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
135838624
label
Cabinet Meetings [Notes] (January 1981) (2)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
135838624
contentType
document
title
Cabinet Meetings [Notes] (January 1981) (2)
citationUrl
identifierLocal
291
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (Reagan Administration)
Kenneth L. Khachigian's Meeting Files
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
135838624
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1981-12-31
year
1981
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1981-01-01
year
1981
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
c5b9763e0d4ab78c
ocrText
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Digital Library Collections
This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.
Collection: Khachigian, Kenneth L.: Files
Folder Title: Cabinent Meetings
[Notes] (January 1981) (2)
Box: 1
To see more digitized collections visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library
To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection
Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected]
Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing
National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/
WITHDRAWAL SHEET
Ronald Reagan Library
Collection: KHACHIGIAN, KEN: Files
Archivist: gge db
[Notes] (Jan81)
redo
File Folder: Cabinet Meetings (2 of 3) Box 4689
Date: 5/13/97
10/24/06
Boxl
DOCUMENT
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
NO. AND TYPE
1. Notes
handwritten notes by Ken Khachigian re Cabinet
2/13/81
P5
Meetings (3 pp)
2. Notes
handwritten notes by Ken Khachigian re Cabinet
2/4/81
P5, P5,Pr BI
Meetings (7 pp.)
3. Memo
from L. Paul Bremer to Craig Fuller re Burden of
2/3/81
F5
Proof for Statutory Validity of Regulations (2 pp.)
4. Memo
from James Edwards to Craig Fuller re Burden of
2/3/81
P5-
Proof for Statutory Validity of Regulations (1p)
3.
B. Notes 3.
handwritten notes by Ken Khachigian re Cabinet
1/26/81
P5,Pt BI
Meeting (4 pp.)
2.
B. Notes 2,
handwritten notes by Ken Khachigian re Cabinet
1/24/81
P5,P1- BI
Meeting (7 pp.)
1.
#. Notes 1.
handwritten notes by Ken Khachigian re Cabinet
1/23/81
P5
Meeting (7 pp.)
8 Notes
handwritten notes by Ken Khachigian re Cabinet
1/22/81
PSBb Bb
Meeting (12 pp)
partial
p.io
Db.
CCB 11/29/00
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National security classified information [(a)(1) of the PRA].
F-1 National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA].
P-2 Relating to appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA].
F-2 Release could disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an agency [(b)(2) of the
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA].
FOIA].
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or financial information
F-3 Release would violate a Federal statue [(b)(3) of the FOIA].
[(a)(4) of the PRA].
F-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or financial information
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President and his advisors, or
[(b)(4) of the FOIA].
between such advisors [(a)(5) of the PRA].
F-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy [(b)(6) of the
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy [(a)(6) of
FOIA].
the PRA].
F-7 Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement purposes [(b)(7) of
the FOIA].
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of gift.
F-8 Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of financial institutions
[(b)(8) of the FOIA].
F-9 Release would disclose geological or geophysical information concerning wells [(b)(9) of
the FOIA].
WITHDRAWAL SHEET
Ronald Reagan Library
Collection: KHACHIGIAN, KEN: Files
Archivist: gge d/b
[Notes] (Jan 81) (20f2)
redo
File Folder: Cabinet Meetings (2 of 3) Box 4689
Boxl
Date: 5/13/97 10/24/03
DOCUMENT
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
NO. AND TYPE
1. Notes
handwritten notes by Ken Khachigian re Cabinet
2/13/81
P5
Meetings (3 pp)
2. Notes
handwritten notes by Ken Khachigian re Cabinet
2/4/81
P5, PT
Meetings (7 pp)
3. Memo
from L. Paul Bremer to Craig Fuller re Burden of
2/3/81
P5
Proof for Statutory Validity of Regulations (2 pp.)
4. Memo
from James Edwards to Craig Fuller re Burden of
2/3/81
P5
Proof for Statutory Validity of Regulations (1p)
3. Notes 3
handwritten notes by Ken Khachigian re Cabinet
1/26/81
P5, P1
Meeting (4 pp.)
2 Notes 2.
handwritten notes by Ken Khachigian re Cabinet
1/24/81
P5, P1
Meeting (7 pp.)
1 Notes
1.
handwritten notes by Ken Khachigian re Cabinet
1/23/81
P5
Meeting (7 pp.)
8. Notes
handwritten notes by Ken Khaehigian re Cabinet
1/22/81
P5
Meeting (12 pp)
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act- [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National security classified information [(a)(1) of the PRA].
