modest responsibility for governing, and with the
benefit of what we have learned about what works and
what doesn't work, I am also here to tell you that if
we want to improve the lives of people, then we are
going to have to go about solving them in a different
way. In a phrase, we are going to have to be guided
by the lessons of the New Paradigm.
(more)
5
In addition to this general awareness that freedom
works and socialism doesn't, out of the 80s come two
areas of emerging national consensus.
First, the public by and large agrees on the
goals they want this country to achieve; whether
Democrat or Republican, black or white, male or
female, virtually everyone wants an educated young
generation, a roof over every head, and a clean
environment. It's a cliche that Ronald Reagan, the
most conservative President in our lifetime,
nevertheless ratified the welfare state, uniting both
parties in a common commitment to the safety net. So
now the argument shifts away from goals -- which we
all agree upon -- to means. That is, how do we do
what we all agree needs to be done?
Second, there are limits to the size of
government. Like it or not, "read my lips" is
national policy and will be, as long as people think
that government, especially the federal government, is
incompetent.
(more)
6
Some think that these two consensuses that define
the 90s are in conflict, that we are condemned to
wander around on a darkling plain, existentially
stumbling over the rubble of demolished policy, poking
around for new solutions to old problems. The New
Paradigm is an attempt to light a candle of hope and
optimism amid the cynicism, fatalism, and opportunism
that have come to characterize Washington. I believe
that people of good will can seize this opportunity to
significantly restructure the way government operates,
to move away from monopolistic bureaucracies, and thus
meet change in a way that contributes to decency and
competitiveness in the 1990s.
These two new consensuses, and the worldwide
realization both that freedom works and socialism
doesn't, spells the death of the Old Paradigm of
centralized bureaucracy, where wise government
officials preside over distribution and production,
fine-tuning aggregate demand, etc.
(more)
7
The use of the phrase New Paradigm is one I have
adapted from Thomas S. Kuhn's classic work The
Structure of Scientific Revolutions as a way of
getting a handle on the nature of the social
transformation that is taking place around us.
Indulge me a moment to review Kuhn's argument.
Kuhn argues that most scientists are problem
solvers, proceeding in their activity on the basis of
certain models or sets of assumptions about how the
universe works. Kuhn calls those assumptions
"paradigms." A great scientist will develop a
paradigm to describe, for example, the nature of the
solar system.
In the third century A.D., the astronomer Ptolemy
outlined the theory, or paradigm, that the sun
revolved around the earth. This "geocentric" paradigm
was accepted by the ancient scientific community
because it "worked," in the sense that ordinary
scientists were able to use Ptolemy's paradigm to make
at least some correct calculations about the location
of the planets and so on.
(more)
8
Thus, until the 16th century, scientists labored
under this paradigm, doing their best to solve
scientific problems. Even though the Ptolemaic
paradigm was clearly flawed, it was the best model
they had. It did work, at least somewhat, to solve
the problem of predicting the location of the planets.
More than a thousand years after Ptolemy,
Copernicus and Galileo revolutionized astronomy by
propounding a completely different paradigm: that the
earth revolves around the sun. Suddenly it became
possible for ordinary scientists to advance the
science of astronomy, because the assumptions they
were now working on were so much closer to the truth.
This heliocentric paradigm guides astronomy to this
day. We all remember from school that the New
Paradigm was not received with open arms by the Old
Paradigm powers that were. Then the opposition was
called the Inquisition. Today it's called
(more)
9
Kuhn put his finger on a truth about the
scientific process that applies to societies as well
as scientists. Societies, too, form themselves on the
basis of paradigms. These paradigms may be good or
evil; they may or may not "work."
If a paradigm does "work" it will continue to
survive. But it still faces the challenge of adapting
to challenges over time. Paradigms give way when
people see a new, a different, a better approach.
This process can happen by revolution, or by
evolution.
Thus, feudalism was a social paradigm, which
"worked" in the same limited sense that the Ptolemaic
astronomical paradigm "worked" during roughly the same
period. For all their obvious shortcomings, the two
paradigms were all that these cultures had to make
sense of the world. of course, both paradigms were
swept aside when other ideas -- new and more useful
paradigms -- emerged. From our contemporary vantage
point, we believe that these paradigmatic shifts were
changes for the better.
(more)
10
Kuhn's lesson is that people will not abandon a
familiar paradigm, no matter how defective it is,
until they can grasp a new paradigm that will replace
the old. This is the essence of the psychological and
political truism that "you can't beat something with
nothing." This is the transition period we are going
through -- people around the world are coming to see
that the old Paradigm is failing. Leaders and
thinkers have a duty to help learn and share the
emerging lessons of the New Paradigm.
I believe that centralized bureaucratic government
is a manifestation of the old Paradigm. Max Weber
said in the last century that the alternative to
bureaucracy was despotism, but he was describing a
different world, where the main obstacle to progress
was the dead hand of the aristocracy. For its time,
bureaucracy may well have been the best available way
to organize the transition from a farm to an
industrial economy. Today, in the era of the Third
Wave, Weber would agree that we have nothing to fear
(more)
11
from residual aristocrats like Prince Charles and
Fergie, and that today, Central Europeans and others
see that the main obstacle to progress is reactionary
statism.
The great English Prime Minister Disraeli said
that a successful politician must know two things: he
must know himself -- forgive the nineteenth century
sexism -- and he must know his times.
The most important knowledge comes from
confronting past mistakes: we must come to see our
own institutional rigidities, in a way analogous to
the way the Eastern Europeans have come to see theirs.
The Eastern Europeans are worried about getting
through the winter -- we have to worry about the
Japanese. But in both cases, thoughtful people see
the need for change. The President's willingness to
at least begin that process of reform is a key reason
for his popularity.
(more)
12
The New Paradigm has five main features:
O
First, governments are now subject to market
forces in a way they haven't been before. The policy-
maker who tinkers with the economy in the wrong way,
who pushes the wrong button, will see the flow of
capital and investment re-route itself instantaneously
across nations and continents and oceans.
This aspect of the New Paradigm is a function of
feedback and the increasing sensitivity of the economy
and political system to feedback. Where the system is
increasingly self-monitoring and self-correcting there
is less room for the social and economic experiments
that were the hallmarks of the 60s and 70s. As
someone said, if you don't deal with reality, other
people will! The President's dogged determination to
see a cut in the tax rate on capital gains, for
example, seems very compelling in view of the low
capital gains taxes imposed by America's greatest
economic competitors (most have no capital gains tax
at all).
(more)
13
O
Second, the New Paradigm is characterized by
increasing individual choice. The President's
education program offers a concrete example. Instead
of pouring money into an existing structure -- an
education structure that already represents the
world's highest expenditure per capita, yet the
results of that spending have been disappointing, to
put it mildly -- the President offers a reform that
promises to change that structure by letting parents
choose the public school their children will attend.
Parental choice in education is a means of letting
the people with a stake in the process, the parents,
not bureaucrats, decide what constitutes a successful
school. Outputs, not inputs. And the New Paradigm
method of choice in education is sweeping the country,
among state governments run by Democrats and
Republicans alike. I might add that the trailblazer
in the fight for choice in the public schools has been
a liberal Democrat, Governor Rudy Perpich of
Minnesota.
(more)
14
O
Third, the New Paradigm is characterized by public
policies which seek to empower people so that they are
able to make choices for themselves. Take the Bush
Administration's approach to child care: The
President has offered a Child Care Tax Credit for low-
income working parents that enables -- empowers --
those parents to care for their children in the way
that best suits them: at home, or with a relative, or
a neighbor, or at a church- or synagogue-based child
care program, or at a day care center.
By contrast, the old paradigm method is to focus
on one method of child care, usually day care centers,
to fund or regulate that one alternative to the
exclusion of other alternatives, have the money
trickled down from Washington, and thereby constrict
the range of choice. Again, the quantitative approach
is to say, in effect, how much spending can we "input"
into one method in the hope that that method is
correct.
(more)
15
The New Paradigm approach, on the other hand,
says: how can we let those with a stake in a certain
process, be it the process of caring for kids, or
education or health care, whatever -- how can we
empower those with a stake in the process so that they
and not bureaucrats can determine the outcome of that
process. In a world where more and more people know
better than to believe that wise bureaucrats can
benevolently enact child care from Moscow or
Washington, choice is increasingly the answer.
O
Fourth, the New Paradigm is characterized by
decentralization: the dispersal of the centers of
authority and the break-up of bureaucracy -- whether
those bureaucracies be a Stalinist government in
Eastern Europe, a stodgy corporation on Park Avenue,
or a sclerotic city hall in Anytown, U.S.A.
Decentralization means pushing decision-making
downward and outward, to the lowest feasible level.
No place, no culture is immune from the benefits of
perestroika. The cultural anthropologists who said
(more)
16
that one culture is backward as compared to another
have missed the central insight of the great Peruvian
economist Hernando de Soto: that people everywhere by
and large want the same things. The President himself
made this point in speaking of de Soto. Quote:
By walking the streets of Lima, not analyzing
official statistics, [de Soto] found that the
poor of Latin America -- who have never read
Jefferson or Adam Smith -- ran their affairs
democratically, outside the formal economy,
organizing their private, parallel economy in
a free and unregulated manner. ...
People
everywhere want the same things. And when
left alone by government, people everywhere
organize their lives in remarkably similar
ways.
End of quote. Those of you familiar with the
great Nobel economist Friedrich Hayek will be reminded
of the "spontaneous order" of the market that he
described.
(more)
17
But what about here? What about decentralization
here at home? Here too, centralized bureaucracies
have proven themselves unable to translate our wealth
and compassion into opportunity and a better life for
every American. Public and private bureaucracies have
not been able to adjust to the change of this decade,
not to mention the coming decade. Therefore, a new
generation which still believes in social justice and
the promise of the American Dream must look for new
ideas and new approaches to achieve the old goals.
Now that the people have learned that government
doesn't know best, they will refuse to turn over
decision-making power when they can decide better for
themselves. Popular opinion now converges around the
notion that instead of doing many things badly, the
government should try to do a few things well. The
public debate focuses on qualitative, as opposed to
quantitative, changes in government, to a
restructuring that finally begins to put the
government in tune with the society that has changed
so much in the past decades.
(more)
18
As Bob Samuelson recently put it, the American
people are not so much stingy as they are skeptical.
This skepticism -- this immunization against being
fooled by the authorities that the Information Age
allows is a healthy thing. The guiding principle is
accountability and feedback. Rather than a rigid
dedication to centralized government, the New Paradigm
emphasizes results. Achieving those results will
usually require the above-mentioned market
orientation, choice, empowerment, and
decentralization.
O
Fifth, the New Paradigm implies an emphasis on
what works: Once we agree on the goals of a decent
life for every American, then the debate shifts to
actually achieving those goals, as opposed to talking
about them and spending money. As far as public
policy is concerned, that means changing the way we
measure the success of those policies. Again, its the
difference between measuring input and measuring
output.
(more)
19
Look at the President's education policy. The
President, in an agreement with the governors at the
Education Summit in Charlottesville last September,
set out some national education goals based not on
how much money we are going to pour into education,
but just how well the students who come out of that
education system perform -- outputs, not inputs. One
of the leaders in this effort, has been Governor
Clinton of Arkansas, who has emerged, especially since
Governor Kean's retirement as the most imaginative and
energetic force for educational reform in the country.
Overnight, the debate on education in this country
has changed. It is now a question of the quality of
education, and less a question of the quantity of
dollars that may or may not contribute to quality.
Note that I am not saying that quantity is irrelevant,
only that we have lost sight of why we focused on
quantity and inputs in the first place. These factors
may help determine the outcome, but they are not the
same thing as the outcome.
(more)
20
I would refer all of you to David Osborne, whose
Laboratories of Democracy is a wonderful overview of
the individual states' respective efforts to actually
make life better for their people. I don't agree with
everything David says, but that's not the point. The
New Paradigm does not rely on the wisdom of one
individual, it relies on diversity and innovation
spread out across the states like 50, or 1,000, points
of light.
As I said, this President holds office at a time
when there is an emerging national consensus:
Everyone wants an educated young generation, a roof
over every head, and a clean environment in which to
live. And yet, everyone wants limits on the size of
government -- limits especially on the size of their
taxes.
Are these two areas of consensus in conflict?
Well, if you believe, for example, that the problems
of America's schools can be solved by spending more
money on them -- if you believe that the best solution
(more)
21
for the high cost of raising kids is to concentrate on
subsidizing bureaucratized, monopolized day care -- if
you believe that the answer to housing our poor is
only to build more public housing projects -- then you
must believe that, yes, our national aspirations are
in conflict.
On the other hand, if you believe that we ought to
judge our schools by how well they perform, not by how
much money we spend on them -- if you believe that
those schools will improve if parents have a greater
say in choosing the schools their children will attend
-- if you believe that the best child care is the one
that responsible parents decide is best for themselves
-- if you believe in giving the poor a stake in their
own futures, say through tenant management and
ownership of public housing -- if you believe, for
that matter, that we should measure the success of our
welfare programs by how many needy people pull
themselves out of poverty -- then, perhaps, you too
see the outlines of the New Paradigm as it emerges
from the dawn.
(more)
22
A world where the focus of public policy is on
what works, where we judge the success of those
policies qualitatively not quantitatively --
emphasizing outputs over inputs, where we expand
individual choice, empower the poor, and create
decentralized, flexible and adaptable institutions and
organizations, there is a world where there is no
insurmountable conflict between our national
aspirations of caring for our neighbors and enlarging
the sphere of our freedoms by limiting our government.
But note: none of this is just my opinion of what
should happen in the future. All of this is
happening. Thanks to the Information Age, thanks to
the worldwide span of the media, thanks to the global
village, we are learning faster about what works and
what doesn't work. That, incidentally, is why I have
been so impressed with the World Future Society. You
are looking forward, scanning the horizons of what
works. I like to think that the President shares that
farsightedness. He is a man whose biography, after
all, is entitled Looking Forward.
(more)
23
But notwithstanding that similarity with the
country's leading politician, this Society has of
course not tied itself to the political, but to the
practical. If, as I believe, we are witnessing the
emergence of a New Paradigm, a new era marked by an
emphasis on what works, then all the more worthwhile
are the contributions of a practical, non-ideological
organization like this Society -- not least because
the old cliches have suddenly taken on a new
profundity: the future is today, as it never was
before. So, as a fellow admirer of what works, let me
say that I am particularly grateful to be asked here
today. Thank you very much.
###
An inside view of
speechwriting for
America's CEO
By Peter Robinson, MBA '90
M
r. Vice President," the press secre-
tones from high-presidential to low and
tary said, "this is the fellow I'm recom-
folksy. Jokes in the Vice President's
mending as your new speechwriter."
speeches had to be straightforward, with a
George Bush looked down at my feet,
single laugh-line. President Reagan loved
then, slowly, raised his gaze to my face. He
long jokes, jokes that permitted him to get
grinned and shook my hand. "Looks about
a laugh, then go for a second laugh, then
the right height," he said to the press sec-
go back again for a third laugh and crown-
retary. "Let's hope it works out."
ing applause.
That was George Bush: joking, gregari-
But membership on the President's
ous - and shrewd. In effect he was saying
staff proved rewarding above all because it
to his press secretary, "I've left the inter-
afforded the opportunity to shape policy.
viewing to you. You'd better have done a
No, that puts it too thinly. Working for
good job." And to me, "I'll be friendly and
President Reagan afforded the opportunity
easy to work with. But I expect you to
to shape history.
perform."
Beginning that day in 1982, I spent 18
ne example: In March 1987 I visited
months on Vice President Bush's staff; 6
Peter Robinson, a second-year MBA
Berlin to research an address the
months as his only speechwriter and 12
student, spent more than six years
President would deliver after the Venice
months as one of two. 1 joined the Vice
before coming to the Business School
economic summit. I concluded that the
President on trips to Western Europe,
as a speechwriter for then President
Wall could be made to represent a test of
Africa, Scandinavia, and the Caribbean.
Ronald Reagan and Vice President
glasnost. Berliners themselves suggested
Here at home, I traveled with Vice Presi-
George Bush. He reports "the rewards
to me that if Gorbachev were sincere, he
dent Bush to more than 40 states, criss-
were immense."
should prove it by easing passage between
crossing the country.
the East and West sectors of the city.
Working with the Vice President could
Back in Washington, I included this
prove excruciating. He never felt comfortable with a text
passage in my draft: "General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek
any text. He wanted to wing his speeches. But he knew he
peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern
needed carefully presented positions, backed by figures and
Europe, if you seek liberalization, come here. Mr. Gorbachev,
anecdotes. It became routine for me to feel the nose of Air
tear down this wall."
Force Two dip as the plane began its final descent to an airport
When I went to the Oval Office to discuss this address, I
- and then find myself summoned to the front cabin for
explained to the President that, depending on weather condi-
another round of speech changes.
tions, his voice might be picked up as far east as Warsaw, per-
But joys outweighed the pains. George Bush was open. I
haps Moscow. "Then we have to talk about the Wall," he said.
saw him every day, and I could get on the phone to him when-
"That Wall has to come down." He approved my drait. Within
ever necessary. He was kind, energetic, and funny. He often
weeks of the address, intelligence sources reported that the
told good jokes of the President's and bad jokes of his own.
Soviets had begun to consider ways to bring down sections of
During the 1982 recession, he campaigned with spirit, unde-
the Wall.
terred by the pounding the administration and he personally
Why then did I leave Washington for business school?
were taking in the press. He showed guts.
Recruiters always ask me that.
In Washington, those I found myself admiring least came to
I
n late 1983, there was an opening on the President's staff.
town young and stayed. They went from the Hill to lobbying
Vice President Bush, who had earlier warned me (wise
firms, to the White House, to public relations outfits - the
man) not to go to law school, now urged me to accept the new
revolving door. While those I most admired had come to Wash-
appointment. "When you get a chance to work for a President
ington after a full life in the private sector. George Bush knew
of the United States, you take it. After all, I did."
the Texas oil country. Ronald Reagan knew showbiz. He knew
I joined the President's staff the day the Rangers went into
how to negotiate contracts for the Screen Actors Guild with
Grenada and remained, as a special assistant and speechwriter,
the likes of Sam Goldwyn and Louis Mayer. There is nothing
until August 1988, when I left for Stanford. Each year the num-
diluted about Bush's and Reagan's experiences, nothing of the
ber of speeches and sets of remarks I wrote averaged something
at-one-remove quality of the mere functionary.
over 100.
