Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "118564456",
    "label": "Speeches - Governor Ronald Reagan, 1974 [05/09/1974-12/31/1974]",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118564456"
}

{
    "id": "118564456",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118564456",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Speeches - Governor Ronald Reagan, 1974 [05/09/1974-12/31/1974]",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118564456",
    "identifierLocal": "840",
    "collections": [
        "Ronald Reagan's Governor's Papers of the Press Unit",
        "Governor Ronald Reagan's Speeches"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/7408624/40-840-7408624-P19-005-2017.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/7408624/40-840-7408624-P19-005-2017.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/7408624/40-840-7408624-P19-005-2017.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118564456",
    "naId": 118564456,
    "coverageEndDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1975-12-31",
        "year": 1975
    },
    "coverageStartDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1967-01-01",
        "year": 1967
    },
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/7408624/40-840-7408624-P19-005-2017.pdf",
    "mediaId": "e34a7e778d26a90a",
    "ocrText": "Ronald Reagan Presidential Library\nDigital Library Collections\nThis is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.\nCollection: Reagan, Ronald: Gubernatorial Papers,\n1966-74: Press Unit\nFolder Title: Speeches - Governor Ronald Reagan, 1974\n[05/09/1974-12/31/1974]\nBox: P19\nTo see more digitized collections visit:\nhttps://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library\nTo see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:\nhttps://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection\nContact a reference archivist at: [email protected]\nCitation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing\nNational Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/\n**\nNoth\n5/9\nM\nOFFICE OF GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nRELEASE: THURSDAY P.Ms.\nSacramento, California 95814\nMAY 9, 1974\nClyde Walthall, Press Secretary\n916-445-4571\n5-8-74\nPLEASE GUARD AGAINST PREMATURE\nRELEASE\nEXCERPTS OF REMARKS BY GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nCalifornia Association for the Retarded\n24th Annual Convention\nLos Angeles\nMay 9, 1974\nI am familiar with the fine work of your organization and therefore\nam especially delighted to be with you this year at your convention.\nOver the years, I have had the pleasure of knowing some of your\nmembers and the important role you have played in focusing attention on\nthe cause that brings us together.\nAs you know, my years in Sacramento are drawing to a close. There\nhave been high spots during these past 7½ years, things I will remember\nand look back on with a measure of pride.\nBut nothing has given me greater satisfaction than the advances we\nhave made and are making in the field of health, especially the new\ndirections now being taken in the care and treatment of the develop-\nmentally disabled in California.\nThese past 7½ years have been a period of major change, an era of\nunprecedented progress in our entire health program.\nMany of you are concerned parents, and some of you are well aware of\nthe many steps that have been taken. I know too, others of you may not\nbe fully acquainted with the scope of our progress and the many factors\nthat have contributed to it.\nTo really grasp the advances we have made, you have to go back some\nyears to a period in California, and the rest of the nation, when the\npath for the mentally afflicted led in only one direction: a prolonged\nstay, often for a lifetime, at a state hospital.\nThe network of state hospitals in California, which I believe are\nthe finest in the nation, came into being because of our society's\nhumanitarian concern for the mentally disordered and the retarded. And\nat one time, this represented the best and most advanced way of providing\nthe care and treatment the individuals needed.\nI realize that your major concern is in the area of developmental\ndisabilities. And this, of course, is a far different problem that\nrequires its own approach one that we are now taking.\nYet to get a full picture of California's commitment to better\nhealth requires some mention of the dramatic changes in our programs for\nthe mentally ill as well.\nRetarded Association\nMentally Ill\nOver the past 10 to 15 years, our whole concept of treating and\ncaring for the mentally ill has drastically changed, for the better. We\nhave made great strides in developing new methods for treatment.\nSpecialists in this field recognized that for many patients, a community\nmental health program, providing treatment where the patient could be\nclose to home and family, offered a far greater potential for recovery\nthan commitment to a state hospital.\nAlong with these scientific advances in treatment came other changes\nThere was a time when the commitment process was an almost automatic\nlegal ritual for the mentally ill, particularly when it involved an\nelderly citizen often suffering no more than the infirmities of age.\nProtection of the legal rights of the individual patient, I am\nafraid, too often was secondary to the urgency of providing immediate\ncustodial care. Commitment to a state hospital when local programs did\nnot exist may have been a convenient solution.\nBut the result in too many cases was an injustice which society\nshould never again accept.\nCalifornia has recognized the need for change. We have led the way\nin adapting modern methods of treatment and strong legal safeguards in\nour own approach to meeting the needs of the mentally ill. When our\nadministration took over in 1967, California was in the first phase of\nthis transition period. And we faced some difficult choices.\nComing into the decade of the 1960s, California had more than\n37,500 mentally ill patients in its state hospital system. But as the\nconcept of community mental health programs was introduced and the new\nmethods of treatment began having an effect, there was a dramatic decline\nin patient population.\nBy 1967 there were 26,500 patients and by the end of the last fiscal\nyear, the mentally ill patient population was down to less than 7,000.\nWhile not always with the same dramatic results, similar advances\nwere going on in the treatment, care and educational programs available\nfor the retarded.\nThe number of developmentally disabled in our state hospitals has\nalso shown a decline, although at a slower rate, from 13,000 to 10,000.\nQuite simply, we faced the choice of maintaining and staffing large,\nbut only partially used state hospital facilities at a tremendous cost or\nadjusting the number of hospitals to conform to the declining population\nand using the money saved for better treatment in the community centers\nwith which you are familiar.\n- 2 -\nRetarded Association\nWe did the latter and in so doing gave California the finest, most\nextensive system of care to be found anywhere. But this was not done\nat the expense of our state hospital system.\nWe increased their staffing ratios, both for the mentally ill and\nthe developmentally disabled. The budget for community mental health\nprograms went up to seven times what it was in 1967. Not only has there\nbeen a great increase in the number of local programs, but the state\nhas increased its share of funding each program from 75 to 90 percent.\nDevelopmentally disabled\nOur programs for the developmentally disabled have reflected the\nsignificant advances in this field. Legislation was passed and put into\neffect permitting similar improvements in the total program for the\ndevelopmentally disabled.\nThe budget for the developmentally disabled programs under the Health\nDepartment is three times what it was in 1967.\nWhile the retarded population in our state hospitals has declined by\nsome 3,000 over these seven years, the staff has been increased by 1,300.\nIn other words, while the patient population was dropping by 20 percent,\nthe actual number of staff was increasing about 25 percent.\nCompared to 1967, we now have working with a smaller patient\npopulation, more physicians; more psychologists, more people assigned to\nnursing services, more specialists involved in rehabilitation therapy,\neducation and social services than ever before.\nFifty-eight programs for the developmentally disabled have been in\noperation at nine state hospitals since the 1972 reorganization of these\nprograms, under the new Department of Health.\nIn the early 1960s, two pilot programs introducing Regional Centers\nwere developed and in 1967 we chose to expand this program. Since then,\nthe regional centers have expanded until at the present time we have 17\nfully operational and others are beginning.\nThe strides we have made in California have brought a new era of\nhope in the treatment of the developmentally disabled.\nSome patients may always require custodial care in state facilities.\nBut, where there is a potential for training, for education to enable a\nhandicapped youngster to lead a more normal life, we have an obligation\nto provide that training and the necessary programs of education.\nThe state is committed to provide those essential services, in state\nhospitals or within the individual's own community, if that is the best\ncourse.\nThis whole area of developmental disability is now in a period of\nrapid change. We are discovering that some patients can respond to new\ntreatments and can be helped to reach a greater degree of adjustment\nthan anyone previously believed possible. And if we are to serve their\nneeds properly, it is essential that we further develop the concept of\ncommunity services.\nIn the past few months, I have signed legislation that concerns the\ndevelopment centers for the handicapped, operating under the Department\nof Education. This legislation allows a significant increase in the\nnumber of handicapped served by these centers. In 1967, there were about\n528 youngsters in child development centers. By 1973, this had grown\nto 2,400. In the current year, 400 additional children will be added\nand there will be a further increase of between 600 and 650 in the next\nfiscal year.\nNot only have services to the retarded been increased, but the law\nnow includes other handicapped groups, including epilepsy, cerebral\npalsy and other neurologically handicapped individuals.\nYou know better than anyone the heartbreak and human tragedy involve\nin mental retardation. And while our advances in treatment may never\nfully overcome the disabilities of all patients, the research now going\non in this field offers a bright new hope that possibly we can prevent\nmental retardation in the future.\nWe believe we have an obligation to these youngsters and to those\nwho may be born later, to put our resources into programs that offer the\nbest treatment and education as well as the greatest potential for\nprevention.\nIn the last fiscal year, we earmarked $268 million in developmentally\ndisabled programs. And in the coming year, that will be more than $333\nmillion in state and federal funds with the state providing more than\n75 percent of the total.\nThree new regional centers opened in the Los Angeles area in 1973\nand three more are planned this year, two in Los Angeles and one at\nStockton.\nAll this is part of the new and coordinated effort to provide the\nbest possible care and service we can to the developmentally disabled.\nThe administration of these programs and the delivery of services has\nbeen improved by creating the office of Developmental Disabilities in the\nHealth and Welfare Agency as well as area boards to deal with specific\nproblems on the local and regional levels.\n- 4 -\nRetarded Association\nThese boards, along with the state Developmental Disabilities\nPlanning and Advisory Council, are assisting the state in planning and\ndeveloping a statewide program. The reorganization of the new Health\nDepartment placed programs previously in three departments under a single\nadministration.\nWe recently increased by 12½¹₂ percent the rates and fees for those\nfacilities offering local care for the retarded.\nBut care and treatment are not enough. That is why early in our\nadministration, we established a Mental Retardation Center on the UCLA\ncampus to perform research in ways of prevention.\nLast December, I called the first major conference held in the\nUnited States on this subject. There were more than 200 selected\nparticipants, including, I am sure, some of those who are with us today.\nAs a result of the conference recommendations, additional funds were\nplaced in the Department of Education budget.\nA total of 91 specific recommendations were made, falling into\neight main categories:\n1.\nTo provide education and information on the prevention of\ndevelopmental disabilities to all Californians, especially to adolescents,\nprospective parents and practicing professionals in this field.\n2.\nTo coordinate and when necessary, to expand services to provide\ncomprehensive coverage from preconception through early infancy, the\ntime when developmental disabilities may possibly be averted or lessened\nthrough the things medical science is constantly learning.\n3.\nTo provide expectant mothers and newborn infants a full range\nof services.\n4.\nTo offer expanded family planning and prenatal services to\nprospective parents.\n5.\nTo review and assess the preventive services provided through\nour regional centers and to determine the capacity of these centers to\nundertake the preventive programs that may be necessary.\n6.\nTo survey the manpower needs in our existing services, so that\nwe may find out how many professionals in what fields we need to properly\noffer comprehensive care from preconception through early childhood.