F-1 National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA].
P-2 Relating to appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA].
F-2 Release could disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an agency [(b)(2) of the
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA].
FOIA].
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or financial information
F-3 Release would violate a Federal statue [(b)(3) of the FOIA].
[(a)(4) of the PRA].
F-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or financial information
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President and his advisors, or
[(b)(4) of the FOIA].
between such advisors ((a)(5) of the PRA].
F-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy [(b)(6) of the
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy [(a)(6) of
FOIA].
the PRAJ.
F-7 Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement purposes [(b)(7) of
the FOIA].
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of gift.
F-8 Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of financial institutions
[(b)(8) of the FOIA].
F-9 Release would disclose geological or geophysical information concerning wells [(b)(9) of
the FOIA].
Friday, 1-23-81 - Meeting Cabinet
Full Cabinet 10:54 comerned meeting
Swea by city
Ever larger plan jn of fell bears
son cente of Cas. table 12-14" hip
older angels
10-11" diameter -full of J.3's!
In lays of BTW t moves, Jach Wame
would's let anyone where stipled
ties, the said "We want then X
loth at your face not your tie
11 "So If solved the problem as
just buying black thes"
SArchman
Sum Fuels Camp -
and control of Carpers Thus,
off - budget T beyond
$
it 5 members are very
important
D.C.'s 5 appointee just
be replaced by people who
In w/ RR. want
They should mobiling
Unite projects modest loan + privale grantes
or purchase mich support.
Thet's set 5 agrontes fuilly
Shall we accept the resignation
of f.E.'F regule?
P.2
Cap: yes anout respirations,
but then abrlish the Avard
More 2 actions
1.) withhas r Bd
2.) Interen agginitual
It's all in place - recombleti
is to appoint Soand t then
let new Bd. members recomed
to P. that Board be abalided
Broch: maybe not entirely climate
function of Synfus.
Cap: writfall wifes Tox - X
subsidi mud of
work. The lenger keep the
Board the longer you keep the
windfull tax - Get and of
suppuls Coys & your might
get and if of Tax.
Storhmen we appoint by people
to Bd. F come up w/elimation
w/s costing a cents.
Eg. ( tave L project - have moste
people out up large suns of money + u.s.
guantees for rest.
Spend too much political capital
tryis to abolish Just put people is
P.3
there to get ind of it
TAY to solve puble
+ not grend we capital
Jin Edward:
We have to determine the cost
of moding famel of oil from coal a
oil shall. That's when we
Can figure out whe we ho langer need
foreign cinde.
need to aught resignation i
set time to suide whetter we wod
windfull funds
Somewhere have to R+ I speration
to cap off pice of crude.
P's decision: yes - angel
veriguition members + get new BI.
Subject the Indexing I Fed. Profess
Eg. Retirement, Fird stays itc
We need unifan practice anongalt
Antitlement perform Some are ance a
year r then twice a year.
need to make a decision m this
noting
P4
Schwicker. This will raise an your
but we must to it to show
we're fan.
a by battle befc of Fed. a'r
unions. Must get civil sewice culture
Caf: this is one of the few big
savings you can get if you wall
to make the hig budget at
So you also want to put a cap.
on the index if - not & up all
the way up ?
Stoch Ted Stephens suggest a way to clo
this. Older retires could be interted-
ie. import langer hunden of the
change on the newer returns, & len on
the Iden ones.
Can do this t still achieve lays
saving - about J/ bellin
P:
Civil Feward are syrosed to be
raid compable to inste sector
But they are really paid more
then private sector.
v:
"Well, as Job Stuart said: Ride to the Fdund of
the guns."
Regan Have to tachle the issue of
whether mortgegs should be in CPI
P.4a
Thus CPI isnot print -
Cap: ANd yet it's 1cthing us. It's
not on accurate index in
any way.
Baldye use average wage werease
in county as your measurement
stoch: set aid M MC Cormoch
siptame - His pensin was
slmost a 100,000 a year at dull
we'll come up of precise levels.
P: appoves in mights C
mee a year - begin study
process.
Termination of coutes
Strch: move immediates to set
aid of coups 1 b/c we
want fiscal + mater means X do 5.
237 positions - cost
about #10 millin a year.
like thing for frege-
10.7 in slots now -
only w res are day
constructive with
p.5
). limite cow PS slot
2.) 2. give leave The 30 days to
At retain these useful people om B in
4.) Then bach money to the
grit w/ a recisoin notice
to Comp.