So the way I look at it, being here at the Business School
The rewards of working for Ronald Reagan proved im-
gives us all the chance to follow Ronald Reagan's Rule of Polit-
mense. He went over his texts word by word, sending back to
ical Discourse: If you want to have something to say when you
our office his edits, which were expert. His range was enor-
get to Washington, spend a big part of your life outside it.
mous. He could handle humor and solemnity; he could shift
OCTOBER 1989 STANFORD BUSINESS SCHOOL MAGAZINE 11
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
March 31, 1989
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
IN LUNCHEON WITH REPORTERS
The East Room
12:45 P.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: Well, first, let me just say, welcome to
Washington. And I've been traveling some, but I like this much
better you all coming here. And we're delighted that you are
here.
We've got a broad cross section of both print and
broadcast journalists here, and what I really want to do is to take
your questions. I'm delighted that you heard from our drug czar,
Bill Bennett, this morning, and Roger Porter, as well. And I'll be
glad to follow on to any subjects that you have taken up with them.
Our Chief of Staff John Sununu came over here with me -- hey, you
don't get off that easy, Joe. You haven't heard my speech.
(Laughter.)
No, I'm not going to spend a lot of time, but I do want
to indicate that certain important things have taken place at the
outset. We went up with a good budget agreement -- we hope we'll get
an agreement -- a good budget proposal. We've thrown an idea, a plan
out there for the savings and loans, and I think that is an important
thing to have happen. We've introduced a child care initiative in
keeping with the philosophical approach that I talked about in the
campaign parental choice. We've done that one.
We've made a vigorous start in the narcotics area, and I
want to congratulate Bill Bennett, who really -- antinarcotics area
-- hit the ground running. And he has to formulate under the law a
specific plan. But we're not going to wait for that to move forward
in various ways.
Next week, we'll be sending up new legislation on ethics
and education. The ethics guidelines will enable us to sustain an
honesty and integrity in public service. I've been talking some
about my belief in public service -- those not that are in and out on
the political basis, but those who serve in a career basis. And I --
though we have no legislation on that, I want to keep saying how
important I think that is.
We've made we recognize that the major problem facing
us is the budget deficit. And Dick Darman is doing a very good job
-- nobody declared our budget dead on arrival, which pleased me very,
very much. Nobody has annointed it, either, in every possible way.
(Laughter.) But nevertheless, we are making progress.
We're -- on the national security-foreign affairs side,
we're going to have a vigorous week next week with President Mubarak
here, Prime Minister Shamir here. And then we're going to have
several of the Central Americans up here very soon. You've seen our
new approach, you might say, on Nicaragua, where we are working with
the Congress, we're together with Congress.
One of my regrets is that we were sending two signals.
We'd have one signal out of the Executive Branch and then another
signal coming out of Capitol Hill. And I think that now we've laid
that to rest and we're going to do what we can to move forward --
help move forward the democracy that I believe the people of
MORE
- 2 -
Nicaragua want and the democracy that they've been denied.
So we've got a big agenda there with forthcoming meetings
on Europe, on the NATO summit coming up at the end of May, and then,
of course, we'll have a big meeting in Paris in July.
So we're going to -- the agenda is full. We're moving
forward on our national security reviews. I remain optimistic about
working with the Soviets, but I've said and I'll repeat to you all,
I'm not going to precipitously move just to be -- just to have some
meeting going on out there. There's a lot happening and when I come
forward with a proposal, I want it to be sound; I want it to have the
full support of the NATO Alliance; and I want it to have a
credibility, and instant credibility that shows our commitment, not
only to enhancing the peace, but to preserving the Alliance and
keeping it strong.
So there's a lot happening out there. I'm just delighted
all of you are here. And now, let's just go to the questions.
Q
Mr. President, I was wondering whether you, in the
light of the Alaska oil spill, whether you think the federal
government should take measures in perhaps two areas -- one, to
tighten up the requirements -- the restrictions on alcohol and drug
abuse by the people who are in charge of these ships; and perhaps
more importantly, to ensure that there is a quicker response on the
cleanup efforts?
THE PRESIDENT: I would certainly support constitutional
steps in the former area. I feel that substance abuse is wrong. I
want to see a drug-free workplace, and I would certainly think we
could expand that to reasonable requirements in terms of people who
are fulfilling important functions like taking crude oil through
straits.
I will say it's awful hard to guard against abuse of this
nature when you're making laws. And I think one of the things I
learned from our meeting with our EPA Administrator, and the head of
the Coast Guard, and our able Secretary of Transportation, was that
this strait was pretty wide and that it -- I don't think there is any
way you could plan, as you're making the pipeline, against this kind
of abuse.
But in terms of testing, I do favor that. You noticed I
used the word "constitutional.
What was the second part, Joe?
Q
Regarding the cleanup, sir. There's been criticism
in Alaska that, for a number of reasons, that the cleanup didn't
begin --
THE PRESIDENT: I think there were some reasons that it
didn't go fast enough, and yes, I think we will have to do everything
we can to see that the federal government, working with the states
and private industry, has as rapid response time as possible. And I
will say I feel very concerned about the environmental damage up
there. When you look at those pristine shores and then see the
threat to the fisheries and certainly the loss of life that's taken
place so far -- birds and animals -- you have to be concerned about
the environmental damage. And we have a very able Administrator of
EPA, a man with unquestioned credentials in environment. And I
expect that he and his people will learn from this, and then maybe we
can -- maybe there are things we can do to guarantee quicker cleanup.
Q
Mr. President, Iraq is reported as seriously engaged
in a program to build nuclear warheads and missiles. Does the
prospect of this tiny, sometimes warlike, nation being able to wage
nuclear war -- does it give you great concern for the future?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, one, I don't want to give
credibility to the reports. Two, I strongly stand against the
MORE
- 3 -
proliferation of nuclear weapons. We must strengthen IAEA safeguards
to be sure that there is as much inspection as possible. But I don't
want to give credence to the fact that Iraq is in the process of
building nuclear weapons. I cannot confirm that. And so I don't
want to go beyond that, Gabe. But I'm -- anytime you see
representations that there will be nuclear proliferation it has got
to concern us. And we will be making those representations, if we
feel it's about to take place, to any country.
Q Is it a matter that you feel that the Soviet Union
and the United States should take action on in connection with small
countries developing - other countries developing those weapons?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think we do agree with the Soviet
Union, who has also made its statements against proliferation. And
you look around the world and there's some very worrisome areas. You
know our position on Pakistan. Pakistan's very concerned about
Indian proliferation. And so you can just keep going and find areas
that we have to be alert to the dangers and then try to find ways to
see that nuclear proliferation does not happen.
But I don't want to -- I just don't want to be pushed
into giving credence to the reports.
Q Mr. President, if I might follow up on the Alaskan
situation for just a moment.
THE PRESIDENT: Please.
Q
Might this cause you to review and possibly change
your support for oil exploration and-or drilling in the northeastern
part of Alaska, near that wildlife refuge up there? Might you now
review the policies on this because of this oil spill?
THE PRESIDENT: No.
Q No? (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: You asked me if I would review the
policies about ANWR, about somebody bringing oil out of a strait 10
miles wide who was allegedly intoxicated. And the answer to your
question is no.
Q
The reason I ask is because environmentalists now
are very concerned, as they were after the Santa Barbara spill of
1969, which I think you remember --
THE PRESIDENT: I do.
Q
-- about transporting this oil from Alaska down the
coastline.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we have to transport oil. We are
becoming increasingly dependent on foreign oil. And that is not
acceptable to any president who is responsible for the national
security of this country. So what we will do is not go backwards;
what we will do is redouble every effort to provide the proper
safeguards. And I think most people are reasonable enough and fair
enough to look back at the record over the years in terms of the
pipeline and found that there had been very little damage, if any.
Certainly there's been no lasting environmental damage.
Now you have a ship that runs on a reef at 12 knots and
driven by somebody or in command by a person who allegedly had been
under the influence. And I'm not sure you can ever design a policy
anywhere to guard against that. The logical suggestion would be,
well, should we shut down the Gulf of Mexico? Should we shut down
the oil fields off of Louisiana because of this? And the answer
would be no. That would be irresponsible.
So what you do is do the best you can, express the
genuine sensern that you feel en the environment == and I do feel a
MORE
- 4 -
concern -- but not take irresponsible action to guard against an
incident of this nature.
Q Mr. President, I'll ask you a question I asked Mr.
Bennett earlier today. We've seen a number of antidrug programs --
THE PRESIDENT: You didn't like his answer? (Laughter.)
Q
-- in the last couple of decades, and my question
is, are you confident that the federal government, working with local
governments and -- I'm here in Washington at WMAL -- that you will be
able to come up with something this time that will actually have an
impact on the nation's drug problem?
THE PRESIDENT: I hope SO. I would never suggest that
the federal government will design a program and implement it that
will be imposed on every locality. We can't do that. I believe the
federal government has a certain role and I believe that the control
and power rests with the states and the localities.
But we have a responsibility, and there's no better
person to fulfill that responsibility than Bill Bennett in making
suggestions in terms of training programs, or educational programs,
or enforcement programs, or programs that relate to prison space,
programs that relate to utilization of the military assets -- and we
are using them in the interdiction field -- than Bill Bennett.
Q
Mr. President, what is the administration's plan to
obtain the freedom of the American hostages in Lebanon?
THE PRESIDENT: The plan to do it?
I
Well, what is the plan? What is the
administration's plan --
THE PRESIDENT: The administration's plan is to do its
level best to try through intelligence to find who is holding these
hostages and where they are, and then to do what we can to release
them. The plan is not to knuckle under to demands that will put
American citizens at risk all around the world. That's the plan.
Q
Mr. President, I gather you had a meeting this
morning with Senator Armstrong of Colorado about the Two Forks dam.
Are you willing to ask the EPA to change its decision on that dam at
all? What do you have to say to the people who feel they haven't
been given a fair shake by the EPA?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I have a feeling that -- you ask
what I plan to do -- I heard from Bill Armstrong a very strong
presentation representing the need to go forward with the dam. And
what I have asked is that our Administrator Bill Reilly be there for
that presentation. He was, and he will be back in touch with me. It
is a matter that is decided by the EPA Administrator, and I was very
anxious that Bill Armstrong have him in attendance so that he hear
this side of it. And I have confidence that Bill Armstrong, a very
fair individual -- and we'll just see what is recommended.
But it was a good meeting and I was given a lot more
detail on it than I had had before. But there's -- no final decision
has been taken on that matter.
Q
Mr. President, during the campaign, the general and
primary, you were asked several times to protect the textile industry
from foreign imports. Invariably, your response was that you would
enforce existing laws. Since you've come into office, can you point
to a single specific instance in which you have taken some action to
--
THE PRESIDENT: No, no, I can't.
&
The question is on U.S. dependency on foreign oil.
Would
MORE
- 5 -
THE PRESIDENT: Let me go back. Existing laws, to my
knowledge, are being enforced. I can't think of any new existing law
that's in force that wasn't before.
Q Okay. On the question of U.S. dependency on foreign
oil, can we reach a point where your administration would take steps
such as an oil import fee or other stances that would help the
domestic oil industry?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the domestic oil industry is doing
a little better now, the price of crude oil having risen to some $20
or $18 -- I don't know what West Texas crude is today $18.50,
something of that nature. The industry is doing a little better.
The rig count is still very low. I repeat; there is no security for
the United States in further dependency on foreign oil. I have made
proposals that would stimulate domestic production and I'd like to
see the Congress move on those proposals.
And so I -- but I am not have not changed my view on
the oil import tax.
Q
Mr. President, what do you envision for the role of
education, especially in the fight against drug abuse? Do you see a
blending together of the two?
THE PRESIDENT: I think it is absolutely essential. We
are not going to win the fight against narcotics on the interdiction
front alone. And I think Bill Bennett agrees with me that the demand
side is the place where we've got to do better, and that means
education.
Q Mr. President, we've been hearing about the new Whip
in the House and all we hear is, he's a pretty tough guy. Are you
going to meet the Congressman and are you going to talk to him? I
mean, talk to him about the style that he's known for with respect to
what you have at stake in legislation over there?
THE PRESIDENT: I am absolutely convinced, having known
Newt Gingrich, that we are going to work together very, very well. I
don't think he needs any lectures from me. But he's -- I think that
every congressman that I've talked to since then feels that he'll be
what he said he'd be -- a team player. He's not going to suddenly
become a shrinking violet, but we don't want that. He's going to be
a good leader. And I'm going to work with him and I'm going to work
with him productively. He's got his style and I got mine.
Q
Mr. President, a few days ago, a small company out
of Houston called Space Services launched a private rocket. What are
your plans to incorporate private enterprise in space? How is that
going to work with NASA?
THE PRESIDENT: It's going to work that we're going to
encourage it. I've had a feeling -- and I can't document this --
that there has been some reluctance in some quarters of the
government against privatization, against the commercial aspects of
this. David Hanna, who was the founder, certainly one of the key
honchos in that company, has risked a lot of capital. He's gone out
and done what he believed in. He had one dramatic failure -- and a
lot of people were giving him grief over that -- and he stayed with
it. And he's had a successful launch -- he and Deke Slayton and
others and I applaud them.
My role will be to tell the bureaucracy NASA, that we
want to encourage the privatization. NASA has a role that's a
government role and it'll continue to be a government role. But when
you have enterprise like this, I think it is nothing but good for the
United States. And we need alternate ways to put things into space,
and this is good.
Q
Can I just follow that up, Mr. President?
MORE
- 6 -
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
Q
Are you saying then, that at some time private
enterprise will take over NASA's role of the R&D?
THE PRESIDENT: No.
Q
Do you see that coming?
THE PRESIDENT: No, no I don't. But I see NASA making
room for a significant private role in terms of putting things into
space. And I don't sense, at the highest levels of NASA, a total
resistance to this. But I've had a feeling that some involved in the
process, not just in NASA, but along the way, have not been pushing
the concept of privatization not being as cooperative as we might.
So I see NASA's role continuing in R&D. And I see it continuing in
its shuttle business, space station business -- that I hope to see
come to fruition. But I just think that we need to support and
applaud those who, in the private sector, have big dreams like David
Hanna has had.
Q Mr. President, you have come under criticism in some
conservative circles due to your policy toward the Nicaraguan
Contras. The fact that apparently you have no plans to request
military aid for the Contras, is that a tacit admission on your part
that the Reagan administration policy which you had a part in for
eight years ---- of asking for military aid for the Contras was a
failure in forcing our the Sandinista government or making it make
reforms in Nicaragua?
THE PRESIDENT: No, I think the Reagan policy brought the
Sandinistas to the table. And I think, had there been no pressure,
the Sandinistas would have gone about their merry revolutionary ways,
without keeping their commitment to the Organization of American
States a commitment for free press, for freedom of worship --
democratization, if you will. So, I think now we are -- the problem
we had is you go to recommend aid and you have a different foreign
policy set on Capitol Hill. Now we're saying and my own view is,
there was no way, not a snowball's chance in hell of getting a dime
for lethal aid -- military aid, from Congress. And I think anybody
that's familiar with Congress would acknowledge that.
So what we've done is get together with the Congress --
with strong conservative support, I might say. I'm not suggesting
your question is wrong, because I hear some voices out there hitting
us. But it's not bad. The policy has been well-received. And we're
speaking with one voice and we are going to push for democratization.
And by getting humanitarian aid that goes through this election, I am
hopeful that the Nicaraguans will go forward and do that which they
give rhetorical support for, but that which they've failed to
implement and that means democracy - free certifiable elections.
And you hear some criticism of Salvador and what's taken
place down there recently. You don't hear it from me because I want
to give Christiani a chance. Those elections were certifiably free.
Democrats and Republicans on our commission going down there and
saying that. So we will treat the Salvadoran winner on his word --
that he wants to continue the democracy that we salute Duarte for
moving forward; that he stands against the extremes. And I think
he's got some big problems with these Marxist-backed guerrillas
coming at him. But we're going to support that, just as we're going
to support the Central American presidents as they now, hopefully,
push Ortega to do that what Ortega should have done long before
now.
Q
Secretary Yeutter and Ambassador Hills, Mr.
President, go to Geneva next week for very important trade
negotiations that I've been told will determine the shape of the U.S.
foreign policy in the next decade and how the world reads it. What
are your expectations from that meeting? Are you optimistic?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, it's hard to say. So far, I've
MORE
- 7 -
been pleased with what came out of Canada, for example. I had a talk
with both Clayton Yeutter and Carla Hills two days ago. I would say
that Carla expressed a certain optimism about moving forward with the
agenda, and that would include agriculture. But I'd just say, I'm
reserved on it. I'm reserved on how that's going to come out. But I
think it is very, very important, if you believe as I do in free
trade. I also think we need to get the emphasis on fair trade. And
so I'm hopeful that they can make more progress. But I think they
think there will be progress, if I had to give you the judgment of
both the Secretary of Agriculture and the USTR.
Q
Did you give them any advice that you could share
with us?
THE PRESIDENT: No. I just said I hope they're right.
And they' both professionals. They know my view on opening up
agricultural markets; they know my view in fair trade, they know my
abhorrence to more protectionist measures. But they also know that I
support selective shots. I supported the wheat flour shot that was
fired several years ago. And where the United States is being
unfairly treated, I think we have every right to fire a selective
shot. But I don't want to see us unleash the hoards of protectionist
legislation. It gets back to the textile question I'm not
supporting legislation. Fortunately, that industry is doing fairly
well right now.
Q Can you be more specific about your intentions in
dealing here in Washington with drugs and drug-related crime?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I'd leave that I'd have to defer
to Bill Bennett in more specificity. But it's going to be across the
aboard as we -- where we can help education, law enforcement,
prison maybe expansion of prisons and prosecutors and judges -- if
we can help on that area. I'd say those are some broad fields, but I
really would have to, on a five-point program, defer to our -- to
Bill Bennett on that.
Q
The Department of Defense has expressed concern over
tritium supply to fuel nuclear weapons and such.
THE PRESIDENT: What was that?