\n7.\nTo require state supported preventive services to maintain\nindividual client records so that we may measure the effectiveness of the\nvarious services offered.\n8. And finally, to assure that related professional boards and\nsocieties and educational institutions develop standards that will assure\nhigh quality care and training for those involved in the education,\nRetarded\nAfter these recommendations were presented to me, I directed that\nthe full resources of the state Health and Welfare Agency be utilized\nto turn these recommendations into reality.\nI wish more Californians were aware that our state's total mental\nhealth program has become a model for the rest of the nation, and that\nwe have received national recognition for our programs for the mentally\nretarded.\nFor those who were not at the ceremony, I would like to pass on to\nyou some news that demonstrates the effectiveness of our overall efforts\nin this field.\nLast month, California was selected to receive and was presented the\nAward of Merit of the President's Committee on Mental Retardation.\nIt was given in recognition of our state's pioneering programs for\npreventing mental retardation. When it was presented, the director of\nthe President's committee said: \"the California program should be a\nmodel for the nation. When fully effective, it could cut in half the\nnumber of retarded children born in California, estimated now to be\n10,000 a year.\"\nI took great pride in accepting this award but I fully acknowledge\nthat the honor belongs to the combined effort, the help and guidance\ngiven to us by groups such as yours.\nYour concern is that we do everything possible to provide the\nfinest, most comprehensive program of care for the developmentally\ndisabled. You want to assure that we will be doing everything we can\nin the months and years ahead, not only to treat mental retardation, but\nto prevent it because it, after all, is the best treatment we can\npossibly develop.\nYour concern is shared by this administration. Your goals are our\ngoals. And I am fully convinced that by working together we can achieve\nthose goals.\n#######\n(NOTE: Since Governor Reagan speaks from notes, there may be changes in,\nor additions to, the above quotes. However, the governor will stand by\nthe above quotes).\n- 6 -\n#\n5/22\nOFFICE OF GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nRELEASE: WENESDAY P.Ms.\nSacramento, California 95814\nMAY 22, 1974\nClyde Walthall, Press Secretary\n916-445-4571\n5-21-74\nPLEASE GUARD AGAINST PREMATURE\nRELEASE:\nEXCERPTS OF REMARKS BY GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nCalifornia International Trade Conference\nSacramento Inn\nSacramento, California\nMay 22, 1974\nI want to extend a special welcome to our guests from other\nnations and to say how pleased I am to see so many representatives\nof California business and industry here today.\nThe purpose of your conference is an important one, especially\nin today's rapidly changing economic climate. International trade\nis a vital part of California's economic base today. And it is\ndestined to play an even larger role in our prosperity in the years\nahead.\nWe believe California has a great deal to offer our trading\npartners, just as there is a dynamic and expanding market for imports\namong our 21 million people.\nDuring the past several decades, California has been America's\nleading state in terms of overall growth, by almost any standard of\nmeasurement. If we were a nation, we would have the world's seventh\nlargest economy. Our state is rich in resources, trained people and\ntechnology, and the decade ahead promises to be a period of even\ngreater growth and economic expansion.\nTrade with other nations, in both exports and imports, is an\nimportant part of our economic potential. I am sure most of you are\naware of the great strides we have made in recent years in making the\nworld aware of what California has to offer.\nWe are a major agricultural exporter. We sell rice to Japan and\nolives to Spain and if they are running short of refrigerators in Alaska,\nwe will be happy to trade a few to them for some of their oil.\nAlready our trade with other nations has a $10 billion impact\non our economy. It helps to provide hundreds of thousands of jobs for\nCalifornians and it has a beneficial impact on almost every one of our\nmajor industries.\nTo illustrate just how important it is, the rate of employment\ngrowth in industries involved in international trade is increasing\nat 1½ times the rate of growth in the rest of the economy.\nWe believe the potential is there for an even greater period of\ngrowth.\n-1-\nTrade Conference\nThe purpose of your conference is to explore this subject in\nmore detail and to see what we in California have to offer to our\ntrading partners and what market potential we offer for their goods\nand services.\nBecause of our geographic location, California, from our earliest\nbeginnings, has been heavily involved in world trade with the nations\nin the great Pacific Basin. Now we are reaching out to broaden our\nhorizons with other great trade areas of the world.\nWe recently sent a representative from the Department of Commerce\nto West Germany to attend a series of trade seminars there.\nIn recognition of the growing impact of international trade in\nour state, we have recently created a division of International Trade\nin our Commerce Department. The purpose of this department is to\nencourage a two-way exchange of goods and services that can be\nbeneficial to everyone.\nThe recent energy crisis demonstrated how interdependent are the\neconomies of the various nations of the world.\nThere are things that we produce which other nations need and want\nand our 21 million people offer a giant market potential for the goods\nand services unique to other nations.\nI believe this expanded commercial contact can do more to\nstimulate peace and prosperity than any other single development. It\ncan generate greater understanding among the people of the world and\nit can provide a growing prosperity for everyone.\nAlthough the United States has the world's largest economy, only\na small fraction of our manufactured goods are exported. Yet as the\nother great nations of the world achieve a greater degree of prosperity,\nwe know there will be a demand for the things California produces.\nWe need to broaden our contacts overseas, to bring to the\nattention of other nations the potential that California offers as a\ntrading partner.\nWe are actively trying now to inform our own businessmen, in\nindustries large and small, of the potential of international trade.\nMany of the nations in the great Pacific Basin depend on imports\nto feed and clothe their people. The massive agricultural output of\nCalifornia can help meet that need, along with more specialized products\nthat come from our diversified industry.\nOur state Department of Food and Agriculture is doing its part\nto help our farmers and ranchers benefit from this expanded market\npotential by arranging tours of overseas buyers, to help acquaint\nthem with the varietv of things we have to offer.\nTrade Conference\nIn meeting this demand, California is playing a vital role in\nhelping assure an era of peaceful prosperity and stability in the\nworld.\nRight now, in America, our agricultural industry is moving back\ntoward a totally free market system after an era of surplus and subsidies\nWith the world's population growth, we find that there is an\never increasing demand for the food and fiber that California produces\nin abundance.\nConstructive trade, the two-way exchange of goods and services,\nis the most efficient and logical way for each nation and each area\nof the world to build a stable prosperity, a prosperity based not on\naid, but on mutually beneficial economic contacts.\n******\n(NOTE: Since Governor Reagan speaks from notes, there may be changes\nin, or additions to, the above quotes, However, the governor will\nstand by the above quotes.)\n-3-\nthe\n5/30\nthe\nOFFICE OF GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nHOLD FOR NOON RELEASE\nSacramento, California 95814\nClyde Walthall, Press Secretary\n916-445-4571\n5-30-74\nEXCERPTS OF REMARKS BY GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nCalifornia State Employees Association\nInstitute on Government\nSacramento\nMay 30, 1974\nAs you know, for many employees, part of last year's state salary\nincrease was held back by the Cost of Living Council. The council went\nout of business April 30, so we instituted this increase May 1.\nThose of you who had part of your pay increase held up last year\nwill be receiving the additional money (an average of about 4½ percent)\nwith this month's paycheck.\nAt the same time, however, we were enjoined by a federal court\nfrom paying the retroactive portion of this salary increase. It had\nbeen our intention to pay this retroactive portion immediately in a lump\nsum.\nI wish I could report that this matter has been resolved. But\nthere has been no change in status.\nSo let me make the state's position clear: We put this money into\nthe budget as part of a phased effort to upgrade state employee salaries\nup to a comparable level for similar work in other government and non-\ngovernment occupations. We believe you should have had it last year.\nWe believe you deserve the increase you are getting in the current year,\nand we will keep the retroactive pay in a separate fund in the budget\nso that we can pay it to you just as soon as we get the legal authority\nto do SO. In the meantime, we are exploring to see if there is an\nalternative way of authorizing this retroactive pay, including some\nlegislative attempts. Normally, I do not comment on pending legislation.\nBut in this case, I feel free to make an exception and tell you that if\na legally-sanctioned alternative way to pay this is found, we will look at\nit with considerable sympathy.\nThere also have been some developments on this year's salary\nproposals, the ones which will go into effect in the next fiscal year\nstarting July 1. A few weeks ago, we requested a salary fund budget\naugmentation for 1974-75 totaling $36.8 million, bringing the total\nsalary fund to more than $81.7 million.\nThis will permit a 5.3 percent average salary increase, the amount\nrecommended by the State Personnel Board. In addition to the salary\nadjustment, we have budgeted another 3.1 percent ($45 million) to greatly\nimprove employee fringe benefits. -1-\nINSTITUTE ON GOVERNMENT\nThe total salary and fringe benefit package amounts to an average\nof 8.4 percent for the coming fiscal year.\nThis budget augmentation recognizes the severe inflation our\nnational and state economy has been experiencing since we drafted our\noriginal proposal.\nBecause the cost of living has been going up, we revised our salary\nproposal upward.\nAlong with acknowledging the impact of inflation, we also have\ntried\nduring these past years\nto recognize the disparity that\ndevelops among different job categories in government service. That\nwas the purpose of our phased program of salary inequity adjustments,\nwhich got under way just about the time the Cost of Living Council came\ninto being.\nThat was the reason we commissioned a study of fringe benefits\nseveral years ago, to try to bring this form of compensation into a\nbetter balance and meet those needs which you yourselves regard as most\nimportant.\nThe $45 million we have budgeted for fringe benefits this year is\npart of that program. While it is still going through the legislative\nprocess, our intent is to make substantial improvements in the overall\nstate program of fringe benefits.\nWe want to increase the state's contribution to health insurance,\nboth for the individual and for the family coverage. We want to make\nsome further improvements in the area of retirement pay, both for active\nand retired state employees and we want to make some other adjustments\nin various areas of the total compensation program.\nFringe benefits have become an increasingly important part of the\nemployee's total compensation, representing an additional 25 percent of\npayroll costs not only in government, but throughout the economy.\nThey are even more important in periods of inflation. Every dollar\nin a fringe benefit has a greater net value than a dollar given in\nstraight salary because fringe benefit dollars are not taxable. You\ndon't have to share them with the tax collector as you do an increase\nin salary.\nThe goal of this benefit package is to both substantially improve\nthe state's array of fringe benefits and to increase the employee's net\ntake-home pay, the amount that really counts in meeting the cost of\nliving.\n-2-\nINSTITUTE ON GOVERNMENT\nWhile salaries have gone up 50 percent since 1967, we also have\nincreased the state's contribution for health insurance several times,\nenacted a program of unemployment insurance for state employees for the\nfirst time in history, sponsored time and one half for overtime and a\nnight differential, also a first. And we adopted the so-called 1/50th\nretirement formula, a change that translates into a 20 percent increase\nin retirement benefits. That was the most significant retirement\nimprovement in the past 20 years.\nIn brief, what we have tried to do in the salary and benefit area\nis to recognize your contributions as state employees. I have told you\nbefore and I repeat it today: I believe California has the finest state\nemployees in the country. And I appreciate all that you have done\nduring these past several years to help state government do a better\njob for the people of California.\nIn addition to being state employees, you are also citizens of\nCalifornia and this nation. And as such, have a vital interest in good\ngovernment and any reforms that promise to assure good government.