RR-, "Let's doit fast. Being a child of the Depair
it has always been very hard for the to fine
anyone, all night fo aheal."
P: "On goal is to reduce the Fed
Register to the size of a prouphlet."
Regulation
Stoch: Outlined a proposel X
teeth give V-P's task force a little
regulatory impact analysis -
Regins lad agency x submit a
wat cost benefits and
1
AND that it's looked at other ways
Yo do this
allows with spot every new bad
regulation To re-do if warray
p.6
Do an order that has teeth.
also propose that all existing
regulations would he w/Dran t
re promulgated
also have OMB rich dent most
costly, bankersome least effective
regs. + get handle or then
Meese: Bring this back next week after
we look at it.
P: Thow Something Int for consideration
can't create humeany to get
ind of beneaucrary 1 Can't we
set some volunteess from outside
as Task force X do this - so a
lot of this work for us. Like we
did wf welfare reform in Calif
Brock: printe sectn is living w/ this
Cabinet meating - Schnday 10:00 - 11:00
(to Craig Falles Cop Tuesday
re- RRS SOTH
P. on SOTH - Comp. wants to leave
on Feb. S. that affects our
Date NC: affecing before Cay.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
CABINET MEETING AGENDA
January 23, 1981 -- 10:30 a.m.
Economic Policy Group
1. Potential Budget Reductions
David Stockman
a. Strategic Petroleum Reserve
b. Synthetic Fuels Subsidies
C. Uniform Indexing of Federal Programs
d. Export-Import Bank
e. Early Termination of Council on
Wage and Price Stability
f. Proposed Executive Order on
Regulatory Management
CABINET MEETING PARTICIPANTS
January 23, 1981 -- 10:30 a.m.
James Edwards
David Stockman
Malcolm Baldrige
John Block
Donald Regan
Edwin Meese
Other Cabinet members optional
Jim Baker
Mike Deaver
Richard Allen
Martin Anderson
Max Friedersdorf
James Brady
Richard Darman
Craig Fuller
David Gergen
Dan Murphy
FOR PRESENTATIONS
Ed Harper
Glenn Schleede
Don Moran
Jim Miller
Ray Romatowski
Distribution to All Participants
Additional Distribution
David Fischer
Helene von Damm
Pen James
Nell Yates
I
RONALD W. REAGAN LIBRARY
THIS FORM MARKS THE FILE LOCATION OF ITEM NUMBER
LISTED ON THE
WITHDRAWAL SHEET AT THE FRONT OF THIS FOLDER.
1
Cabinet Meeting
1-27-81
11:03 L
Before meetish
"Cap's missing. there peant be a was."
guip Haif
Ed Hugher get budget cuts in for
next week's speed
Jim Edwards This in Decantrol of Curde Oil
"Sidn't /Card about it until
I 'got bach into town."
Jeane : should - wt feet
on allies w/ contaight Seve
then 24 him while.
P's at al. agree to delay it
one day for consultation rupers
Pete M Phasa: Inopectus General removed
Worled put fine Reaction
relatively Mild.
Schweikes : re: Refulations
citizen you show that good. has
Bunden of wool on refs is on
usuped its powers - not an the
govt. Bet Exec. order to ensure that rep.
Emply W/ law.
p.2
Fed. civil Services Penle write
these + that's the problem
now, w/ Pres. order - car provel
Thent to comply w/ a plan to lusue
that ep been thought through
P : "I anit wait - I'd like to
sign that
P- "S/9 Intent understand V
invocent until mover fuilty. But if you're
you murder someone, you are considered
chaged
d ans, you any fuilty as changed
+ you must prove you are imorgent +
you ment the 400 care before
The mes who A are judge, juy +
mote the Lefawto
executions,"
Drll Block:
re: Orain Enbago
Should be a decime of
hat'l. see. Qunest but a lage
group NSC made the had decision
in the first plane
A: "My whole approved K an this
is one of mixed emotions I Know is
new on, Iwaft policy that anythme we sive, we get:
hants family, but don't want 40 give X for From
Dorh Block: will get us off on
wrong foot to leave the embayo
on.
p 3
3
Bell Porliaguel -
Insulting to Educatory X give
Secerving + bendensme regulations.
them too many instructions.
Gral. We have nd
direction of 5/9 wh/ should be
of Fed. cantalt
fusiness being involved
Recommend we move quickly
to get this one
P P "60 to it full greed abead."
" The job is mainly bilingud
education is to find the child
who doesn't understand the
lem + help him - But make
sure intelligent". It's not just a problem w/
P: " " 60 to it / more your to you
Don Regan:
The new deft ceiling would be
$ 985 not 0990.