Q The tritium supply to fuel nuclear weapons.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, sir.
Q
Do you plan to have the Savannah River Plant be
started this year and what is --
THE PRESIDENT: I'm waiting to hear from Secretary
Watkins on that, but I do share the concern about it. I am one who
believes that it is important that we not, in this era where some are
proclaiming no need, almost to keep our guard up, that we not succumb
to that and that we recognize we have got to have a tritium
production capability. But I can't give you a time frame yet or
anything of that nature.
Q
Mr. Bush, thank you for calling on me. I have a
reasonable question to ask you. Governor Thompson is in Moscow to
establish a trade bureau with the Soviets there. I'd like to know if
he went with your blessing, and do you encourage similar initiatives
on the parts of other states? And why didn't the Republican Party
support Ed Vrdolyak in the Chicago mayoral race?
THE PRESIDENT: Very good questions --omewhat unrelated,
but let me try to help. (Laughter.) I have absolutely nothing but
admiration for those governors that try to expand trade between their
states, thus the country, and other countries. We have certain laws
governing them and Jim Thompson is very familiar with them. I must
confess that I personally did not bless this mission because I wasn't
familiar with it. He's done other such missions that he's done on
his own, as a Governor of a state should do. So that would handle
MORE
- 8 -
the Thompson one. The other one was on Ed Vrdolyak?
Q
Fast Eddie.
THE PRESIDENT: Fast Eddie?
Q
-- support of the Republican National Party as Rich
Daley with be a Democrats. So we were wondering why didn't the
Committee support him --
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I don't know, we'd have to refer
that to Lee Atwater. If you want to know whether I'd support the
Republican nominee, I do -- Ed Vrdolyak amongst the nominees. And he
supported me, and I don't forget those things. But whether -- if the
question is, how much in the way of assets or stuff, I really would
have to refer you to the National Committee.
Q
Mr. President, I've just come from Philadelphia,
where the Mayor last night unveiled the most austere budget they
seen in decades and he's planning on eliminating city services that
have been long-protected. And the feeling is that much of the
problem is the elimination of revenue-sharing and other forms of
federal aid, that cities are being abandoned by Washington. What
hope can you offer the Mayor of Philadelphia and the citizens there
that Washington will begin to help them with some of the social
problems they're trying to deal with?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, first, I'd tell there isn't any
revenue to share, and say it respectfully, but make sure he
understands that. And the best hope that we can do for Mayor Goode
or for anybody else, is to get our federal deficit down, because
that's going to have a major impact on interest rates in this
country. So we've got to get in agreement. And I would ask people
who are pressed for funds -- and certainly a major of a major urban
area would fit that description -- not just Philadelphia, a lot of
cities -- but the best thing you say what can we do? What we can
do is get the federal budget deficit solved and get this -- get the
deficit going downward in accordance with Gramm-Rudman-Hollings
And that is the best thing to do because if we do that we
keep the economic growth going -- the longest in a long, long time in
American history. That means job creation -- the new job creation
reached I think it was 20 million jobs in the last announcement that
I have seen. Interest rates have been creeping up, and this worries
me. We've got to always be on guard against inflation. But I don't
want to see an interest crunch slow down this economy. And that
means then that we are going to have to do the best we can on the
spending side. And we are going to have $80 billion more revenue to
the federal government this year than last -- under existing law, no
change in law -- $80 billion more coming in.
Now some programs have claim on that, many in the
entitlements area, I will concede that. But we've got to take that
money and use some of it to meet our obligations to get this deficit
under control. And that is the best thing -- that is the priority
thing that the federal government can do for any city. And there are
other -- there are a lot of programs that are still amply funded or
well-funded and we're going to try to continue as many of those as
possible.
2
Mr. President, you promised a kinder, gentler
nation, yet your budget calls for a $5 billion cut to Medicare beyond
the current law. How can that help but not adversely affect
beneficiaries?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, what we want to do is take it out
of the side on terms of efficiency, of service -- delivering
services, and that's what the proposals that we have sent up to the
Congress and that Dick Darman is discussing with the various
committees - that's the emphasis that our recemmendations take. And
I hope that it will be -- I hope they'll be implemented. There will
probably be some give-and-take on that recommendation, I think.
MORE
- 9 -
Q
Won't there be adverse affects, though, to
beneficiaries with such a deep cut?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I'm saying, it needn't be. It
depends what's worked out with the Congress. Our proposal did not --
our proposal took it out mainly on the side of services. So we're
not talking about drastic cuts of monies to families.
Last one. Once, twice. Then I'll go peacefully.
Q Your resident scholar, Dr. Porter, gave us a brief
history lesson this morning on the presidency. And he recalled a
conversation he had with you about the great presidents of the past
and why we don't have great leaders today -- talking about Jefferson
and Monroe and Madison. Who are your two favorite great presidents?
THE PRESIDENT: First, I'd make a point that everybody
looks better over time. (Laughter.)
Q
But who are your two?
THE PRESIDENT: Herbert Hoover looks better today than he
did 40 years ago, doesn't he?
Q
No.
THE PRESIDENT: People remember -- (laughter) -- not to
you, but to a lot of people, they do. They remember the
compassionate side of the man. You couldn't even talk about that 30
or 40 years ago.
Q Is he your model?
THE PRESIDENT: No he's not. (Laughter.) But I want to
just I was trying to make the point that -- I was trying to make
the point that time is generous to people. I remember the hue and
cry around Harry Truman from guys like me, and Republicans. Now,
we're all kind of moderated and think the good things and leave out
some of the contentious matters.
So history is basically kind to American presidents. A
model, I think -- I was talking to some people the other day about it
--- would be Teddy Roosevelt. He comes out of the same elitist
background that I do. (Laughter.) And he had the same commitment to
the environment I did, although the rules on hunting have changed
dramatically since he used to shoot with no limits out there in South
Dakota, or North Dakota.
But he was a man of some action. He was a person that
understood government, didn't mind getting his hands dirty in
government. I remember part of his life being on the Police Board in
New York City. Ask Abe Pressman about that. That's probably
combat pay was required in those days. So he was an activist. I
have great respect for Eisenhower. I'm not trying to compare myself
to any of these people, but in Eisenhower's case, he was a hero. He
was a man that, I'm old enough to remember, was our hero. He led the
Allied Forces and helped free the world from imperialism and Nazism.
And he brought to the presidency a certain stability. Others may
have had more flare, but he -- and he presided, I will concede to you
-- and I take it you're a student of history - in fairly tranquil
times.
But he did it he was a fair-minded person, strong
leader, and had the respect of people. And I think he was given
credit for being a compassionate individual. So those are two who I
would throw out there, and you can't live in this house and do as I
do -- have my office upstairs, next door to the Lincoln Bedroom in
which resides one of the signed, handwritten copies or the freedom
doctrine that will live forever -- Emancipation Proclamation right
there in our house. So I think all of us -- I think almost all
Americans put Lincoln on that list some place.
MORE
- 10 -
Q
Any Democrats in your pantheon, sir?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, there could well be. Sure.
Q One?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I respect certain things about
Harry Truman. He liked to go for walks. (Laughter.) But he was
tough said what he thought and had respect from people. Won them
over, did it his way, and I respect him being a fighter. They had
him written off in '48. I bet 10 bucks against him. And on Tom
Dewey. And I lost. So did a lot of other people who thought that
the polls were going to be correct. So I respect a guy that fights
back, and Truman did that.
So there's -- and you can walk down -- I had a lot of
differences with Lyndon Johnson. But there are certain things about
him that were good. And he was certainly a very gracious freshman
Congressman in those days to Barbara and me. So we had a little
insight that came from a personal knowledge of the man. And he got
all caught up in Vietnam, but people forget that, for his legislative
agenda, he got through what President Kennedy couldn't get through.
We ought to give a little credit for somebody that can do that. He
controlled both Houses of the legislature, which is slightly
different than the 41st President is facing.
But it's interesting, because when you live in the house
here, you think about a question that you just asked. And again, I'm
no student of history. You can't live here without becoming more of
a student of history, but you learn the redeeming features. You
begin to pick up the redeeming features of those that maybe you
hadn't had down as a hero, or hadn't even thought much about in the
history of this country.
So I don't think that I would argue with your premise
-- I could just go on forever here (laughter) -- but I would argue
with what I thought was the premise that great leaders were all back
there somewhere. I'm not sure of that.
Let me just end on one that I learned a lot from
Ronald Reagan. And one thing I was telling these guys at lunch here
-- one thing I learned from him is, I never once in eight years, no
matter how difficult the problem, heard him appeal to me or to others
around him for understanding about the toughest, loneliest job in the
world - how can anybody be asked to bear the burden single-handedly.
Never.
And when Reagan left office, you never heard the
presidency is too big for one man never heard it.
Back in 1980, people like Lloyd Cutler, for whom I have
great respect, were saying, look, this is so complex today that maybe
we need a parliamentary system. He wasn't proposing it, he was
saying it ought to be looked at. Reagan came in, stood on certain
principles, stayed with them, and never asked for sympathy or never
asked for understanding of the great overwhelming burden of the
presidency, and left with 61 percent of the people saying, hey, wait
a minute - he did a good job. Good lesson right here in modern
history.
Last one.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. In the state of Kansas,
about a third of the wheat crop has already been destroyed by drought
and there were indications that the rest may be in jeopardy. Given
the current budget problems, what's realistic for those farmers to
expect in the way of disaster aid?
THE PRESIDENT: I can't give you any numbers on it.
Current law addresses itself to disaster aid, and we can fulfill our
obligations there. But I really am not up to speed enough to tell
MORE
- 11 -
you exactly what I can propose on that, or what will be proposed in
terms of disaster aid.
Q
Are you aware Senator Dole and Senator Kassebaum are
trying to get some --
THE PRESIDENT: Well, they're talking to our Secretary of
Agriculture right now in terms of trying to come up -- but I just
can't tell you what the administration is going to come up with on
it.
Q Are you going to sign the fairness doctrine --
passed by Congress expect to veto?
THE PRESIDENT: I never talk about what I'm going to sign
until I know exactly what's in it -- read the fine print. or better
still, given the size of some of this stuff that comes around, have
somebody else read the fine print, that you have confidence in.
Thank you all. Listen, I've got to run. Thank you all
very, very much. Hope you've enjoyed your stay.
END
1:24 P.M. EST
Wednesday, August 16, 1989 -- B-7
NBC COMMENTARY
NBC's John Chancellor comments on President Bush's style. Last week the
President had The Boston Globe in for an interview which included
the following exchange:
(Reporter: "Do you believe the Israelis were wrong to abduct Sheik
Obeid?"
President Bush: "No, I can't say it's wrong and I can't say it's
right."
Reporter: "Well, how do you assess it? People have taken stands on
both sides of the issue."
President: "That's me."
Not in a million years would Ronald Reagan have given an answer like
that. Reagan would have ducked the question. Mr. Bush just smiled
and said what he meant. A Bush style has emerged which is very
much his own and totally unlike [that of] his predecessors. Reagan
was fuzzy on details; Bush knows his brief. Reagan polished his
prose; Bush is informal. Reagan used 3x5 cards when he talked to
members of Congress; Bush acts like a member. Press conferences
were an ordeal for Reagan, Bush has them all the time. In fact, you
have to go back to John F. Kennedy to find a President who's as
skilled at press conferences as George Bush. Yes, but, you may
say, it's been an easy six months since he took office. But it
hasn't: China, a nasty hostage crisis, a split in NATO, the S&L
mess, the assault rifle controversy; it hasn't been an easy six
months, it has just seemed easy. And the credit for that has to go
to the new President and his style of easy-going low-key competence.
For that, he gets, and deserves, in my view, high marks. (NBC-12)
VICE PRESIDENT QUAYLE
Koppel reports that one year ago tomorrow George Bush named his running
mate and most of the country had a two-word response: Dan who?
One year later, Dan Quayle is still something of a question mark. An
ABC News-Washington Post poll shows that 52% of those surveyed still
don't think he's ready to be President; 43% think he's doing a good
job; and 76% say that he's done nothing to change their opinion of
him since he took office.
ABC's Ann Compton reports that when George Bush picked him out of
the crowd one year ago, Dan Quayle had no idea how punishing the
next few weeks would be. Questions about Quayle's National Guard
service, academic record and about his qualifications to assume the
presidency surrounded him. Since then, he has tried to recover
quietly.
(Vice President Quayle: "Well, the high visibility took place during
the campaign. Since the campaign, the office of Vice President is not
a high profile office.")
Vice President Quayle has not been invisible and he has been in what
he considers training. He has been at the President's side for
everything from daily intelligence briefings to defense strategy
sessions to Congressional ceremonies. Quayle's actual responsibilities
are limited and narrowly focused, chairing one council on the space
program and another to promote economic competitiveness. Quayle
also travels for the President.
-more-
White House News Summary
Monday, April 16, 1990 -- C-15
Kilpatrick: The civil rights bill is supposed to overturn six
decisions of the Supreme Court, and I go with them on two. I think
two of those decisions probably should be overturned. The other
four are going to drive us into quotas, into racism, into the worst
kind of situation you can imagine.
Rowan: Now this is where we'll find out what kind President George
Bush is. Lyndon Johnson had the guts to go to Howard University
in '65 and say in the commencement address, "You cannot put a ball
and chain on somebody's leg for 200 years, break his leg, and then
suddenly say, oh come on up here. We're going to take the ball and
chain off and put you at the starting line and you're free to run
the race with all these other people who have been free for 200
years.' Johnson said we must have affirmative action. Now they're
asking Bush to go with the white males who stacked the deck for all
these years, got all these privileges, and don't want to give any
of them up. And we'll see where Bush stands.
---
On whether the Administration can help Shimon Peres form a
government in Israel:
Talbott: I have the somewhat mischievous thought that the Bush
Administration has already helped him by forcing the crisis that
brought down this phoney coalition that was ruling Israel
before
-end of News Summary-
Athlon's 1990 Baseball Yearbook
Letter from the Publishei
W
e've had several collegiate
national title," recalls Rod Dedeaux,
Yale, he batted .239; in 1948 he im-
football players become
USC's legendary coach. "But they
proved to .264. He hit one home run
president (Eisenhower,
turned out to be a fiery bunch, and
each year.
Nixon, Ford, Reagan). We've had an
that skinny first baseman was their
"Overall, I'd describe myself as a
amateur boxer (Theodore Roosevelt).
team leader.
good fielder and a fair hitter," the
We've had any number of golfers
"He was a fierce competitor, no
president says. "I think if I had bat-
who had decent handicaps (or, in
question about it. He was a splendid
ted lefty (he threw left-handed), I
Ford's case, one who threatened to
fielding first baseman and a good hit-
would have done much better."
handicap the spectators).
ter who made contact."
Actually, Bush wasn't the first base-
Last year, a baseball player finally
As it turned out, Bush's Yalies played
ball player to become president. That
made it to the
distinction belongs
White House.
to William Howard
He was more dis-
Taft, who, at over
tinguished as the
300 pounds, also
Navy's youngest
qualifies as the
bomber pilot in
original Refrigerator.
World War II, but in
It's easy to imagine
case you hadn't
that his reputation
heard, George
as a power hitter
Bush was also a
was well-deserved.
college baseball
Bush ranks as
player. And not a
NALE
one of the best
bad one, either. He
athletes among our
played first base on
presidents. And I,
Yale's 1947 team,
for one, think
which reached the
there's something
finals of the first
reassuring about
College World
having a baseball
Series. The next
player in charge of
year, as team cap-
things. A baseball
tain, he helped lead
player understands
the Elis back to the
the value of patient
championship game.
diplomacy, of work-
For some reason,
ing the count until
people seem a bit
President Bush captained Yale's 1948 baseball team that went to the national finals.
you get the right
surprised to find out
pitch to hit. He also
that the president wasn't bush league
surprisingly tough against USC,
knows the importance of having a
(no pun meant) on the diamond.
which won the series two games to
big stick in the lineup. He knows that
Maybe that's because they just can't
one. Things might have even gone
sometimes you have to be lucky; or
picture the scion of an Ivy League
the other way if Yale's Jerry Breen
as Yogi Berra once said, "Good
family hitting fungoes and shagging
hadn't hit into a bases-loaded triple
pitching beats good hitting and vice
flies. Maybe they can't imagine him
play in the bottom of the ninth inning
versa." Politically, Bush knows that
with a classic baseball nickname;
in Game 1, with his team trailing 3-1.
sometimes you have to throw a
something just doesn't sound right
Bush was waiting on deck.
message pitch high and inside.
about George Herbert Walker
For the series, Bush batted only
Most of all, it can be argued that
"Spikes" Bush, for example. Maybe
.167 (2-for-12). But he scored Yale's
baseball is the greatest unifying force
they can't see the guy who talks
only run in the opening game, and
in American social life. Regardless of
about a kinder, gentler America tak-
he drove in two runs in the Elis' 8-3
political differences, we can relate to
ing out a shortstop to break up a
win in Game 2. He also handled 32
someone who loves baseball.
double play.
chances at first without an error.
So if I ever get invited to the White
Southern California, the Goliath of
"I'd put him on my all-time, all-
House, we'll have something besides
the collegiate baseball world in the
opponent team, which means he was
football to talk about.
1940s, must have had similar
pretty good," says Dedeaux, who
thoughts before the Trojans met the
coached the Trojans for 45 years.
Ivy Leaguers in the finals of the 1948
Bush, to be sure, was never going
College World Series. "We all kind of
to be compared to Bill Terry or Don
laughed about playing Yale for the
Mattingly. In 1947, his first season for
Jeny ME Coin
Publisher
Services of Mead Data Central
PRINT CASE REQUESTED: APRIL 2, 1990
100G7P
1 DOCUMENT PRINTED
5 PRINTED PAGES
SEND TO: DOOLY, PEGGY
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OLD EXECUTIVE OFFICE BUILDING
17TH & PENNSYLVANIA AVE., NW
WASHINGTON DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 20017
04392
LEXIS® NEXIS® ® LEXIS® NEXIS® ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
1
DATE: APRIL 2, 1990
CLIENT:
LIBRARY: NEXIS
FILE: CURRNT
YOUR SEARCH REQUEST IS:
STATE OF THE UNION W/5 BUSH AND DATE AFT 3/1/90
NUMBER OF STORIES FOUND WITH YOUR REQUEST THROUGH:
LEVEL 1...