\nThe subject of campaign abuse is not a new one, either in\nCalifornia or the nation. But because of Watergate and other events,\nthere is a much stronger public concern today, a demand for eliminating\nall areas of potential abuse. California already has responded with\nstronger conflict-of-interest and financial disclosure laws and there\nare other steps we must take to assure the integrity of the elective\nprocess.\nYet, in adopting constructive political reforms, we must be wary\nof so-called reforms that seem to offer a panacea for all that is wrong\nwith the body politic.\nMost of all, we must be sure that the reforms we adopt are aimed\nat the abuses and do not restrict the right of any individual or group\nto legitimately petition government for a redress of grievances.\nSome in your own association have cautioned against an initiative\nthat will be on next week's ballot (Prop. 9). This initiative is also\nopposed by many other groups, both in the public and private sector,\nby legislators and others who feel its impact is something akin to\nbulldozing the whole forest to clear the tree that is blocking the road.\nI'm sure we are all agreed on the necessary for strong safeguards\nagainst conflict-of-interest, improving registration requirements for\nlegislative advocates and with strict financial disclosure laws relating\nto campaign financing.\n-3-\nINSTITUTE ON GOVERNMENT\nBut I do not believe we must unduly infringe on the right of\nprivacy of state employees, just because they happened to be employed\nby government.\nWe believe a constructive program of political reforms must be\nadopted this year. And we have proposed such a program, one which will\naugment the pioneering steps California already has taken in this area.\nOne of the things we have proposed is to reduce campaign costs by\nshortening the length of the campaign period, moving our state's primary\nelection from June to September.\nCalifornia also has recognized there are certain necessary\ngovernmental functions which should be conducted on a non-partisan\nbasis. In the past few years, the duties of Secretary of State have\nbeen substantially broadened. The person holding this office is the\nchief elections official, the person who receives, certifies and monitors\ncampaign financial reports and who supervises the preparation of the\nballot pamphlet that explains every ballot measure.\nIt is not enough that the official holding this post conduct the\nduties in a non-partisan manner. The law itself must eliminate the\npotential for partisan or personal bias. And we can do this most\neffectively by adopting a Constitutional Amendment making the office\nof Secretary of State non-partisan, selected as we now choose the\nState Superintendent of Public Instruction.\nGood government also requires the participation of the citizens.\nso we have proposed an advisory committee on Fair Campaign Practices\nwhich would have the duty of recommending any steps it deems necessary\nto correct abuses or otherwise improve our campaign laws.\nAnother part of our program is aimed at eliminating the confusion\nthat complex ballot proposals hold for the average voter. Too often,\nwe have had ballot measures where your \"yes\" vote really means \"no\"\nand vice versa.\nIf the initiative process is to work as it was intended, the\nissues must be presented to the people in clear and concise language.\nWe propose that the legislative counsel be required to confer with\nqualified reading experts to guarantee that every ballot measure is\nexplained in terms an average voter can understand.\nLong ago, California became one of those states which took the\nspoils system out of state government. The Civil Service system in\nwhich you serve was adopted for that very purpose.\n-4-\nINSTITUTE ON GOVERNMENT\nNow we must remove the potential of improper government activity\nin the political arena. So we have proposed that our laws be\nstrengthened to specifically prohibit any employee or appointive office\nof the state, the legislature, any city or county or special district\nfrom participating in political activities of any kind during working\nhours.\nThis proposal will not mean any curtailment or abridgement of the\npublic employee's right to participate in political affairs, to vote\nor to support or oppose the candidates or causes of his or her choice.\nThat is a basic constitutional right which public employees enjoy,\nalong with every other citizens.\nBut it will assure the public that public resources are not being\nimproperly used to support or oppose political candidates or causes.\nThe last three parts of our reform program involve the most\npublicized area of campaign abuse: financing and political donations.\nMore than any other area of CHD public life, our judicial system\nmust be free of any possible potential for political bias. We believe\nit is time to adopt legislation to prohibit judges from serving as an\nintermediary in political contributions or make political contributions\nto any campaign except those involving their own reelection or election.\nThe activities of legislative advocates already are regulated by\nstate law, They are required to register, to report publicly their\nexpenses and campaign donations and to list the clients or groups they\nrepresent. I strongly support these laws, just as I strongly support\nthe right of groups to have advocates to present their case to the\nlegislature for or against proposed for existing laws.\nBut there are some steps I believe essential to correct weaknesses\nin the existing laws. At the present time, lobbyists are required to\nregister and report their expenses to the legislature itself.\nWe have proposed:\n--That they register with the non-partisan Secretary of State, who\nwould take over the administration of all regulations and laws covering\ntheir activities;\n--That lobbyists file detailed financial reports of all entertain-\nment and other expenses on a monthly basis.\nAnd to deal with possibly the greatest criticism involving\nlegislative advocates, the law we propose would prohibit lobbyists\nfrom directly or indirectly making political contributions.\n-5-\nINSTITUTE ON GOVERNMENT\nThe last part of this reform program deals with an area of campaign\nfinancing that holds the greatest potential for abuse: the large\namounts contributed to political campaigns and causes by special interest\ngroups.\nWhether the funds come from business or business groups, labor\nunions or associations, there is a very serious potential for unfairly\ninfluencing the elective process when one group can, through its\ncollective financial support, contribute hundreds of thousands of\ndollars to a single candidate or cause.\nTherefore, we would restrict political campaign donations to those\nvoluntarily contributed by individuals.\n# # #\n(Note: There may be additions to, or changes in, the above text.\nHowever, the Governor will stand by the above quotes.)\n-6-\n5/30\n30\nOFFICE OF GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nRELEASE: FRIDAY A.Ms.\nSacramento, California 95814\nMAY 31, 1974\nClyde Walthall, Press Secretary\n916-445-4571\n5-30-74\nPLEASE GUARD AGAINST PREMATURE\nRELEASE\nEXCERPTS OF REMARKS BY GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nRegional Occupation Centers Completion Ceremonies\nSacramento Memorial Auditorium\nMay 30, 1974\nSuperintendent Palmiter, members of the Board of Education,\ndistinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, and, of course, all the\nstudents who are the reason for this completion ceremony:\nUsually, when a speaker is invited to attend a ceremony such as\nwhat we are having this evening, he begins by saying how nice it is to\nbe here.\nThat goes double for me and for this occasion because the program\nyou are completing is an area of education that is close to my heart.\nI am proud to be part of your ceremony and you can be proud of your\nachievement in the occupational fields you have chosen.\nI know it is something of a cliche to say that our world is\nchanging. Things always change. But that phrase is really an\nunderstatement when you consider the sweeping developments in just a\nsingle generation.\nWe have put a man on the moon and opened a vast frontier of\nknowledge. The advent of computer technology has created whole new\nindustries and this has meant new and better ways of doing things,\nproviding new services, and new opportunities throughout our economic\nlife.\nJust by touching a few buttons, industry is now able to make\ncalculations that it used to take an army of mathematicians and\naccountants to figure out. Just as the tractor revolutionized\nagriculture and freed man from back-breaking drudgery, the computer is\ntaking over many sophisticated mental tasks that are used in everyday\nlife everything from bookkeeping to keeping a second-by-second watch on\na patient's heartbeat in a hospital.\nThis technology, much of which was born in California, has been\nbeneficial in an endless variety of ways. We have used it ourselves\nin state government, to establish a system so people who want to camp in\na state park may make a reservation months in advance and be assured\nthere will be place for them. That particular innovation proved so\nworkable the national park service picked up the idea.\n-1-\nOccupational Centers\nAll of this has meant a tremendous surge of economic opportunity.\nIf that sounds as if I am sold on modern electronics and technology, you\nare right.\nYour parents and I have, in our lifetimes, lived through an era\nof the most far reaching developments in almost every field of knowledge.\nAnd we have learned to appreciate the fact that almost everything man\nlearns is useful in some way, often on a massive scale.\nMost of all, we have learned that if we are to have the kind of\nsociety and country we want for ourselves and for you, we must take\nadvantage of the opportunities that knowledge offers to us.\nOne of the first things we discovered when I arrived in Sacramento\nis that California and its state government had to adjust to these\nchanges, particularly in education.\nAfter a period of rapid growth, our population was stabilizing.\nIt was still growing but at a slower pace. And this was going to have an\nimpact in the enrollment of our schools.\nThere was a new public awareness and concern for the environment.\nPeople everywhere were seeking an improved quality of life. They wanted\na prosperous economy and a rising standard of living, but they also\nwanted to make sure that we did not needlessly foul the environment\nwith air or water pollution.\nThat is why California has been a world leader in the fight\nagainst pollution of all kinds; that is why we have developed the\nnation's strongest air and water pollution regulations.\nIn 1967, we were in the middle of the Vietnam War and California's\neconomy was heavily affected by defense spending and programs. But we\nknew that this, too, would change, that someday the conflict would end\nand we would have to make economic adjustments to encourage new\nindustry and business so that there would be jobs waiting for our young\npeople when they left school and started their careers.\nNowhere was the challenge greater than in the field of education,\nnot simply because we were going to have fewer youngsters in the lower\ngrades. The whole concept of education has been undergoing a transformation\nin recent years.\nWe have been broadening educational opportunities for our young\npeople, for students who never before have had an opportunity for\nadvanced training.\n-2-\nOccupational Centers\nAnd at the same time, our whole society was taking a fresh look\nat some of the traditional concepts of education. Young people themselves\nwere challenging an educational system that was heavily oriented toward\nacademic degrees.\nThose are still important, of course. But we also were\ndiscovering something that had always been true: the fact that unless\nour schools did more in the areas of technical and occupational training,\nwe would not be meeting the need and desires of a great percentage of\nour young people.\nBusiness and industry found that to keep up with the rapid changes\nin their own fields they needed better trained employees to fill the\nvarious career job opportunities that are constantly being made available.\nSo education began adapting to these changes. Your own program,\nthe Regional Occupation Center concept, is the fastest growing area of\ncareer taining and education.\nOnly a few years ago, the program you have completed was just a\nconcept. Yet the idea of using a community's total resources in\neducation has grown rapidly.\nIn the past three years, we have doubled the number of students\nbeing served in Regional Occupation Centers. More than 83,000 students\nare enrolled in 46 programs throughout the state and you are among more\nthan 43,000 students who are graduating from these programs this year.\nTwo thousand high school seniors are enrolled in your own program,\nin four counties. The objective, as you well know, is to provide every\ngraduating youngster with an entry level job skill.\nA new dimension has been added to your regular high school\nprogram. You have been getting a practical insight into the world of\nwork because part of your education program includes actual job\nexperience. There is no way to place a dollar value on this. In\neffect, you have been getting a head start in learning about our free\neconomic system and the way that each individual contributes to our\noverall prosperity.\nI have often said, and I believe firmly, that progress and\nprosperity for California and America depends to a great extent on\neducation and the preparation that our school systems provide for the\nworld of work.