R: HI Knowthis isa little unfair 1
you have gigastic depts + by
Band it will take
P.4
4
time to been - Americants can
give you way advise.
If wine going X get for't
back w/i its revenues, we need
freaten saip There will he
greate savijs when you know
changes - when you can generame
name about it- pregamentis
old ways of loss day this
people create job to insup their
Own longebily
"We did a this in Calf-
that cab. fing in budget they
need to have - but also big in
a budget JH would be your lost
word if that was b 20 20 cut
ANd that was a
Gets down to absolute recentes
"Read fambris book - layes
+ layer of fat in Fll
ow/o cutty any muscle
for wh can be cut
fibes That's what we
were elected to do Hit
and of my little think
P. More Fed lls in the sitting
Calif than there me f the
this
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
CABINET MEETING AGENDA
January 27, 1981 -- 11:00 AM
1. Cabinet Procedures
Edwin A. Meese III
2. Budget Working Groups
David Stockman
3. Decontrol of Crude Oil Prices
James Edwards
4. Debt Ceiling
Donald Regan
5. Inspectors General Update
Peter McPherson
6. Recision of Bilingual
Terrel Bell
Education Regulations
7. Schedule of Cabinet Meetings
Edwin A. Meese III
CABINET MEETING PARTICIPANTS
January 27, 1981 -- 11:00 AM
The Cabinet -- All Members
James A. Baker III
Michael K. Deaver
Richard V. Allen
Martin Anderson
Max Friedersdorf
James S. Brady
Richard Darman
Craig Fuller
David Gergen
Admiral Daniel Murphy
Ken Khachigian
Ed Harper
Glenn Schleede
Raymond Romatowski
R. Tim McNamar
FACT SHEET ON BILINGUAL EDUCATION
REGULATIONS -- DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
On August 5, 1980 regulations were published in the Federal
Register by former Secretary Shirley Hufstedler.
These regulations relate to the U.S. Supreme Court case (Lau
VS. Nichols) which found that school districts were in violation
of Title VI (of the 1964 Civil Rights Act) if such districts
failed to provide programs of instruction to students of limited
English proficiency that would help such students overcome their
language barriers to learning.
(
students who do not under-
stand English are effectively foreclosed from any meaningul
learning ") The Lau decision requires that student needs be met
but does not prescribe a method.
There are 3.5 million students in the United States who have
language barriers to learning. The Department of Education makes
grants totalling about $184 million per year to assist schools
in meeting these needs.
The published regulations go far beyond the requirements of law.
Not only is teaching method prescribed, but the regulations go
into great detail in identifying and teaching students on the
size of classes and on records that must be kept. This is a
classic example of law making by bureaucratic fiat.
If our system is to work, the bureaucracy should stop expanding
and adding to the law through abuse of its rule making process.
PROPOSAL
The Secretary of Education should withdraw the regulations and call
attention to the excessive requirements and prescription of teaching
method. The responsibility of the State and local education agencies
for general control and supervision of education should be emphasized,
and this Administration should reaffirm its commitment to return
control of education back to the State and local levels. We should
emphasize that this action is just the first of a number of steps to
be taken to cut back and to cancel regulations that are both costly
and unnecessary.
ANTICIPATED OPPOSITION
Some leaders in the hispanic community will likely respond by express-
ing strong criticism that the Department is turning its back on the
rights of students with language barriers to learning.
SUBJECT: Standards for Factual and Legal Conclusions Supporting
Proposed Regulations for Possible Inclusion in
Executive Order on Regulations
BACKGROUND
One of the issues included in prior regulatory reform debates
has been the applicable standards for factual and legal deter-
minations underlying regulations. This has usually been framed
in the context of standards for judicial review of regulations.
Under existing law and judicial precedents, agency legal inter-
pretations are given an assumption of validity, in effect giving
the challenger the burden of proof that the regulations exceed
the agency's legal authority. Also, agency factual conclusions
(such as regarding the nature of the problem addressed by the
regulations) are generally accepted without much scrutiny of the
evidence submitted. Higher judicial review standards to scrutin-
ize both the agency's legal authority and its factual conclusions
have been proposed, such as in the Bumpers Amendment (passed by
the Senate in 1980) and in a new Bumpers/Laxalt bill this year.