24
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
2
18TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1990 National Journal Inc.;
National Journal
March 3, 1990
SECTION: WASHINGTON UPDATE; White House Notebook; Vol. 22, No. 9; Pg. 526
LENGTH: 1692 words
HEADLINE: Bush, Lacking a Sense of History, Can't Worry About His Place in It
BYLINE: BY BURT SOLOMON
BODY:
Washington, a pushover for prophets from foreign lands, swiftly took
Czechoslovakian President Vaclav Havel to its bosom. President Bush invited the
self-effacing playwright, who'd gone from prison to the President's palace in
just two months last fall, back to the Oval Office for an unusual second day of
conversation. At a Feb. 21 joint session of Congress, Members anointed the
slightly built messiah with shouts of "bravo."
Havel confided to Congress that he had come to America to learn about
democracy but also to teach, using his country's totalitarian legacy of "horrors
that fortunately you have not known" of a sort to create a "special capacity to
look from time to time somewhat further than someone who has not undergone this
bitter experience." Havel invoked Presidents Jefferson, Lincoln and Wilson, and
spoke comfortably of events a millennium ago (when Czechs and Slovaks conceived
"their humanistic traditions") and a century hence, showing an effortless sense
of history far more common to Europeans and Asians than -- whether by culture or
lack of necessity - to Americans.
But serendipitously, many recent U.S. Presidents have had a feel for history.
Harry S Truman was an omnivorous reader of history and thought in historical
terms, according to Princeton University political scientist Fred I. Greenstein,
while Dwight D. Eisenhower's "very broad view" of events perhaps emerged from
his interest in military history. (He liked to red Clausewitz, who's also a
favorite of Republican National Committee chairman Lee Atwater.) John F.
Kennedy, who'd won a Pulitzer prize for a work of history, happened to be
reading The Guns of August --- Barbara W. Tuchman's study of the start of World
War I -- during the Cuban missile crisis and told aides it sensitized him to the
risk of accidents at geopolitically critical moments. Lyndon B. Johnson
absorbed his history in cliches (idealizing the New Deal and an America that had
never lost a war). Richard M. Nixon was obsessed with his place in history and
read widely to learn how power had been wielded in earlier ages. Jimmy Carter
had at least as much sense of history (and tragedy) as any self-aware southerner
must.
Ronald Reagan's sense of history, however, seemed to arise from Hollywood,
such as from the small-town America of simpler times romanticized in King's row,
his affecting 1941 melodrama. In conversation in the White House, Reagan
reportedly once confused Grover Cleveland, the two-time President, with Grover
Cleveland Alexander, the legendary baseball pitcher he played in a movie.
Nor does Bush seem infused with a sense of history. This seems a matter of
temperament rather than of brainpower or education. Bush's education at
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
3
(c) 1990 National Journal Inc., National Journal, March 3, 1990
Phillips Andover Academy and Yale University (where he qualified for Phi Beta
Kappa at a time when competition was stiff) certainly matched Kennedy's at
Choate School and Harvard College in aristocratic quality. Bush preferred
practical academic pursuits, majoring in economics.
To this day, he doesn't read much history and "certainly doesn't talk about
it," a friend said. He identifies with Theodore Roosevelt -- a similarly
well-born, energetic Republican President - and has read up on him and on
Abraham Lincoln. He'll also indulge in history he needs for his job - before a
foreign trip, say. But otherwise, his friend said, Bush -- like "most Americans
of his generation" -- seems a "perfect product" of what Time co-founder Henry R.
Luce dubbed the American Century, with its mind-set that whatever happened
before World War I was too long ago to matter.
There's scant evidence of a sense of history at work in Bush's foreign policy
making. This perhaps has helped. A President propelled by historical or
ideological imperatives might only have messed matters up. Possibly it's
because Bush doesn't think in grand historical terms that Washington's modest
role in what he has augustly termed "the Revolution of '89" hasn't frustrated
him. As it's happened, his gentlemanly demeanor and skill at acquaintanceship
proved just right for a period when geopolitical was in turmoil but the public
spotlight bothered to take "only an occasional glance at the Potomac," as
Washington Post political reporter David S. Broder wrote on Feb. 18.
Bush's Administration, though, continues to be faulted for not having
historical end points in mind - for having failed to conjure a security
structure for a new Europe or a fresh rationale for U.S. defense spending.
Critics worry that Bush may know just enough about Chinese history and politics
to have thrown in with the wrong lot in Beijing - with the hardliners who might
ultimately lose (as they have elsewhere recently) to underdog democrats.
Nor is a sweep of history evident in Bush's domestic policy making. He has
repeatedly invoked the coming turn-of-millennium for its rhetorical value, and
he showed an admirable thoroughness last year in rethinking a comprehensive
range of domestic policy. He took many small steps on many fronts that seemed
to auger -- especially with the Cold War dying and a "peace dividend" looming -
more to come.
But Bush's State of the Union message a month ago, with its paucity of
new notions, suggested instead that what we've seen 50 far may be pretty much
all we'll get. His fiscal 1991 budget has proposals (on Head Start, housing and
job training, for instance) that are intelligently crafted, but they are too
small to bring "major change," Urban Institute economist Isabel V. Sawhill said.
"There's not much that's new and exciting," she added, because "the whole
process is very much driven by budget numbers." This may only intensify, now
that prospects for a peace dividend seem to have vanished and Sen. Daniel
Patrick Moynihan, D-N.Y., has touched off a debate over using social security
surpluses for workaday federal expenses. Bush has remained insistent on hewing
to his pledge of no new taxes - politically crucial to his support among
conservatives ---- despite evidence that the United States taxes itself lightly
compared with its allies (the lowest, along with Japan, among the 24 nations in
the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in 1986).
Quite consciously, Bush and his advisers have sought to bypass these
self-imposed constraints by pushing hardest for domestic programs that
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® ® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
4
(c) 1990 National Journal Inc., National Journal, March 3, 1990
Washington needn't pay for. The White House has negotiated vigorously with
congressional leaders to bring forth a clean-air law - for which the private
sector would foot the bill -- and pressed to improve education and combat drugs,
undertakings mainly for state and local governments. Bush, agreeing with
education-minded governors on a set of education goals on Feb. 26, suggested
they be posted in every classroom, leaving it to Gov. Roy Romer, D-Colo., to
worry aloud (to ABC News) that achieving them is "going to cost a good bit."
It's not clear where states and local governments will get the money.
Bush has striven to change the tone of governance, which also comes free.
Civil rights leaders, environmentalists, consumer activists and advocates for
the poor acknowledge (privately, at least) that Bush's heart seems to be in the
right place. But they continue to question his willingness to pay the necessary
price -- whether in dollars or political capital - to achieve substantive
domestic goals. He has pursued none of them flat-out. His Justice Department's
recent change of heart on last year's Supreme Court constrictions of the scope
of civil rights laws seemed emblematic: It announced support for legislation
addressing the two "easiest" matters to fix, a House Democratic aide said, among
the five that the Court created.
Problems requiring big bucks have encountered skimpier ratios.
Administration officials say that homelessness has crept onto Bush's policy
screen, put there by Housing and Urban Development Secretary Jack F. Kemp. But
this self-styled kinder, gentler President continues to sleep nightly, without
apparent discomfort, across the street from the homeless in Lafayette Park. Nor
is it evident that the larger social problems for which homelessness is the tip
of the iceberg (such as poverty and the lack of housing and mental health care)
have captured Bush's attention yet.
It's not impossible they will. The Cabinet's Domestic Policy Council
solicited ideas last year from experts at think tanks and universities for
coping with poverty and the underclass. When the council's proposal proved meek
--- centering on federal waivers to encourage states to experiment - budget
director Richard G. Darman and Kemp insisted on trying again. Accordingly, the
council solicited and (by Feb. 16) gathered a second round of roughly a dozen
papers that were to be bolder and less mired in budget realities. But with
dollars scarce for the foreseeable future, Administration officials consider it
iffy that much will come of this. Deemed more likely is an Administration push
on health care, where conceptual solutions (for containing costs and making
insurance more available) seem further developed. But even that, officials
acknowledge, entails spending at least $ 5 billion-$ 10 billion more a year,
requiring a budget fix.
It may take a crisis before the nation's prickliest problems (such as its
inner-city sufferings or its declining competitiveness in world markets) will be
attended to. In American political history, change historically has come in
waves, Harvard historian William E. Gienapp noted. Politicians, ordinarily
timid about political risks inherent in dramatic solutions, have tended to
neglect problems until they couldn't. In this regard, the late 20th century
reminds Gienapp of the late 19th, when President after President ignored the
troubles generated by industrialization until a depression erupted in 1893,
permitting the out-of-power party to consolidate its hold and ushering in
Theodore Roosevelt's activist trustbusting. Thus ended a string of weak,
ineffectual Presidents from the 1860s through 1890s whom Gienapp likens to those
who have served a century later.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
5
(c) 1990 National Journal Inc., National Journal, March 3, 1990
GRAPHIC: Picture, no caption
LEXIS® ® NEXIS ® LEXIS® ® NEXIS ®
ARCH 29, 1989
In the Capital
R. W. Apple Jr.
Bush, in search of a role model, may have found
one in the Oyster Bay Roosevelt.
WASHINGTON, March 28 - When
croft, says, "He's relaxed about it; he
Presidents look for people to com-
enjoys dealing with it, chewing over
id
pare themselves to, for role models or
problems, looking for answers."
historical soul mates, they usually
And like Roosevelt, who shifted
choose Presidents of another era.
ideologies from patrician conserva-
Ronald Reagan liked to talk about
tism to populist radicalism with
Franklin D. Roosevell, his boyhood
changes in the prevailing winds of
hero. So did Lyndon B. Johnson. John
opinion, Mr. Bush has shown a certain
F. Kennedy often spoke with admira-
suppleness in responding to public
tion of Thomas Jefferson, almost with
mood. A critic of Mr. Reagan in 1980,
awe. George Bush has been in the
Mr. Bush served him as Vice Presi-
White House for only a couple of
dent with unstinting loyalty; an oppo- M
months, but he already seems to have
nent of gun control and a supporter of
settled upon Theodore Roosevelt, his
military aid to the rebels in Nicara-
fellow Republican from Oyster Bay,
gua, Mr. Bush has modified both
L. I., as an example of the kind of
President he would like to be.
those positions in the short time he
has been in the White House.
Not only has Mr. Bush installed a
portrait of T: R. in the Cabinet Room.
His bedtime reading in recent days
But there is little of Roosevelt's
has consisted of a political novel,
combativeness in Mr. Bush, and not
Jack Gance," by Ward Just, and a
much of his flamboyance either;
political biography, "The Rise of
quite the contrary. Mr. Bush has
Theodore Roosevelt," by Edmund
shown, especially in the conduct of
Morris.
foreign policy, a determination to
"I'm an Oyster Bay kind of guy,
move with great'deliberation.
the President told a visitor just last
Nor does it appear from the record
week, and it is true that he, like Theo-
of his long public career that Mr.
dore Roosevelt, is the head of a large
Bush has much of the domestic re-
former in him. More often than not he
has stood for the status quo, and it is
Maybe I'll turn out
hard to see from this perspective
which Grails might inspire him to
to be a Teddy
crusades like those of Teddy Roose-
velt against police corruption and
Roosevelt.'
against the monopolists. Mr. Bush
has shown no inclination, for exam-
ple, to attack today's "malefactors of
and exuberant clan whose home base
great wealth," contenting himself so
is an enclave of wealth on the Eastern
far with an admonition to the nation
Seaboard - in Mr. Bush's case,
in his Inaugural Address to take care
Kennebunkport, Me. "Maybe I'll turn
not to confuse mere riches with last-
out to be a Teddy Roosevelt."
ing worth.
Roosevelt the polymath could
There are other parallels as well.
speak with gusto and confidence and
Both men-served with distinction in
explosive humor on a dozen subjects.
foreign wars, although Mr. Bush is
Looking back, Rudyard Kipling, no
neither as jingoistic nor as much of a
unlettered bumpkin himself, recalled
showoff as Roosevelt was. Both went
listening to T. R. hold forth at the Cos-
west in search of fame and fortune,
mos Club: "I curled up in the seat op-
Roosevelt to the Dakota Territory to
posite, and listened and wondered,
become a rancher and Mr. Bush to
until the universe seemed to be going
Texas to enter the oil business. Both
round and Theodore was the spin-
had legislative experience, and both
ner." Mr. Bush is altogether a more
served in appointive posts.
prosaic creature, whose syntax is full
Like Roosevelt, Mr. Bush exhibits
of snags and whose thoughts often
an ardor for outdoor sports, and has
outrace his tongue.
said he intends to make a name for
Theodore Roosevelt the imperial
himself as an environmentalist.
President came along at a time ripe
Roosevelt certainly did that, with the
for governmental activism in a half-
help of his Progressive ally, the great
dozen areas, ranging from corporate
conservationist Gifford Pinchot, and
regulation to public health to Latin
Mr. Bush clearly hopes that he has
America. Problems remain in all
found a counterpart in William K.
those areas, but Mr. Bush has taken
Reilly, head of the Environmental
office in a time of restricted govern-
Protection Agency.
mental resources and minimal public
Like Roosevelt, Mr. Bush has an
enthusiasm for adventures abroad.
aptitude for foreign policy. As his na-
At whom, one might ask, will George
tional security adviser, Brent Scow-
Bush wave his big stick?
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
1
DATE: DECEMBER 18, 1989
CLIENT:
LIBRARY: NEXIS
FILE: CURRNT
YOUR SEARCH REQUEST IS:
BUSH DOCTRINE AND DATE IS 1989
h1-3
NUMBER OF STORIES FOUND WITH YOUR REQUEST THROUGH:
LEVEL 1....
28
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS ®
FEXIS
Bush file- -
Buoh Doctune
?
U
ГЕЛЕГ I
58
ИПИВЕК OE 21081E2 LONND MIIH YOUR BEONE21 THRONGH:
Bn2H DOCIKINE VID DVIE 12 1288
ХОПВ 2EVKCH BEONES1 12:
N.J.-3
LIFE: СПВВИТ
FIBBVBA: MEXI2
CRIENT:
DVIE: DECEWBEK 18 1382
bACK
I
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
2
1ST STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Proprietary to the United Press International 1989
December 13, 1989, Wednesday, BC cycle
SECTION: Lifestyle
LENGTH: 901 words
KEYWORD: DINNER
BODY:
bc-dinner
(wap) (ATTN: Feature editors) (Includes optional trim)
Bush Attends Centennial Dinner for Catholic University (Washn) By Phil
McCombs (c) 1989, The Washington Post
WASHINGTON - The powers and potentates of this earthly city and six
American princes of the Catholic Church gathered at a lavish centennial dinner
for Catholic University Tuesday night and heard the president of the United
States declare that freedom demands ' ' the right to life'' and the dismantling of
'barriers between nations,' as in Eastern Europe.
Outside in the falling snow 30 protesters carried signs saying, among other
things, ' 'Keep your rosaries off my ovaries'' and ''Homophobia is a sin.'' They
chanted ' ' Condoms save lives!' and 'Cardinal O'Connor preaches hate!''
''Some serenade,'' mused a black-tied guest, pausing to watch before turning
to enter the vast decorous cavern of the Pension Building, where dinner places
were set for 1,500 businessmen, politicians, priests and others. A string group
played ''Fascination,'' then ''Silent Night.' Both seemed appropriate.
Cardinal John D'Connor of New York, the immediate object of the
demonstration outside, stood in a receiving line with Cardinal James Hickey of
Washington, Cardinal Joseph Bernardin of Chicago, Cardinal Bernard Law of
Boston, Cardinal Edmund Szoka of Detroit and Cardinal John Krol, formerly of
Philadelphia, splendid in their crimson robes and crimson caps and with heavy
gold crosses around their necks.
Last Sunday 111 AIDS and abortion rights activists were arrested for
disrupting Mass in St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York as O'Connor called on the
congregation to overwhelm their chants with prayer. Condoms were thrown onto
Fifth Avenue, apparently because in November 0' Connor had said 'truth is not in
condoms. ... Good morality is good medicine.
Tuesday night the controversial priest received many words of sympathy and
encouragement. ''They're giving you a little heat, but keep up the good work,''
said one man.
''Don't give up!'' added Jim Pagano, a Washington businessman.
''I won't,'' said the cardinal. A moment later he confided, ''They're saying
nice things, and I can use it. That wasn't the most pleasant experience I've
ever had.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS® ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
3
Proprietary to the United Press International, December 13, 1989
When President Bush and his wife Barbara arrived midway through the evening,
they received a standing ovation and Bush was allowed to give his speech
immediately.
The president talked about faith, and freedom (including ''the right of
every parent to send their children to the care center of their choice and that
includes church-sponsored centers'' --- much applause for this), and how when he
met Mikhail Gorbachev off the coast of Malta last week he was thinking to
himself ' how God does move in mysterious ways'' -- how amazing it was that
Gorbachev had met with Pope John Paul II and declared that ' 'the moral values
that religion embodied for centuries can help in the work of renewal of our
country.
Bush said the United States 'will do everything we can'' to bring justice
to the murderers of the six Jesuit priests in E1 Salvador, and will not rest
until ''liberty's victory is won' ' in Nicaragua. He said he relayed a message of
concern from Costa Rican President Oscar Arias to Gorbachev about Cuba exporting
revolution.
He then announced the Bush Doctrine: ''We want this to be the first
hemisphere made up entirely of free, democratic countries.'
(Optional add end)
Dinner chairman Smith Bagley announced that $1.4 million had been raised at
the $1, 000-a-plate dinner for Catholic University, and he alluded in brief
remarks to the ''unprecedented opportunity to create peace in the world' that
has arrived with this Christmas season.
Also at the dinner were Sen. Paul S. Sarbanes, D-Md.; Abdullah Omar Nasseef,
president of the World Muslim League; Catholic University President the Rev.
William J. Byron; Secretary of Health and Human Services Louis Sullivan; U.S.
Circuit Judge James L. Buckley and his wife, Ann; Rep. Lindy Boggs, D-La.; and
Sen. Mark 0. Hatfield, R-Ore.