\nOccupational training is helping to prepare you for a meaningful\nplace within society, And the vocational programs that we offer both in\nhigh school and in later life are crucially important.not only to you,\nOccupational Centers\nWe live in the world's most advanced economy. Our standard of\nliving is the highest; our people earn more and spend more on a greater\nvariety of goods and services than any other nation in the world.\nBut other countries are catching up in affluence. They are\nbecoming competitors in many fields where America was once dominant.\nBut this rising affluence in the rest of the world also offers a\nhistoric opportunity, an opportunity to achieve a more stable world and\na lasting peace.\nAnd we are determined to make the most of that opportunity by\ndeveloping peaceful and beneficial trade with other countries which\nneed the goods and services our people produce.\nRight now, California is selling rice to Japan and olives to\nSpain. The income from this kind of trade helps create jobs and\nprosperity for our people at home.\nIn the past, our abundance was a problem. We had farm surpluses.\nToday it is an opportunity to help build prosperity at home and to help\nfeed a hungry world.\nThe things you have been learning are part of this, just as every\nconstructive activity is part of our total free enterprise system.\nThat system has done more to fight poverty, heal the sick, uplift\nthe downtrodden and protect freedom than any other ever devised by man.\nYou may not think that your own work program, or the new jobs or\ncareers you will be pursuing are all that important. But they are. In\nfact, you have been learning the most important lesson of all: how the\nindividual fits into the world. By succeeding in your own tasks, you\nare a part of the whole. You help make the system work efficiently\nto meet the needs of everyone.\nFor many years, I have been sounding off on a theme that has\nconcerned me and many other Americans: the fact that so many people\nbelieve so many false things about America and its political and\neconomic systems.\nOne state recently took a survey of 25,000 high school seniors.\nThey discovered that a heavy majority of high school youngsters had\na totally distorted view of economics and this in turn lead to a\nhostile view of business and the free market system.\nSeventy-three percent thought industry made as much as 25 percent\nprofit on every dollar of sales. The truth is, the average profit\nmargin is less than five cents.\n-4-\nOccupational Centers\nNine out of 10 students who responded thought that corporations\npay only 5 percent of their profits in taxes and they thought that they\nshould pay 40 percent. In the year the survey was taken, the average\ntaxes business paid was 44.7 percent.\nThe reason I mention this is that the young people who had taken\npart in a career program similar to your own had a much more accurate\nview than the others. They estimated profit to be 3 to 6 percent.\nThe world of work was not a theory to them. They were part of\nthe Junior Achievement Program in which high school younsters actually\nlaunch a business and go through all phases of operation to produce\ngoods or offer a service.\nThey saw the market place in action and learned to appreciate\nthe need for efficiency, for offering the best possible service at\nthe least possible cost.\nThe training and experience you have achieved in the Regional\nOccupation Center program has given you the same opportunity to learn\njust how the individual fits into the world of work.\nIt is the kind of practical innovation in education that we must\ncontinue to encourage and expand if we are to meet the needs of all\nour youngsters.\nWe must never be hesitant to adjust our educational programs if\nthere is a need for it. We cannot allow education or any other part\nof our society to do things the same old way just because that is\nwhat we have always done before.\nWe sure can't be like the fellow's wife who used to cut off both\nends of the ham before she cooked it. When he asked her why she did\nthat, she said because that's the way her mother always did it.\nOne day, he got a chance to ask his mother-in-law why she cut\noff both ends of the ham before she cooked it. And she said because\nthat's the way her mother always did it.\nCame the holidays and Grandma was visiting and he told her about\nit and asked if that was true---why did she cut off both ends of the\nham before she cooked it? She said, \"That's simple. I never had a\npan big enough to get the whole ham in.\"\nJust because somebody cooked hams one way does not make that the\nbest way.\nIf education is to serve its true purpose, it must always be\nready to develop programs that meet the changing needs of the students.\n-5-\nOccupational Centers\nThat is what public education really is for, to provide an\nopportunity for every youngster to find a career field of his\nchoice and to fulfill his own personal goals.\nBy completing this program, you have been a pioneering part of\na new and significant part of our total educational program.\nEducation is not simply a matter of books or buildings. What\nreally counts is how education is serving our people, helping them\nachieve a better life; how it helps to produce the skilled men and\nwomen we will need to build a better society and a better life.\n########\n-6-\n(NOTE: Since Governor Reagan speaks from notes, there may be changes\nin, or additions to, the above quotes. However, the governor\nwill stand by the above quotes.)\n6/12\nOFFICE OF GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nRELEASE:\nWEDNESDAY P.Ms.\nSacramento, California 95814\nJUNE 12, 1974\nClyde Walthall, Press Secretary\n916-445-4571\n6-12-74\nPLEASE GUARD AGAINST PREMATURE\nRELEASE\nEXCERPTS OF REMARKS BY GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nCALIFORNIA SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION, PALO ALTO\nJune 12, 1974\nRight now I am sure you would like to know which way our society is\ngoing in the battle against crime. Do we want effective law enforcement?\nor will we accept crime and violence as a constant and growing menace to\nthe law-abiding, a part of our everyday life?\nI am sure some will say I pose the question too bluntly, that I\nignore the complexity of the problem.\nWell, is the problem all that complex or is it that some find the\nobvious answer hard to swallow?\nEvery year, the poll takers do a survey on crime and the impact it\nhas on the lives of our citizens. A year ago, a thid of the people\nresponding said they were actually afraid to walk on the streets at night.\nThis year, the figure is 40 percent. But when you ask that question just\nin our nation's large urban areas, the figure goes up to 67 percent.\nMore than two-thirds of our citizens are afraid to be on our city streets\nafter dark.\nWe have made some progress in reducing property crimes in recent\nyears, but the number of violent crimes continuesto increase.\nDrug addiction, something the average citizen knew almost nothing\nabout as little as 15 years ago, has become dangerously widespread among\nour young people. It is responsible for a great part of the increase in\nother types of crime.\nThe dread term \"O.D.\" for overdose, has become a tragic and familiar\nphrase in law enforcement and in our emergency hospitals, where the worst\nof the drug problem is so chillingly apparent.\nYou do not have to be told too many of you know already something\nof the awesome dimensions of drug addiction in our society, youngsters\nhooked on drugs and turning to crime to support their habit.\nToday, few families have escaped some sort of contact with the drug\nculture.\nYet we are still divided on what we should do to combat the drug\nthreat, and this division extends to our approach to the entire problem\nof crime and violence.\nIn these 7½ years in Sacramento, one of our major priorities has been\nto strengthen law enforcement's ability to combat crime,\nWe have tried to give you the legal tools you must have to be\neffective.\nSheriff's Assoc.\nThough it has been an uphill fight, we have had some success. We\nhave enacted a comprehensive drug inventory program to block the illicit\ndiversion of legitimate drugs into illicit channels. We have strengthened\npenalties for robbery, rape and burglary if the victim was physically\nharmed. We have expanded the Mutual Aid program to help local police\nagencies deal with riots and other major emergencies.\nWe put into operation the nation's first computer-to-computer crime\ninformation network and created the Crime Technological Research\nFoundation to encourage the development and use of scientific crime\nfighting methods.\nWe have adopted programs of education and treatment to try to steer\nyoungsters away from drugs and to help them if they become addicted.\nTo some extent, we have allowed down the increase of crime in\nCalifornia, but we have not yet achieved the kind of success we must have.\nAnd if I had to single out the one major barrier to more effective law\nenforcement, it would be simply this: society has not yet totally\nmobilized in the fight against crime.\nSome of our courts persist in viewing the problem of crime as a\nlegal chess game. The rights of the victims are lost in the shuffle\nwhile every point of law is stretched to give the criminal the benefit\nof every technicality and loophole.\nAnd I am afraid too many of the lawmakers view the problem as a\nsociological study, a delaying action while they discuss social reforms\nto eliminate all the causes of human misery.\nSome regard drug abuse as a sort of temporary fad, possibly a little\nmore serious than a juvenile curfew violation, but not much more.\nWe sponsored a law this year that would impose an automatic,\nmandatory minimum prison sentence for heroin pushers and for those who\nuse a deadly weapon illegally. We feel if a criminal uses a gun in the\ncommission of a crime, he should go to prison.\nI asked for this law in the state of the state message this year.\nIt was drafted, submitted to the legislature and put to a vote in an\nAssembly committee. It was defeated because a majority on that committee\napparently refuses to recognize the enormity of the problem.\nAs most of you know, the California Peace Officers Association is\nsponsoring an initiative campaign to put this on the ballot for a vote of\nthe people. Many of you may be personally involved in this effort. I hope\nso and I hope you will enlist the aid of your wives and those of your men.\nI know what they can accomplish--my wife, Nancy, has a petition in her\nhand when she goes to the market or any place else. We were invited to a\nconcert a few weeks ago and she signed everybody up for three rows around\nus. So far, she has turned in more than 100 petitions.\n- 2 -\nSheriff's assoc.\nThe people will vote for a tougher sentencing standard just as they\nvoted overwhelmingly to reinstate capital punishment two years ago, if\nthey get the chance. But they just plain do not know about the petitions\nand many police and sheriff stations do not know about them. If we can\nget enough signatures by the end of this month, the measure can go on\nthe November ballot. But if we fail, do not stop, because we can collect\nsignatures until September 10 and have a special election.\nI will admit we should not have to do this. It is the job of the\nlegislature and the courts to protect society, to send the guilty to\nprison and to revise the law when circumstances require it for more\neffective law enforcement. They have not done this.\nIn every poll and every election, the people have declared the\nfight against crime to be a major priority of government and all its\nelements.\nAs law officers, you have a right to expect the full support of the\nlegislature and the court system. But your job has been made more\ndifficult by court rulings and by the failure of the legislature to take\nsteps to make certain that the guilty are brought to justice.\nSeveral years ago, the courts imposed a legal moritorium on capital\npunishment. During that long moritorium, crimes of violence increased\n16 times as fast as the rate of population growth.\nThe legislature of California had an opportunity to restore capital\npunishment, but the effort to do so was blocked and it took a referendum\nof the people to force that issue to a positive vote.\nThe violence that plagued the campus and spread in our streets in the\n1960s has subsided, probably because those who preach hatred and\npolitical subversion have switched to a new arena---our prisons. Their\nrevolutionary rhetoric and twisted system of values has found a\nreceptive audience inside the prison walls.\nYou have seen the headlines of prison violence, in our own state,\nin New York, Michigan, Ohio, all across the country. The same kind of\nmilitants who once seized campus buildings and incited riots among\nstudents are now at work among the outlaws of society.\nIn a shameful mockery of truth, they seek to portray convicted\nmurderers and rapists not as common criminals, but as \"political\nprisoners.'\nNow we have a court ruling that says prison authorities can no\nlonger inspect mail sent to a prisoner if it is from an attorney, even\nif the letter might contain a detailed escape plan.\n- 3 -\nSHELLII AssociAtion\nIn at least one case, in our own state, an attorney is being sought\nfor complicity in an escape plot that left four people dead, including\na judge.\nOur Constitution assures that those not yet tried must be presumed\ninnocent. No one wants to cancel those rights, but now those rights\nare claimed for those who have been tried and found guilty.\nIn our system of justice, parole plays an essential part in\nrehabilitation.\nA federal court has ruled that corrections authorities may no\nlonger rescind a parole and return a violator to prison without first\ngoing through a prolonged hearing process that almost amounts to a new\ntrial.