POSSIBLE STANDARD FOR INCLUSION IN EXECUTIVE ORDER
Before approving any proposed regulation, the Department or
agency head must:
(1) make a specific finding, supported by a memorandum of
law, that the regulation is clearly within the authority
delegated by law and consistent with Congressional
intent; and
(2) make a specific finding that factual conclusions upon
which the regulation is based are supported by substan-
tial evidence in the agency record taken as a whole,
including comments submitted by the public, particularly
members of the public required to comply with the
regulations.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 27, 1981
MEMORANDUM FOR: ALL CABINET MEMBERS
FROM:
Craig L. Fuller, Director
Office of Cabinet Administration
SUBJECT:
Cabinet Procedures
A set of procedures is being introduced to facilitate
effective Cabinet deliberations.
Your review of the procedures and format for presenting
information in Cabinet meetings would be appreciated.
Questions or concerns can be raised directly with me.
We would like to utilize the system at next week's Cabinet
meetings, with modifications being made as required.
Cabinet Matters
The system is designed to identify every item or issue
directed to the Cabinet as a Cabinet Matter. Since a com-
puter will be utilized, each Cabinet Matter (CM) will be
given a "CM" number when it "enters" the system. A
Cabinet Matter may be a major policy issue or a request
for information.
"CM" Format
Items submitted to the Cabinet should be presented to the
Office of Cabinet Administration in a standard format. A
sample format is attached. It consists of seven parts:
I Subject
II Originator
III Action Forcing Event
IV Statement of the Issue
V Analysis
VI Recommendation
VII Decision
Circulation for Views
Once the Office of Cabinet Administration receives a Cabinet
Matter, it will be circulated for views. All other Cabinet
members and members of the Senior White House Staff will
receive the item with a request for initial views. Views
January 27, 1981
Page 2
will be returned to Cabinet Administration for preparation
of the Cabinet Meeting binders,
Cabinet Meeting Binders
Each Cabinet member will have a binder prepared at least
one day prior to every Cabinet meeting. Items not received
in time for inclusion in the binder will not be placed on
the written agenda.
The binders will consist of the meeting's agenda and an
issue summary for each Cabinet Matter. A one page summary
of all initial views will also be included. Backup materials
will follow these two initial one page summaries.
Cabinet Matter Tracking
A major objective of the Cabinet Matter System is to
accurately record and easily retrieve important information
about Cabinet Matters. A computer assisted tracking system
has been developed which will allow us to ask the computer
for complete information about any Cabinet Matter by any
one of the following identifiers:
1) CM number
2) issue
3) originator
4) where action is
5) due date
6) date set for Cabinet
7) actual date in Cabinet
8) who has final action
9) date report is due
10) Special Planning and Evaluation Code
Time Frame
This system requires some advance notice on Cabinet issues.
It is anticipated that items will by necessity need to be
rushed. National Security matters will have limited exposure
for views.
The time frame for proce ssing Cabinet Matters reflects the
normal handling of an issue requiring prompt (but not
immediate) attention:
Days before
Activity
Cabinet meeting
1. Cabinet Matter sent to OCA
3
2. Sent out of OCA for views
3
3. Views developed
2
January 27, 1981
Page 3
(Days before
(Activity)
Cabinet meeting)
4. Returned to OCA
1
5. Sent by OCA to Cabinet members
and attendees
1
6. Cabinet meeting
0
Your reactions to this program are welcome. We are hopeful
that it will provide more complete and more advance infor-
mation to each Cabinet member prior to meetings of the full
Cabinet.
1981
CABINET MATTER
I SUBJECT
II ORIGINATOR
III ACTION FORCING EVENT
IV STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE
V ANALYSIS: Outline history, current status, possible actions
and impacts- financial, constituent or other public
policy considerations.
VI RECOMMENDATION: Indicate single recommendation or list options.
VII DECISION
approve
approve as amended
reject
no action
If options are contained in the recommendation, indicate option (s)
refered to above by placing the appropriate number (s) in the spaces
above.
CM
INITIAL VIEWS:
Department of Commerce
Department of Energy
Department of Treasury
Office of Intergovernmental Relations
Office of Legislative Relations
Office of Public Liaison
US Chamber of Commerce
National Manufacturers Association
Additional background material is on the following pages.
1/26/81
Other
Cabinet
Planning and
Evaluation
National
Security
Policy
Coordination
OCA
Staff
Members of
Cabinet
decision/
Secretary
action memo
issue
OCA
Intergovernmental
(Views)
Staff Sec. /
OCA
Cabinet
Relations
President
meeting
Public Liaison
Cabinet
P&E
Attendees
tracking/
Counsel
evaluation
Legislative
Relations
Personnel
Political
Affairs
Communications