Helen Marino Connolly, a nurse who is president and executive director of
Good Samaritan Hospice in Brighton, Mass., received the first Cardinals'
Encouragement Award for exemplary work in the tradition of Christian service.
According to Cardinal Law, the hospice accepts patients who have no family or
friends- 'those who are especially alone and isolated,' including the elderly
and cancer and AIDS victims.
Cardinal Law spoke of ' the dignity of human persons,' of ''all the
sojourners who make their way through the somewhat treacherous hills and ravines
of what we call contemporary life, and he said:
''In the face of all this, we, members of God's church, are called to
imitate that love of God which we celebrate in the mystery of Christmas. We are
called to go out, to reach out to those who have lost their way or are in need.
We bring the sustenance of God's Word and the strength of our own willing hands
and efforts to do all that we can to be of help to our brothers and sisters.
''Our goal is to win the human heart.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
4
Proprietary to the United Press International, December 13, 1989
LEXIS® NEXIS® ® LEXIS® ® NEXIS® ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
5
4TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1989 Time Inc. All Rights Reserved;
Time
November 6, 1989, U.S. Edition
SECTION: WORLD; Cover Story; Pg. 40
LENGTH: 2113 words
HEADLINE: Yes, He's For Real;
By loosening the Soviet grip on Eastern Europe, Gorbachev proves once and for
all that he seeks a different world. How should the West respond?
BYLINE: BY WALTER ISAACSON;
Reported by Christopher Ogden/Washington and Strobe Talbott/Moscow, with other
bureaus
BODY:
For the Russians, tempered by centuries of land invasions, national security
has long been defined as the control of territory and the subjugation of
neighbors. Moscow's desire for a protective buffer, combined with a
thousand-year legacy of expansionism and a 20th century overlay of missionary
Marxism, was what prompted Stalin to leave his army in Eastern Europe after
World War II and impose puppet regimes in the nations he had liberated.
This Soviet quest for security necessarily meant insecurity for others. It
also, as it turned out, meant the same for the Soviets. "One irony of history is
that the security zone in Eastern Europe that Stalin created turned out to be
one of the greatest imaginable sources of insecurity," says Princeton Professor
Stephen Cohen, co-author of Voices of Glasnost. It precipitated the cold war,
provoked an armed competition with the West and saddled the Soviets with a
string of costly and cranky vassals.
Thus it was understandable, perhaps even inevitable, that Soviet control over
Eastern Europe would erode and its territorial approach to security be exposed
as obsolete in a world of nuclear missiles. Yet even years from now, when the
breathtaking events of 1989 are assessed, hindsight is unlikely to dilute the
amazement of the moment. For suddenly, amid a barrage of headlines that a year
ago would have seemed unimaginable, the architecture of Europe is being redrawn
and the structure of international relations transformed by Mikhail Gorbachev's
redefinition of Soviet security.
"These changes we're seeing in Eastern Europe are absolutely extraordinary,"
George Bush told the New York Times last week. In fact, 1989 will be remembered
not as the year that Eastern Europe changed but as the year that Eastern Europe
as we have known it for four decades ended. The concept was always an artificial
one: a handful of diverse nations suddenly iron-curtained off from their
neighbors and force-fed an unwanted ideology. Soviet dominion over the region
may someday be regarded as a parenthetical pause (1945-89) that left economic
scars but had little permanent impact on the culture and history of Central
Europe.
Last week saw yet another series of events that reflected the upheavals of
this watershed year:
- In Budapest acting President Matyas Szuros stood on a balcony overlooking a
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
6
(c) 1989 Time Inc., Time, November 6, 1989
rally in Parliament Square and said that the 1956 uprising, which the Soviets
suppressed with tanks and the hangman's rope, was actually a "national
independence movement." He declared the People's Republic of Hungary, so named
in 1949, dead. Now it is the Republic of Hungary, an independent state with
plans to hold multiparty elections. When speakers mentioned the U.S., the crowd
cheered; for the Soviet Union, there were jeers. But along with shouts of
"Russians, go home!," there were chants for the man who made the scene possible:
"Gorby! Gorby! Gorby!"
- Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze marked the anniversary of the
Hungarian uprising by telling Moscow's new parliament that the 1979 invasion of
Afghanistan had "blatantly violated" the law. By doing so, he implied that
events like the 1956 Hungarian crackdown and the 1968 Czechoslovakian invasion
would not recur. In addition, with a candor rare even in the West, Shevardnadze
said of the controversial Krasnoyarsk radar station in Siberia: "Let's admit
that this monstrosity the size of the Egyptian pyramid has been sitting there in
direct violation of the ABM treaty." (HIS fealty to the treaty was in part
motivated by a desire to drive a stake through America's SDI missile-defense
program.)
--- In San Francisco Secretary of State James Baker delivered the
Administration's strongest endorsement to date of Gorbachev's efforts. "Any
uncertainty about the fate of reform in the Soviet Union," said Baker, "is all
the more reason, not less, for us to seize the present opportunity." President
Bush likewise abandoned a timid U.S. attitude when he granted Hungary
most-favored-nation trading status and declared, "We are privileged to
participate in a very special moment in human history. We are witnessing an
unprecedented transformation of Communist nations into pluralistic democracies
with market economies."
---------- In a trip laden with symbolism, Gorbachev visited neighboring Finland, a
dexterous nation that has maintained friendly relations with Moscow while
retaining political and economic independence. "Finlandization" used to be
derided as a form of latter-day appeasement that might infect Western Europe;
now it is considered a model for the relationship that Poland or Hungary could
achieve.
When Gorbachev first spoke of "new thinking" in foreign policy, many in the
West - especially in the U.S. -- doubted his sincerity. The real test was
whether Gorbachev would end the policy at the heart of the cold war: the
subjugation of Eastern Europe. At the end of last year, in a speech at the
United Nations, Gorbachev declared that he would. "Freedom of choice is a
universal principle," he said. Yet the doubts lingered. They always seemed to
come down to the question: Is Gorbachev for real?
There can be only one answer now: yes, emphatically yes. Earlier this year,
after Poland's Communists lost the most open elections since World War II but
tried nevertheless to thwart Solidarity's effort to form a government, Gorbachev
spoke by phone to the Communist Party leader, who subsequently backed down.
Gorbachev has also provided public approval to the Hungarian reformers. In
summing up a Warsaw Pact meeting in Bucharest last July, he pronounced: "Each
people determines the future of its own country and chooses its own form of
society. There must be no interference from outside, no matter what the
pretext." What it all adds up to is that both in rhetoric and in reality,
Gorbachev has done what Western leaders have been demanding for 21 years:
repealed the "Brezhnev Doctrine," under which the Soviets claimed the right to
provide "military aid to a fraternal country" (translation: invade it) whenever
there was "a threat to the common interests of the camp of socialism"
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
7
(c) 1989 Time Inc., Time, November 6, 1989
(translation: a threat to Soviet dominance).
Gorbachev is clearly motivated by his nation's desperate internal situation.
Per estroika, which aims to radically restructure the Soviet economy, has so far
succeeded only in disrupting the clanky old centralized-state system that at
least belched forth a few second-rate consumer goods for the store shelves. Now
those shelves are barer than they have been for 20 years, there are rumors of
looming food riots this winter, and Gorbachev is not the hero at home that he is
abroad. It is no wonder, then, that the Soviets, as former U.S. arms negotiator
Paul Nitze says, "have turned inward, looking at what the military establishment
has cost the people, the society, the economy."
For the first six months of the Bush Administration, agnosticism about
Gorbachev was an article of faith. White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater went
50 far as to call him "a drugstore cowboy." Moreover, it was virtually taboo to
use any form of the verb "to help" in the same sentence with Gorbachev. Senate
Democratic leader George Mitchell accused the Bush Administration of "status quo
thinking" and exhibiting an "almost passive stance." Bush's attitude began to
change when he visited Poland and Hungary in July. His hosts impressed on him
that their survival, not to mention their success, depended on Gorbachev's. Bush
commented afterward that he had understood the connection intellectually but now
he understood it "in his gut."
Bush's conversion has not ended the deep schism within his Administration.
National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft remains cautious about Gorbachey's
ultimate aims, and his deputy Robert Gates is acidly skeptical about the Soviet
leader's ability to prevail. In an unusual move, Baker last week forbade Gates
to deliver a speech that was too pessimistic about Gorbachev's economic program.
Vice President Dan Quayle directly challenged Baker in a Los Angeles speech by
stressing "the darker side of Soviet foreign policy" and saying that instead of
helping, the U.S. ought to "let them reform themselves."
Raising this skepticism is probably, to use Bush's favorite word, prudent.
After all, what if Gorbachev is indeed merely pursuing by more subtle means the
old Soviet goals of getting the U.S. to withdraw from Europe, dissolving NATO
and neutralizing Germany? Even 50, as Baker points out, it would still make
sense for the U.S. to "lock in" gains by helping Soviet bloc nations become more
independent and by securing agreements that make mutually beneficial arms
reductions. In addition, the changes in Eastern Europe have progressed so far
that a sudden reversal becomes less likely every day. In the worst-case
scenario, a hard-liner even Gorbachev could crack down in Moscow tomorrow.
But could he reverse the course of events in Hungary and Poland? Could he ensure
the loyalty of troops in Eastern Europe?
Gorbachev and Shevardnadze said once again last week that NATO and the Warsaw
Pact should eventually be dismantled. NATO Secretary-General Manfred Worner
dismissed the suggestion as "a long-standing aim" of Soviet policy. Still, if
there is no cold war to fight, it will be impossible at some point to avoid
reconsidering the roles of the two military alliances. One of Worner's
predecessors, Britain's Lord Ismay, said the goal of NATO was "to keep the
Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down." As the Soviet threat
recedes, NATO could serve to keep the West Germans, if not down, at least
tethered to the West. The organization's purpose would become more political:
preventing the Continent from reverting to the spasmodic shifts in national
alliances that sparked centuries of wars. The twelve-nation European Community
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
8
(c) 1989 Time Inc., Time, November 6, 1989
is likewise poised to play a leading role in belaying the nations that are
breaking loose from the Soviet orbit.
The success of perestroika will depend on the Soviets, but Washington can
help Gorbachev by reaching agreements to cut conventional arms and strategic
nuclear arsenals. In addition, Shevardnadze in his speech last week spoke of
Moscow's desire to join such Western economic institutions as the World Bank,
the International Monetary Fund and GATT (the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade). Like Hungary, the Soviet Union could benefit from most-favored-nation
trade status.
Yet given the sweeping transformations under way, these measures seem limp.
Such a step-by-step approach would be, at best, yet another example of the -
dare one say timid? - incrementalism on arms control and trade that has marked
Soviet-American relations for four decades. As Bush himself says, the
opportunity is historic. The idea that the Warsaw Pact would launch a land
invasion of Western Europe, which is what most of NATO expenditures are designed
to prevent, has become nearly inconceivable. "It may be time to abandon
incrementalism for a leapfrog approach, to see if we can really make a basic
change in our relationship," says former Assistant Secretary of State Richard
Holbrooke.
Instead, Bush could challenge Gorbachev with courage and imagination. He
could ask the Soviets to join the West in making enormous, fundamental cuts in
defense spending. This would not be naive pacifism but hardheaded self-interest.
It could be a boon to the deficit-choked American economy as well as to peres
troika. Rather than negotiating trims in a few weapons programs, Bush could
propose demobilizing significant portions of each side's military, testing
whether Gorbachev would go along with dismantling whole divisions and
reconfiguring forces so as to create a less dangerous world.
Dean Acheson compared the task of his fellow statesmen at the end of World
War II to the one described in the first chapter of the Bible. "That was to
create a world out of chaos; ours, to create half a world, a free half, out of
the same material." The genesis that is now at hand may be just as formidable,
because it involves transcending not chaos but a rigid order.
The postwar era was launched with a speech by Harry Truman outlining a
presidential vision of containment. Similarly, Bush could launch a
postcontainment era by propounding a bold swords-into-plowshares scheme for a
fundamental change in East-West relations. Such a clarion call for a radical new
Bush Doctrine could command the bipartisan support that accompanied the Truman
Doctrine. It could also, at the very least, regain for the U.S. the initiative
on the world stage. And, who knows? Gorbachev might go along. More surprising
things have happened this year.
GRAPHIC: Picture 1, THE BIG BREAK Moscow lets Eastern Europe go its own way
descColor cover: Girl in crowd waving Hungarian flag., Photograph by Filip
Horvat/Saba; Picture 2, NO CAPTION descColor: Man sitting on statue waving flag
- contents page., FILIP HORVAT - SABA; Picture 3, HUNGARY The crowds yelled
"Russians go home!" but also chanted "Gorby! Gorby! Gorby!" as an old uprising
and a new name were celebrated descColor: Mikhail Gorbachev holding child,
others., CHESNOT - SIPA; Picture 4, See above. descColor: Demonstrators with
Hungarian flags., CHRISTIAN VIOUJARD - GAMMA LIAISON; Picture 5, EAST GERMANY A
massive exodus and growing protests hastened the exit of an aging hard-liner
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
9
(c) 1989 Time Inc., Time, November 6, 1989
and forced a few flickers of new flexibility descColor: Demonstrators in East
Germany., CHIP HIRES - GAMMA LIAISON; Picture 6, OL' BUSHY BROWS "When forces
hostile to socialism seek to reverse the development of any socialist country
whatsoever
this [becomes] the concern of all socialist countries" --
Leonid Brezhnev, Warsaw, Nov. 13, 1968 descColor: Leonid Brezhnev., DELIP MEHTA
-- CONTACT(c) Picture 7, VS. OL' BLUE EYES "The Brezhnev doctrine is dead
You know the Frank Sinatra song My Way? Hungary and Poland are doing it their
way. We now have the Sinatra doctrine" -- Soviet spokesman Gennadi Gerasimov,
Helsinki, Oct. 25, 1989 descColor: Frank Sinatra., HEMSEY - GAMMA LIAISON(c)
Picture 8, POLAND Now that Lech Walesa has guided him into office, Tadeusz
Mazowiecki needs to find a cure for the country's shattered economy descColor:
Tadeusz Mazowiecki, Lech Walesa, others., CHESNOT -- SIPA
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
10
5TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1989 News World Communications Inc.;
The Washington Times
October 31, 1989, Tuesday, Final Edition
SECTION: Part A; NATION; Pg. A4
LENGTH: 876 words
HEADLINE: East bloc moves lead White House to stop encouraging division
BYLINE: Paul Bedard; THE WASHINGTON TIMES
BODY:
Reflecting its approval of the Kremlin's political and economic reforms, the
Bush administration has dropped past White House attempts to divide the Soviet
bloc and is encouraging East European regimes to follow Moscow's lead.
White House officials said yesterday that President Bush has scrapped
previous policies of rewarding East bloc nations for stepping away from the
Soviet Union. They said the policy change is due in large part to Kremlin
reforms.
The new policy, seen in the administration's economic support of Hungary and
Poland, now focuses on encouraging reforms in individual East bloc nations with
no demands that ties to the Soviet Union be cut - although that may be the
result - the officials said.
Explaining the emerging Bush doctrine, National Security Adviser Brent
Scowcroft said, "Our policy has been to encourage differentiation in Eastern
Europe, not on the basis of their distance rom the Soviet Union
but
on the basis of their interest in political pluralism and in opening up their
economic systems."
One official said "it would be silly" for the Bush administration to reward
an Eastern European nation for walking away from the Soviet Union when the
Kremlin is implementing policies Washington considers desirable namely,
greater economic and political freedom.
The official said the White House wants East bloc nations to follow Moscow's
changes - not avoid them. "The Soviets are reform-minded.
Things have
changed, circumstances have changed," the official said, noting the historic
democratic reforms taking place in Poland, Hungary and East Germany.
Asked the administration's reaction to the changes sponsored by the Soviet
Union, White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater said, "I can certainly understand
why the Soviets are changing their tune on this with the Warsaw Pact countries
all singing, 'Please release me, let me go.'
The latest example: Bulgaria, which the State Department yesterday said is
on the brink of announcing major reforms.
"We welcome indications that the Bulgarian government will move faster on
needed reforms. Bulgaria still lags behind the leaders of reform in Eastern
Europe," said State Department spokeswoman Margaret Tutwiler.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
11
(c) 1989 The Washington Times, October 31, 1989
"What I'd like to suggest is that we may be at one of those historic periods
of transition when we're really moving from one age to another," Mr. Scowcroft
told a convention of American Stock Exchange international investors at the
Mayflower Hotel.
"Our enemies, those who have the alternative vision of the world, are now
more and more openly abandoning it and moving to adopt the things from our
world. In that sense, we have won," he said.
"In almost every sense you look at it, American foreign policy since the war
has been a tremendous success. We are now talking from our agenda - our agenda
- political pluralism, market economics," Mr. Scowcroft said.
Mr. Scowcroft's views are shared by Secretary of State James A. Baker III,
who has heaped praise on Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev and his reform
programs. They have steered the administration away from the view held by
administration conservatives, notably Vice President Dan Quayle and Defense
Secretary Richard Cheney, that the Soviets should not be trusted.
Mr. Scowcroft said the U.S. policy of containing the growth of communism
has succeeded, encouraging demands for major changes.
"Whether we talked about detente in the '70s, peaceful coexistence and 50
on, it was all different ways of managing this struggle, this mortal struggle
between two different systems," he said.
Scow.
But today, he said, "We can look beyond it, beyond a Soviet Union determined
one way or another to overthrow the world as it is, into a Soviet Union prepared
[
- not necessarily to be friendly - but prepared to take its place as a member of
the international community, not as a mortal threat to the international
community.
In a direct compliment to Mr. Gorbachev and his reforms, Mr. Scowcroft
said, "We have a long way to go, and there are signs - there are both good signs
and bad signs. But if you look back over, even in the last five years since
Gorbachev came into office, some of the things that we're now hearing and seeing
now would have been absolutely unimaginable just five years ago."
White House Chief of Staff John Sununu, meanwhile, said changes taking place
in Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union and "even in China, although it was aborted
3
a little bit," represent a "victory for Western values.
Joining the Baker-Scowcroft camp, Mr. Sununu gave the American Stock
Exchange gathering a cheery description of American-style changes taking place
in the communist world.