\nIn effect, the court declared that parole is no longer a \"privilege\"\nconferred for good behavior and under specified conditions designed to\nprotect society. Instead, it becomes a \"right\" and officials must go\nthrough a time consuming procedure to return a parole violator to prison\nto serve out the sentence that was lawfully imposed when he had his\noriginal day in court.\nBecause of another federal court opinion, if a prison guard is\nassaulted, it may not even be possible to isolate or discipline the\naccused convict until after the criminal charge is brought to trial.\nThe language of the opinions are couched in familiar phrases, due\nprocess, civil rights, all of the noble words that describe the\nConstitutional safeguards built into our system of justice to protect\nthe innocent.\nWhen these safeguards are unreasonably stretched to shield the\nguilty, they make a mockery of justice.\nA court ruling that forbids prison authorities from isolating a\nconvict accused of assaulting another inmate or guard is not a victory\nfor due process. It is a technical triumph for those who would misuse\nthe law to subvert justice.\nIf we are ever to succeed in controlling crime, there must be a\nturn away from permissiveness and a more determined stand in favor of\nstrong, effective law enforcement.\nThose who rob and kill are not romantic revolutionaries engaged in\nexpressing their political discontent. They are thieves and murderers.\nAnd if we are to have a lawful society, we must use every resource at our\ncommand to track them down and bring them to justice.\nThe freedom our Constitution guarantees includes more than the right\nto speak and write what we please, to worship in the church of our choice.\nIt also includes the freedom to enjoy liberty and the pursuit of\nhappiness, without fear of being mugged or robbed in the park.\nSheriff's Assoc.\nUpholding the law is not a task for you alone. It is a job for\nevery citizen, every parent, every elective official and each of\nsociety's institutions.\nWe have built the most affluent society ever known to man in America.\nWe have made economic and educational opportunity a fact, not a dream.\nWe have developed a society dedicated to equality, one that offers more\nindividual freedom than any other society in all history.\nAnd we are understandably bewildered when some of our young people\nshow little respect for our tradition of law, and readily accept the most\nmonstrous distortions of fact and history about our country and its\ninstitutions.\nPerhaps we have not stressed enough of the other side of individual\nfreedom, the side that spells individual responsibility. We can never\nhave a lawful society unless and until a majority of our people are\nwilling, not only to abide by the law themselves, but to demand that\ngovernment and the law demand strict accountability of the individual\nfor his misdeeds. Possible defects or shortcomings in our society cannot\nbe used as an excuse for criminal acts by individuals.\nWe have a free country. But our freedom did not come cheap. It\nwas not a gift. We earned it and to keep it we must be ready to defend\nit against every threat, whether it is from an armed enemy abroad or\nfrom the outlaw element that exists in every society.\n#######\n(NOTE: Since Governor Reagan speaks from notes, there may be changes in,\nor additions to, the above quotes. However, the governor will stand by\nthe above quotes).\n- 5 -\nb/8\nOFFICE OF GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nRELEASE: SUNDAY A.Ms.\nSacramento, California 95814\nAUGUST 11, 1974\nClyde Walthall, Press Secretary\n916-445-4571\n8-9-74\nPLEASE GUARD AGAINST PREMATURE\nRELEASE\nEXCERPTS OF REMARKS BY GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nNational Young Republicans\nSouth Lake Tahoe, Nevada -- August 10, 1974\nYou can have faith in the Republican philosophy of fiscal\ncommon sense, limited government and individual freedom. Let me\noffer the experience of the past 7½ years in California to support\nthat assurance.\nA Republican administration replaced the Democratic administration\nwhich had been in power the preceding eight years and found the\nstate was virtually insolvent spending a million dollars a day\nmore than it was taking in.\nWe instituted a program of \"cut, squeeze and trim\" which was\nimmediately denounced by the majority party in the legislature. It\nis significant that, in 6 of the preceding 8 years, inflation was\nhigher in California than in the rest of the nation. In 6 of the\nlast 7 years of this Republican cut, squeeze and trim our rate of\ninflation has been lower than in the rest of the nation.\nEven so, we had not been able to halt the runaway growth in\nwelfare. A task force was appointed to find an answer. After almost\na year's work they came in with the most comprehensive program of\nreform ever proposed anywhere.\nThe reaction was immediate. I was turned down in my request\nto present the task force plan to a joint session of the legislature.\nThey blasted the plan as unworkable, said it would result in a $750\nmillion deficit and increase property taxes at the local level.\nOther than that, they could not find much wrong with it. They became\npart of a Nationwide chorus crying that welfare should be turned over\nto the federal government entirely.\nNow, 3 years and 5 months later, the case load is decreasing\nnot increasing---and the decrease has been going on virtually\nuninterrupted for those 3 years and 5 months.\n- 1 -\nYoung Republicans\nThere are more than 330,000 fewer people on welfare than when\nwe started the reforms. At the same time the truly needy those\nstill dependent on public assistance-- have received a 41 percent\nincrease in benefits.\nStill, we have saved the taxpayers between $1 and $2 billion.\nThe burden, which our opponents said would be transferred to the\ncounties, evaporated; property taxes have gone down in more than\n40 of our 58 counties for two years in a row.\nThe government in Washington took several of our people who\nhad been instrumental in developing the reforms and they have been\nworking to help other states implement similar reforms.\nLast year the number of people on welfare declined nationally.\nAlmost half of that reduction (47 percent) occurred in California;\nmost of the rest came in those states which have followed our example.\nOne of our reforms was an experiment we were permitted to\nundertake in 35 counties. It is, very simply, a community work\nproject in which able-bodied recipients perform useful work in\nreturn for their welfare grants. Last year, through this program,\nwe placed 57,000 of them in private sector jobs---this year it will\nbe 85,000. But our opponents in the legislature are sponsoring\nlegislation to kill the program.\nThey are tragically wrong, just as they were wrong when they\nsaid the reforms would fail and we would face a $750 million deficit.\nWe had an $850 million surplus which we returned to the people in a\none-time tax rebate.\nWe believe we have demonstrated that the cost of government\ncan be brought under control.\nBut, we have also discovered that it is a never-ending battle.\nWelfare's excesses are like a double-jointed octopus with remarkable\nregenerative powers. When you wriggle free of one tentacle, another\ngrows in its place and squeezes the public's purse strings a little\ntighter.\nWe intend to continue the battle, and tonight I am taking\nadvantage of your hospitality to fire the first shot.\n- 2 -\nYoung Republicans\nOne of the fastest-growing spending programs at the federal\nlevel of government is the food stamp program, a part of welfare\nthat is not even administered by the Department of Health, Education\nand Welfare.\nLike most government programs, food stamps started small and\nwere intended for a worthy purpose. A small pilot project during\nthe Kennedy administration led to passage of the Federal Food Stamp\nAct of 1964.\nWe had a problem of agricultural overproduction and food stamps\nwere viewed as a way of:\n(a) raising the nutritional levels of the truly needy poor\n(b) stimulating the nation's agricultural economy, and\n(c) making possible the distribution of farm food surpluses\nthrough normal retail food outlets.\nNo one can dispute those humanitarian and economic goals. But\npart of the reason for the program has ceased to exist---we no longer\nhave an agricultural surplus. Indeed, the reverse is true. Still,\nas I have said before, a government program once launched is the\nnearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth.\nThe noblest intentions in the world have a way of getting\nbotched up when run through a governmental bureaucracy and this\none is run through several.\nAuthority for its administration is so divided it is impossible\nto hold any one area of government accountable.\nThe Food Stamp Program has become a multi-billion dollar\nadministrative nightmare, a staggering financial burden at the\nfederal level, and the newest nesting place for welfare abuse and fraud.\nAt best, it is totally out of control and in need of a complete\noverhaul. At its worst, it is a massive ripoff of working taxpayers\nbecause it is their tax dollars which pay for food stamps.\nWhen people who really should not be receiving this aid get\nfood stamps because of legal loopholes and liberal eligibility standards,\nthey are---in a moral sense literally taking bread out of the mouths\nof the hungry.\nBack in 1964, it was limited to about 367,000 recipients and\nthe cost was $26 million. By next year, the figures will be 16\nmillion people and more than $3 billion.\n- 3 -\nYoung Republicans\nCongresswoman Martha W. Griffiths of Michigan has estimated\nthat, by 1977, about 60 million- or more than 1 in 4 people in\nthis country can be eligible.\nIn California alone, taxpayers are contributing at least $316\nmillion toward the purchase of some $630 million in food stamps\nthis year. It cost almost $100 million in California just for\nadministrative costs. Food stamps are rolling off the printing\npresses at the rate of $20 million a day.\nWhen we instituted our welfare reforms in California in 1971,\nwe did not include the food stamp program because it is totally a\nfederal program.\nBut because food stamps have become the fastest-growing part\nof welfare costs, and because of repeated instances of abuse and\nloose administration, we have had a new task force take a sweeping\nnew look at welfare, including food stamps.\nAt a time when inflation is hurting everyone, many taxpayers\nfind it difficult to understand why a seemingly able-bodied and\notherwise self-supporting individual can walk up to the grocery\ncounter with a basket full of prime T-bone steaks and lay out free\nfood stamps while they are buying hamburger for their own dinner,\nwith hard-earned cash which they have left after paying taxes to\ncover the cost of those food stamps.\nFood stamps have become a massive subsidy for some of the exotic\nexperiments in group living you have read about what the sociologists\ncall the underground culture.\nTaxpayers have another name for them, particularly those who\nfind fault with the so-called Establishment while they live off the\ntax dollars a compassionate society provides to feed the hungry and\nhelpless who have nowhere else to turn for help.\nIf this sounds harsh, let me point out that it is possible, under\nfederal eligibility rules, for a family of four not on welfare with\nan income of $10,000 a year or more to qualify for food stamps.\n- 4 -\nYoung Republicans\nOne out of every four persons receiving food stamps in California\nis not on welfare and many could not qualify. The fact is that the\nadministration is so loosely delegated and the standards of eligibility\nso liberal, the food stamp program is generating social problems of\nits own, encouraging irresponsible and what we used to call delinquent\nbehavior among young people. Instead of solving problems, it is\ncausing problems among families and in the society which it is\nsupposed to be serving.\nA 17-year-old high school student decided he no longer wanted to\nlive with his parents. So he moved out and stayed with a group of\nfriends. He receives $46 a month in free food stamps and five other\npeople in the same household are also drawing food stamps.\nMany college students legally obtain food stamps because they\nlive away from home. Under the rules, attending school half-time\nexcuses them from work requirements imposed on the less fortunate\nwhose main problem is unemployment, age, an inadequate pension or\nillness.\nWhat do you say to an irate father in another state who phones\nto tell us he earns $100,000 a year and is sending his son to college\nin California? He wants to know why we are giving his son food stamps.\nAll we could tell him was that food stamps are a federal program and\nthe rules are established in Washington.\nSome publications, published in California and elsewhere, have\nprinted detailed instructions to students on how to take advantage\nof the eligibility loopholes in order to qualify for food stamps.\nSome of the same types of abuses we found in our original\nwelfare reform investigation are turning up in the food stamp program.\nOne woman was declared ineligible for food stamps because she\nowned personal property worth more than $1,500 in value. So she\ntransferred the property to a relative and the helpless eligibility\nworker was forced to certify her as qualified for food stamps. She\nwas legally eligible. Other cases involve outright fraud. Sometimes\nwe can catch this, but it is not easy.\nOne couple obtained more than $5,000 worh of food stamps over a\n27-month period by failing to report more than $20,000 in personal\nearnings and another $20,000 income from a business they owned. In\nthat case, the man was convicted of theft and is making restitution.\n- 5 -\nYoung Republicans\nStrikers are exempt from the work requirements imposed on the\ntruly needy and thus qualify for food stamps.\nIn fact, food stamps and other forms of welfare have become a\nmajor part of the resources available to striking workers and\nundoubtedly have prolonged labor disputes. This is a major public\npolicy that demands attention at the federal level if government is\nto play its traditional neutral role in labor-management disputes.\nBecause of these abuses and others like them, California is\ndrafting a report, along with a list of more than 50 specific,\ndetailed recommendations for reform in both the food stamp program\nand in the federally mandated A.F.D.C. program.\nWe soon will be submitting this report, along with a strong\nrecommendation for immediate action in Washington.\nThe abuses and the outright fraud in the food stamp program can\nbe eliminated by tightening up the eligibility requirements, by\nestablishing reasonable regulations that will make certain that food\nstamps are legally available only to those who really need them.\nOne thing we must do is to establish a minimum age for qualifying\nfor food stamps. They should not be allowed to become a means by\nwhich runaway youngsters can leave home at taxpayer expense and in\ndefiance of their own family.\nAt present, the Agriculture Department has the responsibility\nfor administering this program; indeed it consumes two-thirds of\nthat department's budget. Secretary of Agriculture Butz has publicly\ndeclared he would like to see the program transferred to the Department\nof Health, Education and Welfare. We agree. Food stamps are not only\nwelfare, they have become the fastest-growing part of welfare.\nWe need tighter eligibility standards; closer supervision to\nprevent counterfeiting or theft of the stamps while they are in transit;\nand a top-to-bottom streamlining of the administration of this program\nto bring it under control and guarantee to the taxpayers that food\nstamps are going only to those who really deserve and need this form\nof assistance. We believe a closely coordinated and tighter\nadministration could save $31 million a year in California state costs\nalone. And that would be only a fraction of the overall savings.\n- 6 -\nYoung Republicans\nThe recommendations we are proposing require action at the\nfederal level and in some cases, changes in state laws. Our report\nwill deal with both these areas.\nGovernment\nalone\nis the cause of inflation. We must,\ntherefore, eliminate every area of waste and duplication.\nNo government is ever justified in spending a single dollar\nmore than necessary for legitimate functions. And no government\nshould ever tolerate abuses, legal or illegal, that not only defraud\nthe people government is trying to help, but increase the taxes of\nthose working citizens who finance our efforts to help the poor,\nthe aged and the infirm.\nOperating efficiently, at the least possible cost, is the only\nway to balance the budget and bring inflation under control. We\nbelieve that is what government is supposed to do. And we think we\nhave demonstrated in California that it can be done.\n######\n(NOTE: Since Governor Reagan speaks from notes, there may be changes\nin, or additions to, the above quotes. However, the governor will\nstand by the above quotes).\n- 7 -\nREMARKS OF GOVERNOR REAGAN\nAT\nFUNDRAISER FOR DON PETERSON\nEureka, California\nAugust 29, 1974\nGOVERNOR REAGAN: Well, Don, I thank you very much for\nyour generous words. Madam Chairman, Reverend Clergy, our very dear\nfriend that we miss very much in Sacramento, Mrs. Bilotti, others\nhere at the head table and, of course, the man who has brought us\nhere, our candidate for the Assembly in this District, Don Peterson.\nI apologize. Have you ever had one of those days?\n(Laughter.) We waited and-- I've been an after-luncheon speaker on\nmany occasions. I am still an after-breakfast speaker at this\nparticular moment. (Laughter.)\nI remember they said the repair job would be four hours\nand then we found another plane and we got on that plane and we've\nbeen hedgehopping all the way here and I found myself remembering one\nof those classic old lines from some of the movies that I used to\nbe in years ago. Do you know that line? \"You're not going to send\nthe kid up in a crate like that?\" (Laughter.)\nBut I know how long you've been here and I'm not going\nto give you the whole load. (Laughter.)\nBut I would like to just say a few things. This is kind\nof nostalgic. We have been here a number of times and it's always\nvery heartwarming to come here. When I tell you it's a pleasure to\nbe here, I can tell you it's a pleasure just not to be in Sacramento.\n(Laughter.)\nAbout a year ago -- and I don't remember whether I've\ntold you this or not -- Nancy and I came to a moment in which with\nour son we decided that when the legislature left town for the summer\nthat we'd have a change. We'd get away from it all. And for the\nfirst time in our lives, we did a pack trip into the high Sierras\nand then found it wasn't all that different. We were still on an\nuphill, rocky road with a bunch of mules. (Laughter.) (Applause.)\nGovernment is said to be the second oldest profession\nand sometimes I find it very similar to the first. (Laughter.)\nI have learned, also, about some of the customs of\nancient Greece. I was fascinated with the study of Greece when I\nfound out that there was an ancient city-state in Greece that had\na custom whereby when anyone suggested a new program for government,\nhe had to make his proposal standing with a noose around his neck\ntied to the limb of a tree (laughter) -- standing on a chair.\nAnd, if they liked his proposal, they removed the noose. If they\ndidn't, they removed the chair. (Laughter.) And I developed a\nmorbid fascination with the customs of ancient Greece. (Laughter.)\nHave you ever stopped to think what kind of service\nwe'd get from government if the Internal Revenue Service had to do\nbusiness on a satisfaction or money back guarantee? (Laughter.)\nWell, let me tell you, speaking in politics at this\nparticular time, as you can imagine, is a little harrowing. It was\njust a few days ago that I had to go up to Seattle to speak to a\nRepublican gathering there and it was at the end of that 48 hours\nwhen the transition of authority had taken place in Washington.\nAnd the speech that I had and that I thought would do me through\nthe whole campaign -- it was pertinent to the affairs of the day --\nI took another look at it and it was about as appropriate as the\nCaptain of the Titanic saying, \"Never mind all that ice. It's for\nthe party Saturday night.\" (Laughter.)\nMORE\n- 2 -\nAnd then I found a story in a paper and this paper,\nthis news story, was on the front page of the Sunday paper found in\nthe airplane as I was riding up to Seattle. It had to do with a\ngentlemen named Richard Conlin who was a campaign strategist for\nthe Democratic Party and the Democratic Party Study Committee in\nWashington consists of about 170 Senators and Congressman and high\nparty functionaries. He, on that night of resignation, was leaving\nhis office to go home and met a young couple who were celebrating\nthe resignation. And, gleefully, they told him they had voted\nfor McGovern. And Mr. Conlin, Democratic strategist, said, \"Swell.\nAnd we lost that election and now we're going to lose the '74 and\nthe '76 elections.'\nNow, he might have been exaggerating, but what he was\nspeaking of was the fact that for a year and a half we've been\nbludgeoned with one thing called Watergate. We've lost special\nelections, five out of six for the Congress alone, simply on the\nemotionalism of that one issue. And our opponents were hopeful that\nthey were going to be able to carry out the '74 election on that one\nissue. The candidates would be chosen by the the people who will\nhave an effect on our lives and the lives of our children for years\nto come and they wouldn't be questioned on the issues or where they\nstood philosophically. They would be selected on that one issue\nalone.\nThen someone shot Santa Claus and now they have to get\nout and stand up and be counted on the issues that really confront\nus. And one of the reasons they were sorry that this was going to\nhave to happen because in '72 the issues were more clearcut than\nthey have been in the lifetime of any one of us in a national\nelection.\nIn 1972, it was not so much a selection between candidates\nas it was a choice of two widely divergent philosophies and the\nAmerican people, Democrats -- and I hope there are many present --\nand Independents -- and I hope they're present, also because I hope\nthey aspire to a better life -- and fellow Republicans all crossed\nparty lines to repudiate and reject the the confiscation and\nredistribution of the peoples' earnings, the final step into a\nwelfare state, the running of our entire lives by government to an\nextent greater than we've known so far. This was the thing they\ndidn't want to have to campaign on.\nThere has been no change in the philosophy of the\nleadership on the other side, the state or the national level. They\nstill lack faith in our ability to govern ourselves. Arrogantly,\nthey count on the peoples' lack of knowledge to help them continue\nin office. And I'm afraid they're justified in counting on that.\nA recent poll revealed that only 46 percent of the\npeople polled could name their United States Congressman. Even less\ncould name their State Representatives. But of the people who could\nname their Congressmen, 86 percent of them could not tell you a single\nthing he stood for, not a single policy that he represented.\nWe've had too much of this and that's why for 40 years\nwe've had social tinkering by social experimenters that have distorted\nthe relationship between the levels of government and have badly\ndistorted the relationship of the people to their government.\nSmall businessmen in America spend 130 million manhours\na year filling out government paperwork. It adds $50 billion a year\nto the cost of doing business which all turns up in the price of\nthe products we buy and contributes to the thing we call inflation.\nA druggist in my original state of Illinois says it takes\nhim more time to fill out the government paperwork every time he fills\nout a prescription than it does to fill out the prescription.\nAnd the State is no different. Last week I vetoed a bill.\nThis was a bill passed by the majority in the lesgislature and a bill\nMORE\n- 3 -\nthat would have mandated by the State for every community in California\nexactly the type of sign and the size sign that a person could put on\nhis lawn in front of his house if he wanted to sell his house. And\nmy veto was based on one thing only. When the bill was presented to\nus at the cabinet meeting and I heard it for the first time I said,\n\"What business is that of the State government?\" And so we vetoed it.\nBut there are other things that are going on. There is\na bill now within the last couple of days that came to my desk --\nour opponents are frantic. The law of the State of California says\nthat every political party will in the month of August before an\nelection hold a platform convention so that the people of this State\nknow what the party platform is they're voting on. The Republicans\nhave held theirs. The Peace and Freedom Party has held its convention.\nThey're supposed to register the date of that convention and their\nintention to hold it on July 1st. Our opponents made no such declaration\non July 1st and the Secretary of State who would now be Governor\nhas not upheld the law or enforced the law and here we are coming\nto the end of August and they have not held a convention and the\nother day he was asked by the press why he was not enforcing the law\nand he said, \"Maybe we don't need one.\"\nBut the law is the law. So, hastily, a bill was passed\nby the majority in the legislature and laid on my desk with four days\nto go in August that would have excused their party from holding such\na convention until after the election, come next January.\nLast night, the Chairman of the Democratic Party called\nfrantically and said, \"What is the Governor going to do about that\nbill because, if he's not going to sign it, I'm going to have to\nhastily call some kind of a convention and, if I have to, we'll kick\nthe Governor's brains out for making us do it.\" Well, they can go\nahead and kick because I'm still studying that bill. (Laughter).\n(Applause.)\nYou know, some of the progress we've made has been\nmentioned. It has been mentioned the fact, also, that we've been in\nan uphill fight against a hostile legislature on most of it. I know\nthat I've spoken to you about these things before. Let me just briefly\nrefresh your memory what it was like eight years ago.\nI know that our Republican philosophy works because I've\nseen it work for the last seven years and eight months. The cost of\nliving in California was higher than it was in the rest of the nation.\nAnd it had been so for the previous six years.\nThe State was adding 5,500 new employees each year to\nthe State payroll.\nWelfare, which was runaway, was increasing at a rate\nof 40,000 new cases a month. That's what we were adding to the\nwelfare rolls.\nWe instituted our program that they called, \"Cut, Squeeze,\nand Trim\" and we tried everything we could to get welfare under\ncontrol. Finally, after a few years of trying, we turned to the people\nof this State for a task force and told them to find out and bring\nto us a plan by which we could control this runaway program.\nYou know, when you find people that are earning $16,500\na year and were still considered legally eligible for welfare, you\nhad to believe something was wrong with the regulations that were\ngoverning it.\nAnd so, we came with our welfare reform, again, to that\nsame legislature. And they denied me the permission to even present\nthe reforms to them, to a joint session of the legislature.