Change pushed "from the bottom up in many cases" by reformers in communist
countries "has created a sense of inevitability in many cases for the kind of
political change that has been the hope and dream of free countries around the
world to 5ee extended to those countries that have lived in less free
environments," Mr. Sununu said.
Mr. Scowcroft had a word of warning, however. While there is "a lot of
promise here [there is] still a lot of danger," he said. "A lot of things can
happen both in the Soviet Union and in Eastern Europe."
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
12
7TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1989 Globe Newspaper Company;
The Boston Globe
September 29, 1989, Friday, City Edition
SECTION: OP-ED; Pg. 15
LENGTH: 693 words
HEADLINE: Bush's sidestep;
THOMAS OLIPHANT
BYLINE: By Thomas Oliphan, Globe StaffT
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
KEYWORD: GEORGE BUSH; ADMINISTRATION; STATISTIC; WEAPON
BODY:
It was a politically smart, but far from wise, President Bush who chose to
focus on chemical weapons at the United Nations this week.
Once again, he was a long stride behind most of the rest of the world, but in
carefully calibrated lock-step with the US opinion polls so central to his
governing method and political success.
Chemical weapons, as Bush knows well, are an important issue on the periphery
of the great subjects of our time. That is why he focused on them, skillfully
sliding past the economic and political tumult sweeping much of Eastern Europe
and the Soviet Union, and the status of efforts to reduce nuclear weapons and
conventional mega-forces.
This penchant Bush has of seeking the shaded security of peripheral issues
and bromides is often misinterpreted as the absence of any foreign policy worthy
of the term. That view is false. Bush's foreign policy is not fit for detailed
discussion by the president because of its resemblance to the limpid, wimpy
caricature his predecessor created of Jimmy Carter.
This was apparent in the latest exposition on the Bush Doctrine - Dare to
Duck - a little-noticed speech here this month by Lawrence Eagleberger, the
deputy secretary of state and ex-Henry Kissinger hand.
What notice Eagleberger's oration did receive has focused on its remarkable
confession of fatigue: "If it is true that we have emerged victorious from the
Cold War, then we, like the Soviets behind us, have crossed the finish line very
much out of breath."
Not only that, he adds, but both superpowers must face "a frankly diminished
capacity to influence events and promote our respective interests" - in the form
of fiscal constraints and more assertively powerful allies in the West; and of
economic and empire collapse in the East. Almost wistfully, Eagleberger looks
back to another day and observes: "For all its risks and uncertainties, the Cold
War was characterized by a remarkably stable and predictable set of
relationships among the great powers."
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
13
(c) 1989, The Boston Globe, September 29, 1989
There's more. The emerging world of multiple power centers, environmental
despoilation, crunching debt and poverty in the developing world, enormous
tension in the communist sphere, and global protectionism is seen as no less
dangerous than the one dominated by East-West tensions. The problem, Eagleberger
says, is that we can't wave missiles at these challenges.
"Our ability to meet the challenges in East-West and North-South relations
will depend substantially on how well the major Western industrial nations
manage the transition to a new set of relationships and a new distribution of
responsibilities among ourselves
or whether we will slip back toward the
dark days of autarchy, unilateralism and protectionism which proved so damaging
to the West in the 1920s and 1930s."
This is the source of what is typically called Bush's "caution" in foreign
policy. Unlike most of the rest of the West, Bush is not ready to embrace change
in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, much less move boldly to help make the
change a success.
"Out task, after all, is to devise policies which will serve our interest,
whether Mr. Gorbachev succeeds or fails," Eagleberger says. "And our common goal
ought to be the maintenance of the security consensus which has served the West
50 well over the past 40 years, until the process of democratic reform in the
East has truly become irreversible."
While Bush waits, there are two dangers: first, that his ho-hum attitude will
help produce either the replacement of Gorbachev by a reactionary or the failure
of the Polish and Hungarian experiments, or both; and second, that the rest of
the West plus Japan will see opportunity in the American vacuum and move on
their own with Moscow toward a European order less friendly to the United
States.
The polls, however, tell the president the dangers are minor. The latest
CBS-New York Times numbers show his foreign policy approved by 60-23 percent,
and more aid to independent Eastern European countries opposed by 51-40 percent.
The numbers tell Bush he can move forward at his own pace. It is smart politics,
but short-sighted and weak foreign policy.
GRAPHIC: CARTOON, Robert Neubecker illustration (c) Inx
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® ® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
FALL Summer PAGE
14
11TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
The New Republic Copyright (c) 1989 Information Access Company;
Copyright (c) The New Republic, Inc. 1989
August 7, 1989
SECTION: Vol. 201; No. 6; Pg. 11
LENGTH: 1543 words
HEADLINE: Affable abroad; White House Watch - Bush in Eastern Europe
BYLINE Barnes, Fred
BODY:
At his first substantive meeting in Hungary on July 12, President Bush
confronted two very uptight Communist reformers: Party Chairman Rezso Nyers and
General Secretary Karoly Grosz. They sat across from him in a room overlooking
the Danube. Bush started with small talk about how pleasantly cool the weather
was. Secretary of State James Baker whispered in his ear, and Bush "Baker says
it's never hot when you come from Texas." Then Bush got serious. "We're with
you," he said. "What you're doing is exciting. It's what we've always wanted.
We're not going to complicate things for you $by arousing the Soviets!. We know
that the better we get along with the Soviets, the better it is for you." This
seemed to wash their anxiety away. "You could see the sense of relief on their
faces," a Bush aide said.
That's the Bush approach-cheerful, undemanding, empathetic, accomm odating,
unfailingly friendly.
Bush doesn't like meetings that make him, or anyone else, tense and
uncomfortable. So he didn't have any on his ten-day trip to Poland, Hungary,
France, and the Netherlands. Everyone he met, Communists and democrats alike,
liked him, or at least Bush aides thought everyone did. One reason is that Bush
didn't apply pressure. He didn't lean on anyone. He prefers to make other
leaders happy.
The Bush style is great for selling Bush. My guess is he'll soar now in
popularity polls in Europe, maybe even topping Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev.
It's also fine for a time when the economies of the big industrial democracies
are strong and the Soviet empire is fragmenting. But if things go sour in the
world, look out. And if Bush needs to convey a controversial policy, as
President Reagan sometimes did successfully, being nice to everyone won't be
sufficient. Reagan imposed a tough anti-terrorism stand on the allies in 1986.
Earlier he made them swallow the Strategic Defense Initiative. At the economic
summit in Paris, Bush's next stop after Hungary, his boldest move was to get
attention paid to Eastern Europe. He succeeded, but the achievement was a small
one.
The nearest thing to an awkward moment on Bush's trip occurred at his first stop
in Warsaw. On July 10, at the end of a luncheon that brought together Communist
officials and their Solidarity foes, Bush gave an impromptu toast. Then Gen.
Wojciech Jaruzelski rose to propose one. Solidarity members, many of whom were
jailed when Jaruzelski declared martial law in 1981, squirmed. Should they rise
at the end of the toast? American officials noticed their discomfort and grew
fretful as Jaruzelski talked. The Americans feared the luncheon would break
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
15
The New Republic (c) 1989 IAC
up in anger and embarrassment. Jaruzelski averted danger. He proposed a toast
"to the good health of Barbara Bush and all the ladies present with us here
today." Everyone had to rise and applaud this.
To the surprise and delight of Bush's entourage, the president rarely had to
tell other leaders what they didn't want to hear. Jaruzelski made things easy
for him by spelling out all of Poland's troubles. He said the Communist system
isn't working, economically or otherwise. He cited Poland's agricultural
backwardness-a11 small farms on which it's impossible to achieve economies of
scale. Bush spared Jaruzelski trouble by not repeating his assertion, made in
an interview before he left Washington, that Gorbachev should pull all Soviet
troops out of Poland. That would be provocative, counterproductive even, an
aide explained. "Our objective isn't to talk about the Soviets leaving Eastern
Europe," the aide said. "Our objective is to get the Soviets to leave."
In Budapest, Bush was amazed at what he heard from Nyers, the first among equals
in the four-man presidium that runs Hungary. "We have to get rid of the dead
hand of statism," Nyers said. After 40 years of communism, the way people think
in Hungary must be changed, he went on. All Bush could do was nod. Then Nyers
said, "The great test for our party is whether we're willing to put our case
before the people in an election.' Bush couldn't argue with this either. Nyers
said Hungary is in the position the United States was in 1776. Bush liked the
ana logy.
Bush arrived with a head of steam at the Paris summit of the United States,
France, Britain, Italy, Germany, Japan, and Canada. At the openin session he
was the first leader called on ,by French President Francois Mitterrand, the
host. This was the most informal meeting at the summit, the one at which the
seven leaders talked about whatever was on their mind. Bush talked about
Eastern Europe. He said the West has a "historic opportunity" to change the
face of Europe by sweeping away the Iron Curtain. But the allies have to stick
together and get actively engaged in helping Poland and Hungary as those
countries cast off communism. He said the summit countries should meet later to
figure out how to provide joint aid.
This was problematic. In preliminary discussions, Bush's representative had
pushed the idea and gotten nowhere. The Germans and the French were opposed.
So a follow-up meeting on Poland and Hungary was not called for in the draft
communique^. The next day Bush jumped at the chance to get it in. West German
Chancellor Helmut Kohl proposed a follow-up meeting on giving food to Poland.
"It shouldn't just be Poland,' Bush said. "It should include Hungary. And it
shouldn't just include food. It should have a broader range of aid." This was
the b oldest Bush got at the summit.
To his surprise, Mitterrand endorsed his plan, saving it from reject ion.
Mitterrand's intervention was a measure of his friendship with Bush, according
to the president's aides. He and Bush got along famously when Mitterrand
visited Kennebunkport and Boston in May. Bush wanted to take Mitterrand on a
boat ride, but he backed off politely when Mitterrand balked. (Mitterrand hates
boats.) A few days later an authoritative-sounding piece in Le Monde reported
how impressed Mitterrand had been by Bush. At the NATO summit in June,
Mitterrand rebuffed his own bureaucracy and sided with Bush at one point. And
in Paris, Mitterrand also rushed to Bush's side when Italian Foreign Minister
Guilio Andreotti tried to soften the communiquie's mention of "the Soviet
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
16
The New Republic (c) 1989 IAC
threat." Andreotti said the word "potential" should be added. "There's no
potential threat," said Bush. "There's an enormous standing army." Mitterrand
offered the word "objective." Bush readily agreed, and "objective threat" is
what got in the communique. "I wish we'd thought of that," said an American
official.
Bush has also drawn close to Thatcher. He loves to watch her take apart
questions from reporters. She invited him for breakfast whenever he passed
through England as vice president. In June, Bush stopped off after the NATO
summit for his first presidential visit. After a session at No. 10 Downing
Street, he and Thatcher met the press. For days British papers had been writing
about the end of the "special relationship" between the United States and
Britain. The first question was on this subject, and Thatcher delivered a
dazzling rebuttal. All Bush could say was that he liked what she'd said. In
Paris he met with her privately for more than an hour at the American
ambassador's residence. Afterward, he broke his own rule about no questions at
photo opportunities. He said it was "a modified photo op in honor of our
distinguished guest, who will be glad to take questions." I suspect his real
motive was to watch he r batter a pool of reporters.
Mitterrand and Thatcher are hardly alone among world leaders who are esteemed by
Bush. He even admires dead Communists. In an interview with Hungarian
journalists in Washington, he praised Janos Kadar, who was installed as leader
of Hungary by the Soviets in 1956. Kadar died in We might get all kinds of
argument in our political right or our political left about Mr. Kadar, but I
look at him as a man who served his country," Bush said. Actually, right and
left agree Kadar was the "butcher of Budapest." In Poland and Hungary, Bush
liked the Communist leaders better than their political opponents. The
opposition parties in Hungary, said a Bush aide, are relics of the 1940s.
The Communist "are thinking like politicians now."
What the Europeans find all the more endearing about Bush is that he's not a
lone ranger like Reagan. There's no Bush doctrine. John Sununu, the White
House chief of staff, used that phrase to describe Bush's policy of aiding
Communist countries to the extent they adopt democracy and capitalism. But
national security adviser Brent Scowcroft instantly repudiated it. "Bush's
approach is we've got to all be together," said an official traveling with Bush.
"So it's no good to have a unilateral doctrine."
Holland was perfect as Bush's final stop. His visit was strategically
unimportant, but historic-no president had been there before. He was among
friends. "Friendly relations between our two countries have endured
uninterruptedly for over 200 years," said Dutch Foreign Minister Hans Van Den
Broek. Nothing but kind words were expected of Bush, which is what he likes to
deliver.
TYPE: Column
SUBJECT: Presidents, foreign relations; Statesmen, evaluation; United States,
relations with Europe, Eastern; Europe, Eastern, relations with the United
States
NAME: Bush, George, foreign relations
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
17
The New Republic (c) 1989 IAC
GEOGRAPHIC: United States; Europe, Eastern
LOAD-DATE-MDC: September 2, 1989
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS® ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
18
15TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1989 Time Inc. All Rights Reserved;
Time
July 17, 1989, U.S. Edition
SECTION: WORLD; Pg. 68
LENGTH: 599 words
HEADLINE: America Abroad;
Beyond the Reagan Doctrine
BYLINE: Strobe Talbott
BODY:
After years of carnage, all is relatively quiet on three fronts in the cold
war. The Afghan city of Jalalabad is still holding out against a rebel siege.
Most Nicaraguan insurgents are sulking in their tents in Honduras. The various
factions in Cambodia are spending at least as much time these days maneuvering
against one another at international conferences as fighting in the jungle.
The mujahedin, the contras and the Cambodian guerrillas are all foot soldiers
of an American policy whose architect has left office - the Reagan Doctrine. To
punish Leonid Brezhnev for fomenting trouble in the Third World back in the
1970s, Ronald Reagan launched a global counteroffensive in the 1980s. By helping
to arm virtually any group aiming to topple one of the Kremlin's clients, Reagan
gave new force to the old U.S. strategy of "containing" Soviet expansionism.
Then along came Mikhail Gorbachev, who has his own reasons for scaling back
the U.S.S.R.'s foreign entanglements: they are expensive, diverting resources
that might otherwise go to domestic reform; and they provoke worldwide
antagonism at a time when Moscow is looking for capitalist goods and credits. So
Gorbachev has withdrawn Soviet troops from Afghanistan, encouraged the
Vietnamese to end their occupation of Cambodia and warned Fidel Castro that the
Kremlin will not indefinitely underwrite the export of revolution in Latin
America.
George Bush has acknowledged this turnaround in Soviet policy by proclaiming
it an opportunity for the U.S. to move "beyond containment." Already there has
been a shift in U.S. policy toward diplomatic compromise in all three of the
principal regional conflicts. In Nicaragua the Reagan Administration wanted to
overthrow the Sandinistas; the contras were a means to that all-or-nothing end.
The Bush Administration, by contrast, is seeking a political settlement that
would entail some sort of power sharing between the Sandinistas and their
opponents. During consultations on Cambodia in Brunei last week, Secretary of
State James Baker made it clear that the U.S. is more willing than it was a year
ago to accept the current Vietnamese-backed leaders in Phnom Penh as part of a
future coalition and more committed than before to preventing any return by
the genocidal Khmer Rouge.
As for Afghanistan, American hopes for a quick, easy mujahedin victory have
faded. A protracted civil war might favor the more fanatical, anti-Western
elements among the rebels. The U.S. has just said good riddance to one ayatullah
in Iran, and the last thing Washington wants is a Khomeini-like figure in
Afghanistan. There are also 3.5 million well-armed Afghan refugees who are an
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
19
(c) 1989 Time Inc., Time, July 17, 1989
increasing worry to Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. On a visit to
Washington last month, she persuaded Bush to endorse publicly a "political
solution," implying an internationally brokered deal that might allow some
Afghan Communists to remain as part of a new government. Baker has privately
told his Soviet counterpart, Eduard Shevardnadze, that the U.S. "has no interest
in seeing a leadership in Kabul that is hostile to the U.S.S.R." Such
assurances, Baker hopes, may lead Moscow to persuade its clients to accept a
deal.
If these trends continue, it could mean truce, then peace on these far-flung
battlefields. Wars, including cold ones, don't end until people stop dying in
them. By folding up the Reagan Doctrine, the U.S. can provide some cover for
Moscow's retreat, perhaps helping end the expansionist phase in Soviet history.
Such a strategy might even come to be called the Bush Doctrine.
GRAPHIC: Picture, NO CAPTION descColor illustration., ILLUSTRATION FOR TIME BY
RICO LINS DIANA WALKER, DENNIS BRACK --- BLACK STAR
LEXIS® NEXIS® ® LEXIS® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
20
14TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1989 The Financial Times Limited;
Financial Times
July 18, 1989, Tuesday
SECTION: SECTION I; European News; Pg. 2
LENGTH: 874 words
HEADLINE: Bush Puts His Own Stamp On The US Leadership Of The West
BYLINE: Peter Riddell
HIGHLIGHT:
Peter Riddell sums up the President's achievements on his 10-day European tour
and finds he has much to celebrate
BODY:
President George Bush's boyish elation as he ends today his wearying 10 day
tour to Europe - his second within six weeks - is understandable. He has
further built up his standing as leader of the West, but it is leadership of a
different kind than before: less dominant, more first among partners.
This reflects both Mr Bush's personality and the shift in Washington's
position relative to its allies. Despite worries in Europe in the spring about
the time his foreign policy reviews were taking, Mr Bush has now won the respect
of his summit partners. He is not only affable to all, but also assiduous in
keeping up contacts with other leaders.
Mr Bush has developed good relations with Mr Francois Mitterrand, cemented
when the French President visited the Bush family home in Maine, and with Mrs
Margaret Thatcher, even though British-US relations are somewhat more distant
and less intimate than when President Ronald Reagan was in office.
Moreover, Mr James Baker, the US Secretary of State, has developed a close
working relationship with Mr Hans-Dietrich Genscher, West Germany's Foreign
Minister, initially in sorting out the Nato summit compromise on arms control,
and recently on Eastern Europe.
President Bush and his advisers recognise that the US has to consult more,
not only because its allies have strong views of their own, but more
specifically because they have the money and the US does not have much
available. This is what Mr Baker euphemistically describes as "creative
responsibility-sharing."