\nBut we took our case to the people, as we have so many\ntimes. And government by the people works if the people work at it.\nAnd each time public opinion was such that our opponents had to give\nin. Oh, we always had to compromise a little. We couldn't get all\nwe wanted. We only got 70 percent of the welfare reforms.\nMORE\n- 4 -\nIncidentally, on those welfare reforms they told us that,\nif we got them, they said they would raise the caseload, not lower it.\nThey told us that it would dump the burden onto the counties, on\ngeneral relief and the county property taxes would go up and they\nsaid the needy would starve in the streets and we would have a $700\nmillion deficit at the end of the year. Other than that, they didn't\nfind much wrong with the whole program. (Laughter.)\nSo, we started in. Now, we're coming to the end of the\neight years. We started enforcing our reforms just three years and\nfive months ago. The welfare rolls are not increasing at 40,000 a\nmonth. We have almost 400,000 fewer people on welfare in California\nthan we had just three years ago.\nThe property taxes in more than 40 of the 58 counties\nin California have gone down for two years in a row. The taxpayers\nhave been saved almost two billion dollars on welfare alone.\nSome of the men who were responsible for those reforms\nhave been taken to the government in Washington by Cap Weinberger\nat HEW. Their job is to go around the country and persuade other\nstates to implement the similar kind of reforms. And last year for\nthe first time in the history of welfare, it went down at the national\nlevel. Forty-seven percent of the decline was in California and the\nrest was in those states that had implemented our type of reforms.\nIt is still going up in the other states that have not yet been\nreached.\nAnd, oh, yes -- the $700 million deficit. That turned\nout to be an $850 million surplus and, as you know, we gave it back\nto you in the form of a one-time tax rebate. And that was the\nthird time we've done such a thing.\nTo my knowledge, no government has ever followed the\npractice of giving one-time rebates when it found itself with a\nsurplus, save we've done it three times. This last time at $850 million,\nwhen I proposed that, that was a little like getting between a hog\nand the bucket. (Laughter.) One Senator protested that giving the\nmoney back to the people was an unnecessary expenditure of public\nfunds. (Laughter.)\nWhen the eight years end in January, we will have\nreturned to the people of California in rebates, in tax cuts and\nthings such as the inventory tax being changed, even in the cutting\nof bridge tolls, $5.7 billion.\nThe credit for our bonds, the credit rating by Moody's\nhas been lifted to triple, triple A which is the highest rating\nyou can get -- credit rating. The raise from AA to AAA alone\naverages saving one and a half percent interest on the interest you\nhave to pay on your bonds and that means hundreds of millions of\ndollars of savings.\nIn the meantime, I have vetoed and our Republicans in\nthe legislature have upheld the vetos on over $151/2 billion in\nadditional spending proposed by our opponents. The budget today,\nwithout those vetos, would be over $13 billion, instead of the\npresent very extensive $10 billion.\nLet me tell you what it's like. I shouldn't do this\nbecause it might discourage Don and he might want to change his\nmind. (Laughter.) But I tell it to you because I want you to know\nhow much a Don Peterson is needed in Sacremento.\nSaturday, they'll recess and go home for the election.\nBetween now and then, in 48 hours, there will be pandemonium such\nas you've never seen in what are supposed to the the two deliberative\nbodies of our legislature. The clock will be stopped on Friday night\nand they will go into the small hours of the morning and they will\nbe considering and they will be passing judgment on more than 800\npieces of legislation, including bills that involve hundreds of millions\nof dollars in spending.\nMORE\n- 5 -\nAnd about in the wee, small hours of the morning before\nSaturday and their anxiety to get home, there will be rivalry and\nmirth on the floor, there will tricks played on other legislators,\nthere will be amendments added to bills that won't even be read.\nI speak from experience because this is what has happened under their\nleadership ever since I have been in Sacremento.\nLast year, one of our legislators had to leave the\nchamber in those small hours. When he came back, found he had voted\non four bills while he was gone. When he stood up to protest, he\nwas declared out of order.\nDown to my desk the last year came 450 bills that were passed\nin 18 hours of almost continuous sitting there. They included $250\nmillion in additional spending. The same thing will take place in\nthese next few days.\nYesterday, in a committee hearing, rushing its business\nthrough, having to do with appointments to the Parole Board and to\nthe Youth Authority, the committee refused to hear members of those\nboards as witnesses, but did give all the time they wanted to\nrepresentatives of the Prisoner's Union who wanted to complain about--\nregister their complaints as to some of the appointments suggested\nfor those particular boards. This is what takes place. This is\nwhy the people have got to know more about those who represent\nthem in government and what they stand for.\nThis is why you have to ask -- incidentally, ask Barry\nKeene -- you might ask him how did he vote on the bill to exempt his\nparty from telling the people of California what its platform was\nfor the coming election. Ask him where he has stood on a number of\nthe other things, where he stood on limitations.\nWhy should a legislator, for example, be able to introduce\na program that would cost $300 million additional in the first year\nand within four years would cost a billion dollars a year and pretend\nthat there is no additional cost and make no effort whatsoever to\npropose a method for paying for it? And, yet, these things take place.\nToday, a gathering like this in many circles is referred to\nas the gathering.ofethe fat cats. That's what Republicans are all\nsupposed to be. We've heard that for a year and a half. Look around\nyou. You're a pretty good cross-section of America. I've never\nbeen able to figure why a rich Republican is a fat cat and a rich\nDemocrat is a public-spirited philanthropist. (Laughter.)\nWe have a candidate running for the Controller's office\non the other side, Assemblyman Court. He spend $690,000 on the\nprimary to win the nomination and $600,000 of it came from two\ncontributors. And we're supposed to be party with the fat cats.\nNo, our party has an opportunity to represent the one\nspecial interest group -- and we've heard a lot about special interest\ngroups -- the one special interest group that hasn't had enough\nrepresentation in government. That special interest group is made\nup of Democrats, Independents, Republicans, you name it. It's made\nup, crosses every ethnic and racial line, every religious line,\ngeographic line, it's scattered across the whole United States and\nup and down this state. They're just Americans who ask of freedom\nnothing but freedom itself, who ask nothing of government except\nto be left alone to the extent possible. These are the Americans\nthat get up in the morning and send their kids to school, and go to\nwork, and pay their bills, and support their church and charity.\nThese are the unsung heros of America and they need representation\nin government. And I claim that the philosophy of our party, the\nmandate of 1972 that still exists, that philosophy is more akin to\ntheir hopes and dreams and aspirations than anything that our\nopporents can claim or that they represent.\nTherefore, I beg of you, send Don Peterson to\nSacramento. I know that the new governor, whoever he may be, in\nJanuary will be the first governor in 22 years who will inherit a\nbalanced budget and a surplus and will not have to face the necessity\nof a new tax program to pay for the previous year's spending.\nMORE\n- 6 -\nBut send him up there because we need to maintain that\npower. I don't say that we can get a majority in one election for\nthe legislature. We're too far outnumbered. But we can prevent them\nfrom passing that two-thirds mark to where they could override the\nvetos of a Republican governor and thus, be able to add their\n$151/2 billion in spending.\nSo, ring doorbells and knock on doors and contribute\nto the best of your ability and do everything you can to see that\nDon Peterson represents the Second District in the Assembly and you\nwill be doing yourself a very great favor.\nThank you very much.\n(Applause.)\nEND\n%\nOFFICE OF GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nRELEASE: FRIDAY .Ms.\nSacramento, California 95814\nSEPTEMBER 6, 1974\nClyde Walthall, Press Secretary\n916-445-4571\n9-5-74\nPLEASE GUARD AGAINST PREMATURE\nRELEASE\nEXCERPTS OF REMARKS BY GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nSacramento Host Breakfast\nSeptember 6, 1974\nThis is the last time we shall break bread together under these\nsame circumstances. It seems only yest erday, and yet it has been\neight years since I first began telling you how much we had saved on\npaper clips. And I might add eight of the most exciting, challenging\nand personally satisfying years of my life.\nI have learned many things. If you have an interest in genealogy,\nmay I suggest a term in public office? It is the cheapest way you\nwill ever find to get a thorough research of your family tree.\nI have also learned that politics, which is often called the\nsecond oldest profession, has a great similarity to the first\nOver these eight years, as we have met at this Host Breakfast,\nI have tried to give you something of a State-of-the-State report,\nsumming, up where we are and where we hope we are going. Maybe it would\nbe more appropriate today to do something akin to Washington's\nfarewell address, but I won't.\nLet me recap a bit. In our first meeting, I told you I did not\nknow whether I had been elected governor or appointed receiver. It\nwas the time of the Great Society and California had been caught up\nin the explosive growth of government's size and cost. New and\nglittering social reforms had been instituted on a buy now, pay later\nplan and \"later\" was already upon us. California was virtually\ninsolvent, with outgo exceeding income by more than a million dollars\na day.\nThe teachers' retirement system was an unfunded actuarial nightmare\na potential $4 billion fiscal time bomb threatening every property\nowner in the state. The great Water Project was underfunded by several\nhundred million dollars simply because the original bond issue was\nbased on what they thought the people would approve, not what the\njob would actually cost. Welfare costs and caseload had begun a space\ntrip fueled by the prevalent Great Society philosophy.\nThe crime rate was soaring, but every effort to pass effective\ncrime laws was stopped in a legislative committee imbued with the same\nphilosophy and dominated by permissiveness.\n1\nHost Breakfast\nState government needed a fresh, objective and analytical look\nat where we were, where we were going and how we expected to get there;\nan inventory as it were, of problems, programs and possible pitfalls.\nMany of you here participated in that objective analysis through the\nbusinessman's task force, the first of many such efforts to utilize\nthe most creative brains and talent in our state to solve California's\nproblems.\nOur goal then was to meet government's legitimate functions\nwithout allowing new programs to proliferate;\n--to cut out all waste and duplication;\n--to streamline government in every way we could so that the\ntaxpayers would get a dollar's worth of service for every dollar spent.\nAnd if there were any dollars left over, to make sure they were returned\nto the people. This last, I might add, flies right in the face of a\ngovernmental mentality that regards a good tax dollar as one you spent\nyesterday. The first time we fought our way clear of red ink the then\nDirector of Finance, Cap Weinberger, informed me we would have a $100\nmillion surplus. He was sure there would be more than $100 million\nworth of spending proposals once the news got out. I said \"Let's\ngive it back to the people.\" He said: \"It's never been done before.\"\nWell, an actor had never been governor before, so we did it in the\nform of a 10 percent rebate on your income tax.\nThat became the first of three such rebates one for $250 million\nand last year's $850 million surplus, which was returned by way of\nrebates in the sales and income tax.\nWe enacted the first comprehensive property tax relief program in\nour state's history; we have adopted special property tax relief\nprograms for senior citizens; tax credits and deductions to help\nrenters; cut the inventory tax in half and rolled back school tax\nrates this year in 55 percent of our state's school districts. This\nyear, for the first time in 23 years, the average property tax rate\nin California declined.\nI know the impact of this tax relief has been somewhat obscured\nand overshadowed by inflation. But we have made progress. A few\nyears ago, California was fifth among the western states in average\ntax rates. We have now dropped back to seventh, even though many\nother states do not have all the different kinds of taxes we do.\n2\nHost Breakfast\nAt the end of the current fiscal year, the total tax relief\nenacted and put into effect during these past eight years will amount\nto more than $5.7 billion.\nAnd next January, the incoming governor of California will, for\nthe first time in 22 years, inherit a balanced budget with a surplus\ninstead of a budget deficit.\nI would not want you to think I h ve forgotten about the paper\nclips and typewriter ribbons entirely.