Most significantly, there has been the shift in the US attitude towards
taking a positive view of European integration and the role of the European
Commission.
First signalled in Mr Bush's Boston University speech two months ago, it was
put into effect over the weekend when, with full US support, the Commission was
given the task of co-ordinating international help for Poland and Hungary.
The US accepts that it alone cannot support central Europe; there is to be no
second US-dominated Marshall Plan.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
21
(c) 1989 Financial Times, July 18, 1989
Mr Bush has still shown leadership over Eastern Europe, albeit reinforcing
existing initiatives and contacts by West Germany, France and Britain. Other
countries may have been irritated by his initial appearance last week of having
"discovered" Poland and Hungary. But his visits there helped put the issue at
the centre of the Paris summit agenda.
The enormity of what is happening impressed everyone on the trip. As Mr
Baker pointed out, Paris was the first of the 15 annual summits which had not
had to deal primarily with the threat of Communism, but rather with the
consequences of its failure.
The Bush policy is not one of unrestrained support for non-Communists; in
many cases it is the reverse. The aim is to support those favouring reform
whether inside or outside the existing regime; moving forward within a stable
framework is a priority.
In a revealing interview on Sunday, General Brent Scowcroft, the National
Security Adviser, reflected the enthusiasm of the Bush team for General Wojciech
Jaruzelski in Poland - "a very different kind of person from 1981 (when
Solidarity was banned)" and "a man showing great sincerity in trying to deal
with his country's problems."
Similarly in Hungary, the US believes the chances of successful reform will
probably rest primarily with the Communist regime rather than the fragmented and
inexperienced opposition groups (a contrast with the Polish position).
Gen Scowcroft has conceded that the Communists might win the promised free
elections in Hungary because "there's a great deal of innovative thinking going
on within the various parts of the Communist party a Communist party
system
within which there are blocs within the party could eventually be
indistinguishable from a multi-party system."
Such thinking would have been inconceivable a year ago.
West European countries, as much as the US, created the policy of conditional
generosity - step-by-step support for these economic and political reforms.
But Mr Bush played a key role in pressing for the concerted approach.
The US side may have made a mistake in focusing on the limited amount of
direct help for private enterprise and the environment rather than the
potentially far more important fresh impetus for dealing with Poland's debts.
Debt rescheduling by the Paris Club of creditor nations is to be made more
flexible than usual, and in a largely unnoticed commitment secured by the US,
Poland stands to benefit substantially from the Brady debt reduction plan.
However, while rescheduling may be agreed before long, US officials are less
optimistic about an agreement on an economic recovery programme between a Polish
Government - over which Solidarity has at least a veto power - and the
International Monetary Fund. This could take at least the rest of this year.
President Bush's wiser advisers, such as Gen Scowcroft, are loath to describe
his approach to Eastern Europe as representing a Bush doctrine. This is too
grandiose for the President's style.
LEXIS® NEXIS LEXIS® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
22
(c) 1989 Financial Times, July 18, 1989
What has been seen both at the Nato summit and in the past 10 days is a
cautious, collegiate style of policy-making and leadership - which has been more
successful than past dramatic gestures.
LEXIS® NEXIS® ® LEXIS® NEXIS ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
23
16TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1989 Chicago Tribune Company;
Chicago Tribune
July 16, 1989, Sunday, FINAL EDITION
SECTION: PERSPECTIVE; Pg. 1; ZONE: C
LENGTH: 1436 words
HEADLINE: Making Europe whole
Weaning communist nations to the West depends on Mother Russia
BYLINE: By Timothy d McNulty; Timothy J. McNulty reports on the White House for
The Tribune
DATELINE: PARIS
BODY:
President Bush showed the wiliness of the = Bush Doctrine" last week as he
went on his first Cold War offensive, drinking cold vodka and delivering warm
toasts to his communist hosts.
Those Eastern European nations that allow political variety and private
markets and decentralize their economies will be rewarded, he declared.
And those that don't can stew in their own economic failure.
Bush was concerned not to antagonize communist hard-liners in the Soviet
Union. He didn't overpromise the people in Poland and Hungary, the two East bloc
states he visited early in the week.
But his message was understood and appreciated by many who heard it.
"When someone is starving you just don't give them fish, but give them a
fishing pole," said George Konkogy-Thege, a graduate of Karl Marx University in
Budapest, Hungary, who gave a variation of a familiar saying as he stood in the
steamy, jostling crowd at the university to hear Bush.
Several weeks ago, in a speech to the Polish-American enclave in the Detroit
suburb of Hamtramck, Bush declared that his goal was the reintegration of the
communist world into the community of nations.
White House Chief of Staff John Sununu says "the birth of the Bush
Doctrine" was at the President's inauguration in January, when Bush, after
speaking of conciliation with Congress, also said he was extending his hand to
other nations.
Considering the declaration of martial law in Poland in 1981, and the stark
black-and-white film of Soviet tanks rolling into Prague in 1968 and Budapest in
1956, the desire to make Europe whole again is an ambitious, perhaps naive goal
that depends totally on the Soviet Union.
"We're walking a very fine line," a senior administration official said late
last week. "We're trying to wean countries out of the communist bloc, something
that hasn't happened since 1945, and it depends largely on Soviet tolerance."
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
24
(c) 1989 Chicago Tribune, July 16, 1989
So far, Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev seems willing to tolerate that,
though in France 10 days ago, he issued a mild warning that nations under Soviet
influence may reform but must still remain socialist. "The overcoming of
socialism," he said, could lead to "confrontation, if not something worse."
Still, the Soviet leader, whose own problems include a stricken economy,
ethnic turbulence in the Soviet Union and restive client-states in Eastern
Europe, also talks of a "common European home."
A spirit of competition with Gorbachev seemed to be prompting Bush, but each
day he spent in Eastern Europe this week he repeated, in one fashion or another,
that he did not come to irritate or threaten.
That was because the ghost of China hovered over every stop.
"We know every reform is easily reversible," a White House adviser said. "We
don't want to get them nervous."
The political sophistication of average Polish citizens was also evident as
they related their situation to pro-democracy student protests in Beijing.
"Their tragedy is our tragedy. We are afraid of it," said Jan Jablonski, a
51-year-old worker who listened to Bush's speech under the stark memorial
outside the gate of the Lenin Shipyard in Gdansk, a reminder of the
antigovernment demonstrators killed there in 1970.
Partly in response to that, Bush advised the Poles, who gave him an
affectionate welcome, that both "courage and restraint" is needed.
If the speeches fell short of inspiring, the President's advisers claimed it
was intentional, that no speech be too strident, either.
European news media reaction was favorable, and Sununu, conscious of the
political reaction in the U.S., claimed that other leaders had complimented Bush
for his "feel for Europe."
Indeed, it was Bush's second successful trip to Europe in less than two
months. In the first, he deflected a confrontation with West Germany at the NATO
summit in Brussels.
That disagreement ended in a compromise to put off negotiations with the
Soviets on battlefield nuclear weapons in Europe until some initial progress was
made in talks on limiting conventional forces.
The administration also linked talks on conventional arms with economic
promises last week when Secretary of State James A. Baker III announced a new
NATO proposal to reduce combat aircraft and helicopters in Europe.
Bush's ad hoc policy of offering incentives to lure communist nations
staggering under heavy military budgets and poorly functioning economies
prompted some debate about the amounts of money he was offering.
If reforms continue in Poland, where shoppers have to stand in line for salt
and sugar, the nation of 37 million is to get a $100 million investment fund for
its private markets. Hungary is slated for a similar $25 million infusion.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
25
(c) 1989 Chicago Tribune, July 16, 1989
"There is a problem that if we get a lot of money at the wrong time, the
communist system gets strength. Then they become more arrogant and it stops the
process of reform," suggested Stanislaw Obertaniec, a newly elected Solidarity
member in the Senate from the industrial region of Salesia in western Poland.
"I'm divided," he said. "First I think Poland needs a plan like the Marshall
Plan. But as an opposition member I ought to be careful to whom you give the
money, to see first if they're sincere."
He added that many brigades of Soviet troops are stationed in his province, a
steelmaking center, and then he pointedly made a comparison, saying the only
U.S. presence there is in the form of a $1 million grant for a local clinic to
diagnose breast cancer.
Bush, after a much photographed but somewhat stilted lunch at the home of
Solidarity leader Lech Walesa, told reporters, "I rejoiced in his hospitality."
The President appeared to take away the same feeling from Poland and from
Hungary, though the advancement of his doctrine of friendly persuasion shouldn't
be overstated.
Hungary, for instance, is much further along toward a market-oriented economy
than Poland. On the other hand, its nine opposition parties have not coalesced
into a strong or coherent alternative to the communist government, as Solidarity
has in Poland.
And Solidarity has another tricky problem. It doesn't want to be enticed too
quickly into the Polish power structure for fear of leaving itself open to
criticism for the inevitable future disruptions of inflation and unemployment.
The Bush plan does not and cannot solve any of those problems alone, and the
administration showed a foreign policy sophistication of its own when the
President kept insisting he wanted to help each nation to help itself.
The extension of the Bush doctrine elsewhere in Eastern Europe also may
take some time.
There is a large geographic difference, to cite one complication. Hungary,
for instance, shares no border with the West, but Poland is the traditional
buffer between Russia and Germany. Any change in Poland - especially Bush's call
for the Soviets to withdraw their troops there - is likely to be viewed with
more suspicion than a withdrawal request from the government in Budapest.
Next in line to feel the lure of the Bush doctrine might be, in descending
order, Romania, Czechoslovakia, East Germany and Bulgaria.
Yugoslavia, which is not part of the Warsaw Pact, has gone its own mixed
economic way and Albania, once tied to Maoist China, is a closed society that
one administration official said is "off the map."
Without tying his name to the doctrine, Bush had raised the issue of helping
Poland and Hungary in Paris at the annual economic summit of the world's seven
richest nations last week. But the difference in political and economic agendas
quickly became evident when France insisted on introducing questions about a
future North-South summit between the world's richest and poorest states. The
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
26
(c) 1989 Chicago Tribune, July 16, 1989
U.S. was trying to avoid that.
Beneath all of this, for all the warmth with which crowds greeted Bush, lies
the broader specter of a weakened U.S. role in Europe.
Europeans are not holding their breath for U.S. leadership on Eastern Europe.
West Germany has been restructuring its loans to Poland for several years.
And while Bush campaigned last year as an environmentalist, the European
environmentalists known as "Greens" have been campaigning for years and doubled
in strength in last month's European Parliament election.
AS the continent prepares for 1992, when the nations of Western Europe are to
remove most of their trade and employment barriers, they will become even more
reliant on one another and less on the United States.
GRAPHIC: PHOTO: President Bush lunches Tuesday with Lech Walesa and his wife,
Danuta, at the Solidarity leader's home in Warsaw. After the somewhat stilted
meeting, Bush declared: "I rejoiced in his hospitality."
TERMS: UNITED STATES; OFFICIAL; TRIP; POLAND; HUNGARY; AID; INTERVIEW
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
27
18TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1989 The Financial Times Limited;
Financial Times
July 14, 1989, Friday
SECTION: SECTION I; European News; Pg. 2
LENGTH: 508 words
HEADLINE: Bush Auditions For A European Role;
US President Treads A Fine Line Between Myth And Substance
BYLINE: Peter Riddell, US Editor, Paris
BODY:
President George Bush and his advisers have been trying this week to build up
his image as the new liberator of Eastern Europe the statesman who is helping
to break down the Iron Curtain.
There has, of course, been considerable substance to the trip as well as myth
creation. Mr Bush has clearly been excited by what he has seen and heard.
He has also had both new thinking and specific measures to assist "home-grown
moves" towards political pluralism and the free market, in the hope of healing
the post-war division of Europe and welcoming some countries back into the
Western fold.
Yet this has been accompanied by careful nurturing of his image. Mr John
Sununu, the White House Chief of Staff, has even talked about a = Bush
doctrine. "
Indeed, the more that Mr Bush and his aides have protested that he is not out
to rival the successful visits to Western Europe by Mr Mikhail Gorbachev, the
Soviet leader, the more it has seemed that this is precisely their aim.
Mr James Baker, the Secretary of State, claimed: "we're really not in the
business of competition, of counting the crowds," yet immediately added: "I, for
one, thought the crowds were pretty terrific, as a matter of fact, in Poland,
and particularly in Gdansk."
Mr Marlin Fitzwater, the White House Press Secretary, even reckoned that the
crowd in Gdansk was close to a quarter of a million three times most
estimates.
This attempt to talk-up the enthusiasm for Mr Bush on his visit contrasts
both with his desire not to over-promise or interfere, and to make assistance
conditional on local progress. Indeed, some advisers have been worried about
creating the impression that the US had suddenly "discovered" Eastern Europe.
Mr Bush is not a naturally charismatic leader. This week he was overshadowed
in Gdansk by Mr Lech Walesa, the Solidarity leader, whose political passion
shone through.
Similarly, in Hungary, Mr Imre Poszgay, the leader of the reform group in the
Communist party, talked like a Westrn politician in accepting the need for
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
28
(c) 1989 Financial Times, July 14, 1989
change and about the implications of promised free elections, even praising some
of the opposition groups.
Both these reform leaders accept that the chances for successful change lie
in their own countries. The effective demise of the Brezhnev doctrine of Soviet
hegemony does not mean the triumph of an alternative Bush doctrine.
There are dangers for the US in believing, in Mr Bush's words, that Poland
and Hungary are about to embrace the American way.
As Mr Bush, the cautious political realist, rather than the myth creator,
recognises, the West's immediate role is to offer support for internally
generated changes, but not to impose.
The US has this week been giving clear signals of its preference for
stability, including a continued role of reform-minded members of the current
regimes.
Yet US officials cannot disguise their excitement about the pace of reform
and the possibility of other countries following Poland and Hungary. There is a
fine line here between enthusiasm and interference.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
29
19TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1989 The Times Mirror Company;
Los Angeles Times
July 14, 1989, Friday, Home Edition
SECTION: Part 1; Page 14; Column 1; Foreign Desk
LENGTH: 1157 words
HEADLINE: NEWS ANALYSIS;
PRESIDENT COMES AWAY FROM EASTERN EUROPE WITH BUSH DOCTRINE' TAKING FORM
BYLINE: By DOYLE McMANUS, Times Staff Writer
DATELINE: BUDAPEST, Hungary
BODY:
For those with any memory of the bad old days in Eastern Europe, President
Bush's journey through Poland and Hungary this week was nothing short of
astonishing --- from the Warsaw lunch at which Communists and once-jailed
opposition leaders joined in toasting the United States, to the Hungarian
military band that saluted Bush with a spirited rendition of "The Stars and
Stripes Forever."
" (The) change is absolutely amazing," Bush marveled aboard Air Force One as
he left Eastern Europe on Thursday.
"What we've been witnessing in the last three days," added Brent Scowcroft,
the President's national security adviser, "is a really historic set of
developments in the postwar world." The surge of reform in Poland and Hungary,
Scowcroft said, has brought about "a fundamental change in the whole
international structure."
In return, Bush outlined a striking new U.S. policy toward Eastern Europe, an
approach that some enthusiastic aides are already calling "the Bush Doctrine. "
Its central idea, as Bush said in a speech at Karl Marx University here, is
to offer "the partnership of the United States" in the effort to dismantle
Stalinism in Eastern Europe.
The concrete financial-aid component in Bush's proposals was modest: $125
million to promote private enterprise in the two countries; smaller amounts of
cultural and environmental assistance, plus a promise to seek help from the
other Western nations in relieving their economies' crushing burden of foreign
debt.
But the underlying changes in U.S. policy have been extraordinary, and many
Poles and Hungarians recognized it.
"The new attention from the West is important to us," said Gyorgy Kadar, a
Hungarian democratic activist. "It helps guarantee that the process of reforms
will continue."
Ever since the Iron Curtain descended over Eastern Europe after the end of
World War II, the United States has treated the Soviet satellites as just that
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
30
(c) 1989 Los Angeles Times, July 14, 1989
--- satellites. U.S. relations with Poland and Hungary reflected the state of
relations with the Soviet Union. Even when the United States declared a policy
of "differentiation" in the 1970s, it was largely an exercise of giving small
rewards to those satellites, such as Romania, that made life most difficult for
their masters in Moscow.
Now, however, Bush has raised the U.S. commitment to Hungary and Poland
considerably, declaring himself a full partner in their efforts to reform. The
accent is on treating Poland and Hungary as if they were independent, in part to
see how far their autonomy can be extended. And 50 far, Bush noted, "there
doesn't seem to be a bottom line."
As a result, the U.S. goal appears to be nothing short of a "rollback" of
communism in Eastern Europe. But unlike the belligerent policy that bore that
name in the 1950s, this rollback would be peaceful, infiltrating Communist
territory not with spies or troops but with Western-oriented economic reforms.
The theory, Bush aides say, is that more and more Communist rulers will
follow the lead of Soviet President Mikhail S. Gorbachev in deciding that
economic reforms require political reforms as well - and that political reforms
will inevitably draw once-Western countries such as Poland and Hungary back into
what Bush calls "a Europe whole and free."
"A market-oriented economy and a vigorous private sector can provide the
foundation for a more democratic political system," one senior Administration
official said. Or, as Lenin might have put it, the idea is to help the
Communists of Eastern Europe improve their economies - so they can produce the
rope to hang themselves.
Ironically, in another departure from the policies of the past 40 years, the
Bush approach is not aimed at ending Soviet hegemony in Eastern Europe - at
least, not openly. Instead, Bush took pains all week to say that he was not
campaigning to detach Poland and Hungary from the Soviet Bloc or stir up trouble
for Moscow.
=
We're not there
to poke a stick in the eye of Mr.
Gorbachev," he said Thursday. "Just the opposite - to encourage the very kind
of reforms that he is championing, and more reforms."
So intent was Bush at getting this message across that several Polish and
Hungarian officials said they were startled at how often he volunteered it. And
some members of the two countries' democratic opposition movements were a little
dismayed at the President's insistence on patient and gradual change.
More than one member of Poland's Solidarity movement grumbled about Bush's
praise for Gen. Wojciech Jaruzelski, the Communist leader who outlawed their
union and jailed many of their leaders after declaring martial law in 1981. Bush
called him "a man of serious purpose trying very hard to move his country
forward," and added, "He's come a long way since 1981."
And in Hungary, opposition leaders had said they had hoped to win Bush's
endorsement of their call for a total withdrawal of Soviet troops from the
country. Instead, they found the President assuring them that the issue was
being dealt with in East-West negotiations on conventional forces.
Some U.S. officials have even argued that Poland and Hungary can - and
should -- attempt to democratize without leaving the Soviet Bloc.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
31
(c) 1989 Los Angeles Times, July 14, 1989
"Our involvement in Eastern Europe has no political-military dimension," one
senior White House aide asserted.
But opposition activists in both Poland and Hungary made it clear that they
would like to lead their countries out of the Warsaw Pact, if they thought they
could do it without provoking Soviet intervention.
As in the rest of the Administration's campaign for a new system of
U.S.-Soviet relations, dubbed "beyond containment," officials remain
deliberately imprecise over what political and military structures should
replace the familiar ones of the Cold War. "We're feeling our way step by step,"
a State Department official said. But he acknowledged that the Administration
has deliberately avoided calling for an end to the Warsaw Pact, for example,
because that would endanger the incremental progress that has already been made.
Americans, Poles and Hungarians all agree on two factors that are needed to
make the policy work. One is the forbearance of Gorbachev.
"The support of President Bush is important to us," said Kadar, the Hungarian
activist. "I hope you will not be offended if I say the success of Mr. Gorbachey
is very much more important."
The other is whether the new U.S. commitment to two Communist countries in
economic distress can be sustained in an era of tight federal budgets. The first
test will come this weekend, at the Paris economic summit, where Bush expects to
win agreement from the world's other wealthy democracies for more liberal terms
on debt relief for Poland and a general commitment to increased investment and
aid.
But officials acknowledge that the job will take a considerable amount of
money and a long time - especially to revive the moribund Polish economy.
TYPE: Analysis
SUBJECT: GOVERNMENT REFORM; UNITED STATES -- FOREIGN POLICY -- EASTERN EUROPE;
COMMUNISM; UNITED STATES -- FOREIGN AID -- HUNGARY; UNITED STATES -- FOREIGN AID
POLAND; UNITED STATES -- FOREIGN RELATIONS -- USSR; DEMOCRACY; BUSH, GEORGE;
GORBACHEV, MIKHAIL S
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
32
20TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1989 Federal Information Systems Corporation;
Federal News Service
JULY 12, 1989, 11:55 A.M. (HUNGARY TIME) WEDNESDAY
SECTION: FROM THE WHITE HOUSE
LENGTH: 3333 words
HEADLINE: CB
WHITE HOUSE PRESS BRIEFING FOLLOWING
THE PRESIDENT'S MEETING WITH HUNGARIAN LEADERS
BRIEFER: CHIEF OF STAFF JOHN SUNUNU
DUNA HOTEL FILING CENTER
KEYWORD: SUNUNU/BUDAPEST-07/12/89
BODY:
MARLIN FITZWATER: We have a briefing about to begin. It will be for sound and
camera. The briefing is by the Chief of Staff to the President of the United
States, Governor John Sununu. Governor Sununu will have a brief opening
statement, and then take your questions.
Q Speech text?
GOV. SUNUNU: A speech text will be available -- an advance text wil be available
after the briefing here, including a fact sheet. I would like to begin by
stressing for the President how pleased he is and how comfortable he has felt
with the warm response he has received from the people of the countries he has
visited, Poland and Hungary. In particular, he was well moved by those folks
that waited in the rain last night for him to say a few words to them, and he
felt that that certainly represented an affection for the United States that is
very important to him.
The meetings this morning with the various leaders of the government and the
party here in Hungary went very well. The discussions generally focused on the
efforts that are being made here in Hungary to deal with the details involved in
the reforms on both the political side and the economic side. They are -- were
very meticulous in their discussion of the concerns they have to make sure that
the constitutional reforms, the legal reforms and the institutional reforms that
they are making that impact both of these areas are done in a reflection of what
they perceive is the will of the people of Hungary. They are very much focused
on reforms that deal with issues of pluralism, the issues associated with
privatization and the issues associated with getting their nation to a
market-based economy.
The emphasis that they had on those details was underscored by their compliments
to the President for the approach that he has taken in terms of helping Hungary
to help itself, and they were very positive in their comments about the
President's -- (40-second break in audio) -- the discussions not only talked
about the details of what they are trying to accomlish here, but they did urge
the President to please convey at the summit the presentations they have made
here. The President assured them that one of the reasons he was here to hear
what they had to say and to get a better first-hand feeling for what was going
on within Hungary was to be able to convey more directly the approach that they
have taken.
I'll start taking questions, and -- Helen?
Q Did the President tell them what he is going to give them today, and were they
pleased, and what is he going to -- ?
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
33
(c) 1989 Federal Information Systems Corporation, July 12, 1989
GOV. SUNUNU: The discussions were in broad terms. The President left the
detailed presentation to his speech this afternoon. And you will get an advance
text, and rather than my go over - I'll go over some of the details, and then
you can get the specifics out of the fact sheet.
The President will be talking this afternoon about support for Hungary's
considerable efforts in dealing with its economic problems. He will assure them
that he will urge for concerted Western action at the summit by the G-7
countries, recognizing that one of the goals of Hungary is to attract not only
institutional support, but support for the private sector here.
In that respect, the President will propose a Hungarian- American enterprise
fund with the first grant of $25 million to that fund to help the Hungarians
expand their private sector, which is already one of the most extensive in
East-Central Europe. He will announce his intention to grant Hungary Most
Favored Nation status and will announce that he is going to do it without the
requirement of annual waivers, as soon as they pass their new emigration law.
One of the reasons for having to wait for them to pass their law is that that
law is required in order to meet the conditions of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment.
The President will announce funding for a regional environmental center in
Budapest. This is the center that he hopes will provide the focus for East-West
cooperation in dealing with the environmental matters that are of concern across
Europe.
And the President has announced the establishment of a Peace Corps program in
Hungary, centered on assisting Hungarian efforts to develop and expand English
language teaching. In regard to that particular proposal, it is the first - it
will be the first Peace Corps effort in Eastern Europe and the first Peace Corps
effort in any communist country, and reflects a need expressed by the Hungarians
for assistance in dealing with English as a second language. Now that they have
reduced the requirement for compulsory teaching of Russian as a language, they
are finding that with the option available, the pressure on skilled teachers in
other languages was such that they wanted and are very pleased with this
particular assistance.
Mary?
Q Governor, what did you mean when you said that Poland was far ahead of Hungary
in economic and political reform?
GOV. SUNUNU: In particular, that was in reference to the fact that Poland had
their elections, that they had moved to open elections and had allowed for a
democratically selected component of their government. In Hungary they are
putting together the structure that will allow them to move to those elections.
They indicated today that they felt that the earliest those elections could take
place is at the very end of this year or into the spring. The important thing
is that they are moving in that direction. The President applauded their desire
to get to elections as quickly as possible.
Q Governor, when the President is meeting with the opposition members this
afternoon, will be announcing any US support, financial or otherwise, to help
opposition parties as they try to institute democracy?
GOV. SUNUNU: No, the President is trying -- has a policy of making sure that we
do not in any way at all interfere with the internal structure or internal
affairs of any of the nations he is visiting. The Hungarians are being
meticulous about their own approach at supporting a multi-party structure. They
have talked about those issues, they are sensitive to how they want to do it,
and there is no way at all that the President in any way will even suggest doing
anything externally that would interfere with that internal detail.
Q Assuming you --
GOV. SUNUNU: Let me take her.
Q Go ahead.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® ® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
34
(c) 1989 Federal Information Systems Corporation, July 12, 1989
Q Mr. Sununu, is the $25 million grant synonymous with the $100 million that
he's giving for private enterprise in Poland, and if so, why only -
GOV. SUNUNU: Well, the population of Poland is about 37 million, I believe the
population of Hungary is about 10 million, and there was a rough scaling of
4-to-1. It's not an absolute formula, it ought not to be taken as a precedent
for future formulas, but that was an approximate way of --
Q So it's the same program.
GOV. SUNUNU: It's the same kind of a program.
Q Assuming you participated in meetings, did the Soviet Union come up in any
context, and how about specifically Soviet troops? Was there any reference to
that issue?
GOV. SUNUNU: There were two contexts that are very important to stress. Number
one, the President emphasized again, as he has at every opportunity, that he
does not feel that what is being done here in any way at all should be seen as
an effort to compete with Mr. Gorbachev either in style or in substance of what
is taking place; but more importantly, he tried to stress that he applauds the
efforts being taken by the Soviet Union. He wanted to communicate to and
through the leaders of Hungary that he wishes Mr. Gorbachev all the success with
perestroika; that he is supportive, not only of what is taking place in movement
toward reform in Poland and Hungary, but also supports the very significant and
important efforts taken within the Soviet Union.
He tried to emphasize there that in saying that of course he would be pleased to
see - when he had answered that he would have been pleased to see Soviet troops
withdrawn from Poland, that it was in exactly the same context that he would be
thrilled to see an opportunity occur where US troops that are stationed
throughout the world would also be able to be withdrawn, that he recognizes that
he and Mr. Gorbachev have taken a parallel tack to try and stabilize the world
in terms of peace and equilibrium in the world, and taken a tack of trying to
reduce troop levels in various areas, and it was consistent with that that he
was making his comments.
Q But I take it the discussion is general. There is no reference to '56,
there's no reference of retaliation, there's no reference you might be
antagonizing, going too far, none of that?
60V. SUNUNU: No. Again, the President tried to focus on the fact that he is
trying to be a part of an effort to stabilize, that he has tried to take a tack
and an approach that is stabilizing, in effect, not destabilizing, that he has
no intention to create problems, but to be of assistance. And --
Q Governor, was the President suggesting that he would like to bring American
troops home from Europe?
GOV. SUNUNU: Well, the President made clear that in proposing the CFE package at
- at NATO, it included the reduction of US troops as well as a reduction of
Soviet troops.
Q But your comment just a moment ago, it sounded as if you were interested in
withdrawing American troops -
GOV. SUNUNU: The context was in the context of the CFE proposal.
Q And nothing beyond that?
GOV. SUNUNU: No more than an expression of the fact that everyone has a goal
towards stabilizing and equilibrium in relationships around the world as a
whole, but nothing specific.
Q When you say "on a parallel track with Mr. Gorbachev" -
GOV. SUNUNU: Don't --- don't -
Q - Gorbachev is talking about -- (inaudible) -
GOV. SUNUNU: The proposal was in the context of CFE, and if I suggested to you
in any way at all that it went beyond that, then I communicated something beyond
what was actually said.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
35
(c) 1989 Federal Information Systems Corporation, July 12, 1989
Q Governor, the $25 million program, can that be direct --- (inaudible) -- direct
American aid?
GOV. SUNUNU: Yes, this is a US grant to an enterprise, a Hungarian-American --
(three second audio break) - that will provide support with a focus towards the
private sector, assistance to entrepreneurs, either to start businesses or to
acquire equity positions, for example, in state-owned businessesropean and the
Japanese governments in support of Hungarian economic reform and participation
in this particular enterprise fund.
Q Governor Sununu, the other day you likened the Poles to kids in a candy store
who couldn't say no. Does that apply to the Hungarians, too?
GOV. SUNUNU: Let me return to the context in which that remark was used. The
point was that in the 1970s, loans were provided, and even in the discussions we
had with the members of the Polish government and the opposition, they
acknowledged that the utilization of those funds did not always focus on the
most critical needs that Poland had. That was the point I was trying to make;
the metaphor may have been bad, and I apologize for the metaphor. The point I
was trying to make is that merely repeating what was done in the '70s is not,
either from the Polish perspective or the American perspective, the appropriate
thing to do. I apologize for the metaphor, but I think the point was correct.
Q There is no, as far as I hear so far, there's no parallel reference to
austerity here, though. There's no calls for sacrifice -- very, very slight
reference. What's behind this? Is there some notion that the Hungarians are
more disposed to making the kind of cuts in inflation, et cetera, that you'd
like to see in both places? Why is the emphasis so different?
GOV. SUNUNU: On the economic side, the Hungarians have brought their economy to
a much different condition than the Polish economy. There has been an effort to
encourage entrepreneurial participation here. They have had a little bit more
success in developing a better balanced relationship between demand and supply
for consumer goods among others. They are very much sensitive to where they are
relative to some of the other Eastern European countries.
In the discussion, it was pointed out by their leaders that they consider four
nations very much in the forefront of reform, particularly economic reform and
political -- as well as political reform - themselves, Poland, Yugoslavia, and
the Soviet Union. And I think they are quite justifiably proud of how far they
have come even before they --- before they move on from where they are.
Q To what extent has the President prepared the way in advance consultation with
the G-7 nations for the kind of concerted action he has now promised both Poland
and Hungary?
GOV. SUNUNU: In the sense of having communicated the kind of direction we would
like to take, there has been communication on that. In the sense that there is
no pre-packaged deal that we will be walking into to affirm, there is going to
be additional discussion there, so
Q (Off mike.)
GOV. SUNUNU: I'm sorry?
Q What sort of reaction has he had to the --
GOV. SUNUNU: I think there is an understanding by the G-7 countries that they
have responsibilities in a number of areas, and this is certainly one of the
ones that is relatively high on their priority list.
Q Governor, does it require legislation to give Hungary the Most Favored Nation
status --- (inaudible) -- ?
GOV. SUNUNU: I don't think - I think we -- we have the authority to do SO. The
only act -- legislative act --- is actually on the part of the Hungarians, who
have to pass their emigration law in order to satisfy the requirements that
already exist under our Jackson-Vanik amendment.
Q So the President - (inaudible) --
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
36
(c) 1989 Federal Information Systems Corporation, July 12, 1989
GOV. SUNUNU: That's right. That's right.
Q You're not going for -- (inaudible) --- you don't need legislation?
GOV. SUNUNU: That's right. But I said, the only thing that is required IS
legislation on the Hungarian part 50 that they meet the requirements of
Jackson-Vanik.
Q What is it they need to --
GOV. SUNUNU: They have an emigration -- there is an emigration -- a free
emigration requirement under the Jackson-Vanik amendment, and in order for them
to satisfy that, they have to pass a new emigration law that allows emigration
from Hungary.
Q What's their timetable for this?
GOV. SUNUNU: They did not give a specific timetable, and I can't comment on
that. I don't have the answer.
Q (Off mike.)
GOV. SUNUNU: It is my understanding that they are moving in that direction.
They do not have a timetable.
Q Did they raise -
GOV. SUNUNU: Let me get somebody who has not asked a question, and then ---
Q - concerns about their less-than-friendly Romanian neighbors, and the refugee
problem?
GOV. SUNUNU: It was done in the context where it was just an expression of
concern for human rights across the board. The United States joins in the
concern for human rights in all the countries of the world and understands the
problems associated when there are human rights violations of citizens that are
of one country within another.
Q What efforts was Bush trying to -- (inaudible) -- did the President send any
kind of message to the authorities in Prague?
GOV. SUNUNU: Not to my knowledge, but I was not in the President's compartment
when we flew over Czechoslovakia.
Q Could you talk a little more about these enterprise funds ---
GOV. SUNUNU: I'm sorry?
Q Could you talk a little bit more about the enterprise funds and how they'll
work? How, for example, would you describe who should receive a direct grant
and how will you avoid the kind of corruption which has plagued some of the
government-to-government -
GOV. SUNUNU: It is proposed that the enterprise fund be managed by a board of
directors of Hungarian -- prominent Hungarian and American citizens with
experience both in business and in government and that they will, in essence,
write the rules for the operation of the fund.
Q Governor, are we witnessing - are WE witnessing now the birth of the Bush
doctrine that says in - to the Communist countries, "If you have reforms -
political reforms, you get aid, if not you will get nothing"?
GOV. SUNUNU: I that context, the birth of the Bush doctrine really occurred in
his inaugural address in which he made it clear that we support efforts towards
freedom, efforts towards political and economic reform, and that actions that
are taken in that direction will receive a reciprocal response from the United
States. And that was part of a very important message he tried to communicate
in his inaugural address on January 20th.
Q Governor, how would you characterize the Eastern Bloc trip so far? Has it
gone about as --
GOV. SUNUNU: I'm sorry, I can't hear you.
Q How would you characterize the Eastern Bloc trip so far? Has it gone about as
good as you all expected?
GOV. SUNUNU: As I tried to communicate in my opening statement, the President
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
37
(c) 1989 Federal Information Systems Corporation, July 12, 1989
is thrilled with the way it has gone. It has not only accomplished what he
wanted to accomplish in terms of an expression of concern and keen interest on
the part of the United States with what is happening in Poland and Hungary, but
in terms of seeing firsthand and hearing firsthand the debate that is taking
place within the fine structures, if you will, of government and other
institutions in these countries has been a tremendous dividend that he is
thrilled to have been able to receive.
Sitting across the table from the officials in Poland, the Prime Minister of
Poland made a superb presentation of the concerns and struggles and what is
involved in the decisions they have to make. Today, this morning, the
presentation by Mr. Nyers and the presentations by Mr. Nemeth, and the Speaker
of the Parliament made it clear. The kinds of concerns and the debate they have
and the emphasis they have to give that is unique to the problems here in
Hungary and how they have to handle what are unique situations here gives him a
much better feeling that will allow him, he feels, to assess as the transition
goes on the progress that is being made and how they've been able to overcome
each of these challenges.
Q Governor, over the weekend -
GOV. SUNUNU: Last one.
Q - there was a news story about increased political repression in China. ÀS
many as 10,000 political prisoners may have been taken captive there. Can you
give any information from the US --
GOV. SUNUNU: Yeah, the only information I can give at this point is there was an
effort to try and determine whether or not the news stories were valid. No
confirmation has yet been received. And until that has really been mersity. We
are prepared, I believe, now to give out the advance text and the fact sheets.
So we'll have those be handed out just momentarily.
One reminder that Secretary Baker did brief Hungarian officials this morning on
the contents of the President's economic package, which is summarized in his
speech, and Secretary Baker will be here this afternoon for a briefing on that
and other matters, probably around 4:30 or 5:00.
So with that, thank you very much.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS® ®