\nOne of the things I am proudest of is the fact that for the\nfirst time in memory we were able to actually reduce the amount of\ngovernment records stored away. It was only 3 percent last year but\nthat meant:\nwe didn't have to buy 4,500 new filing cabinets, and\nwe didn't have to find 24,000 square feet of building space\nto store those unneeded filing cabinets.\nCrime\nWe have tried to approach the crime problem from many directions.\nWe put into operation the country's first computer to computer crime\ninformation network; created the Crime Technological Research\nFoundation to encourage development of modern crime fighting methods\nand expanded the mutual aid program to give local police the help\nthey need in controlling riots and other major emergencies. And,\nduring one brief period when we had a temporary change in one or two\nlegislative committees, we put new laws on the books providing for\nstronger penalties against rape, robbery, burglary and drunk driving.\nWe passed a sweeping drug inventory control program to combat drug abuse.\nAnd when the people, by a 2 to 1 vote, reversed the state Supreme\nCourt ruling aginst capital punishment, we were able to get legislation\nputting it back in the statutes.\nAll this has slowed down the increase in crime. But it has not\naccomplished all that we know must be done to protect the people.\nHowever, we are leaving to those who come after us a blueprint to\nfollow in such areas as court reform, streamlining the criminal\njustice system and new laws to make sure the heroin pushers and\ncriminals who use a deadly weapon will go to prison when they are\nconvicted.\n3 -\nHost Breakfast\nNow this comes as a great surprise to some, but education\nwas one of our top priorities. In these eight years, we have more\nthan doubled\\the amount of state aid going to public schools and our\nuniversity and college system; the budget for community colleges has\nmore than tripled and state funding of student scholarships and loans\nis nine times what it was eight years ago.\nThe Teachers' Retirement fund is 0 longer an unfunded $4 billion\nliability. It is now on a sound financial basis. The water plan is\nnearing completion, without any new bond issues and our credit rating\nby Moody's has gone to triple A.\nOur hospitals for the mentally ill have dropped in patient\npopulation from 26,000 to 7,000 and we have developed a program of\nlocal mental health care clinics that has become a model for the country\nFinally, as you all know, we did something no other state was\nwilling to try. We took on the welfare program and proved that\nwelfare can be reformed at the state level with great savings to the\ntaxpayers and better provision for the deserving needy.\nJust 3½ years ago, early in 1971, the welfare rolls in our state\nwere growing by 40,000 a month. For almost 3½ years this has not been\nSO. They are going down, not up. The savings to the taxpayers\napproaches $2 billion and the truly needy have had their grants\nincreased to meet the rise in cost of living.\nWe have also expanded the Medi-Cal program to relieve counties of\nthis burden. Washington has taken a number of our experts back to\nthe Potomac to help spread these reforms into every state in the Union.\nLast year the welfare rolls were reduced nationally and almost\nhalf of the decline occurred in California. The rest came in states\nwhich have followed our example.\nWe also reintroduced something that had been missing from public\nassistance for a long time: the work ethic. Our various work\nincentive programs in California put more than 75,000 recipients into\nregular jobs in the past year, including 47,000 who entered the job\nmarket because of the Community Work program we instituted as part\nof our reform in 35 California counties. This is an experiment HEW\nallowed us to try in which able-bodied welfare recipients perform\nuseful community work for their welfare grants.\n4 -\nHost Breakfast\nBut we have learned that reforming any part of government\nand expecting it to stay It crmed is like going over Niagara Falls\nin a barrel the hard way upstream. We have had to fight a continual\nbattle against those who call our community work program slavery in\nspite of its success.\nSome months ago, we put together another task force to take a\nfresh look at welfare, to see if ther were additional steps we could\ntake to tie down any loose ends that may have developed because of\ncourt rulings or federally mandated laws.\nThis included a sweeping review of one area of welfare that is\nnot even part of the national welfare program: food stamps.\nWe did not include them in our first welfare reform because they\nwere entirely a federal program, run and directed from Washington,\nalthough some parts of the eligibility process are delegated to local\ngovernments.\nOur task force found a nightmare of fraud and abuse in the food\nstamp area.\nToday, I am submitting to the California legislature and to\nCalifornia's congressional delegation a comprehensive report outlining\nthe areas of abuse that exist in these programs, along with specific\nrecommendations for reforms.\nLaunched in 1961 as a small pilot project involving 367,000 people\nand costing only $26 million it has become a loosely run operation that\nby the middle of next year will be offering a welfare subsidy to 16\nmillion people at a cost exceeding $4 billion. Some members of\nCongress say unless the growth curve is reversed, 60 million people\nwill be eligible in the next few years and the costs can be expected\nto skyrocket even faster if past experience is any guide.\nRiddled with abuses, the whole program is a multi-billion dollar\nadministrative nightmare, taking up two-thirds of the Agriculture\nDepartment's budget. From what we have discovered in our review, the\namount of fraud and abuse is probably enormous.\nLike many other government efforts to solve a problem, the program\nitself has become the biggest problem.\nThe eligibility rules are ridiculous. One applicant in California\nclaimed to be a full time gold prospector. That was his way of meeting\nthe work requirement and become eligible immediately for food stamps.\nHost Breakfast\nAnother case involved an exconvict who used forged credentials\nto obtain a $16,500 a year job as a hospital administrator. Then he\nfalsely claimed his monthly salary was only $300 and obtained $1, 400\nin bonus food stamps. At least, in this case, he has been convicted\nof a variety of criminal charges.\nOne enterprising young lady managed to get herself exempt from\nthe work requirement because she was er colled more than half time at\none of our universities studying witchcraft.\nThe county welfare\ndepartment called to see if this was an approved course of study,\neligible for the work exemption, they were informed it was and she\ngot her food stamps.\nAmericans are a generous and compassionate people, they do not\ndeserve this kind of abuse and fraud. Businessmen have been angered\nwith justification because food stamps and the welfare system are\nbeing used to finance prolonged strikes. This makes government a\npartner on one side of labor disputes rather than a referee.\nOther citizens, standing in the check-out line at the market,\nsimply cannot understand why the able-bodied fellow in the same line\nis buying T-bone steaks with food stamps their taxes paid for and\nthey have trouble affording hamburger.\nAt a time when food stamps are rolling off the presses at the\nrate of $20 million a day, there is an unbelievably casual attitude\ntoward safeguarding food stamps in transit and making sure they get\nto officials responsible for their distribution.\nIn one case in California, $90,000 in food stamps was stolen in\na post office burglary. In another case, $455,000 in food stamps were\ndelivered after hours to a county welfare department. When the janitor\non duty refused to accept or sign for them, they were turned over to\nthe sheriff's department.\nFood stamps are easily counterfeited. In one case we discovered\nthree people were arrested and federal agents confiscated $1.3 million\nin phony food stamps, along with the equipment used to produce them.\nThe report we are submitting to our own legislature and to\nWashington contains detailed and specific recommendations for reforms.\nOne immediate need is to transfer the entire food stamp program\nfrom the Agriculture Department to the Department of Health, Education\nand Welfare. Secretary Butz has publicly urged that this be done.\nPolicing welfare is a difficult enough task without complicating it by\ntrying to run it through a maze of different agencies, each drafting\nand\nprocedures.\nHost Breakfast\nThere must also be a general tighening up of the whole food\nstamp program, including new federal rules to:\n-Require the federal government to assume complete responsibility\nfor assistance to aliens.\n--Require able-bodied students to be subject to the same work\nrequirement as any other food stamp applicant.\n--Allow welfare departments to rc er food stamp recipients to\nunion-related jobs, and impose more realistic requirements for self-\nemployed recipients.\nThere should be a minimum age for receiving food stamps and the\nfederal regulations must be changed to permit welfare departments to\nnotify parents when their minor or student children apply for food\nstamps. The taxpayers should not be financing runaway teenagers nor\nshould food stamps be available to students who are being fully\nsupported by their parents.\nWe also would like to see an Earnings Clearance System similar\nto the one we established in our welfare reform. This would allow a\ncheck on actual earnings of food stamp recipients against the amount\nthey report in their applications. This is not done at present and\nthe chance for widespread abuse is obvious.\nFinally, our report also contains specific recommendations\ndesigned to minimize the potential for loss, theft or counterfeiting\nfor food stamps, by making government more accountable for safeguarding\nfood stamps from the printing plant to eventual redemption.\nFood stamps are as negotiable as money, and they should be\nprotected as public monies are when transferred from one place to anothe\nI am urging our Congressional delegation to immediately make these\nreforms a top priority. And I urge the new state legislature, which\nstarts in December this year, to give equal priority treatment to\nthe other welfare reforms we have found to be necessary.\nWe must never tolerate cheating and abuse in a program intended to\naid the poor. But in this time of runaway inflation, there is addition:\nreason to curb unnecessary spending. Inflation is caused by one thing\nonly government spending more than it takes in.\n- 7 -\nHost Breakfast\nThis, of course, refers to the federal government. But in the\nnumerous welfare programs and categorical aids, efficient administratio\nat the state level can have a sizeable effect on national spending.\nWe cannot save a state dollar without saving a federal dollar at the\nsame time in many of those programs. Call it coincidence if you will,\nbut from 1960 through 1966 the cost of living rate was higher in\nCalifornia than in the rest of the COV itry.\nFor six of the last seven years of \"cut, squeeze, and trim, it\nhas been lower in California. I don't think it is a coincidence.\nWe have a two-party system. The adversary system is a built-in\npart of our political process. But our real adversaries are the\nproblems we face, not each other.\nThere is only one lasting way to assure that the needs of the\npeople will be the major consideration of their government: make every\nlevel of government more visible, more accountable. A legislative\ncommittee killed our proposal which would have required anyone\nintroducing a spending bill to submit a tax bill to pay for it. That\ndid no service to the people of California. The people should know\nwhat areas of government spending are out of control and what has to\nbe done to bring spending back into line.\nThat was the whole purpose of Proposition 1, to slow down the\ngrowth of government spending so that it would not grow faster than\nthe income of the people. We often hear the phrase \"uncontrollable\nspending\" when the federal or state budget is being discussed. What\nthat really means is spending mandated by some previous statute which\ngovernment accepts as unchangeable. There is no government program\nwhich should be exempt from constant review and cancellation if common\nsense indicates it is not worth its cost to the taxpayer.\nWe did not succeed in doing all the things we tried to do or\nwanted to do, but I believe we demonstrated that government can be\ncontrolled; it can be efficient; it can meet the legitimate needs of\nthe people without bankrupting them with higher and higher taxes.\n- 8 -\nHost Breakfast\nWe have heard a great deal lately about special interest groups.\nAs I look at so many familiar faces, so many of you who served\nwhenever called upon, lending your talents to help solve some problem\naffecting our state, may I say you are a special interest group and\nyour interest has been the welfare of California. I shall never\nforget you or cease to be grateful.\nGovernment by the people works wh: n the people work at it and\nin these almost eight years you have worked at it.\nPlease don't stop! I have learned something else in these\neight years there are other special interest groups whose interest\nis more personalized and limited in scope than the welfare of\nCalifornia. They never rest. Match them in dedication, in effort,\nand in vigilance. If you do any less, they will make that bear on\nour flag a COW to be milked.\n#####\n(NOTE: Since Governor Reagan speaks from notes, there may be changes\nin, or additions to, the above quotes. However, the governor will\nstand by the above quotes).\nI / 9\n10/15\nOFFICE OF GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nRELEASE: P.M.s, Wednesday,\nSacramento, California 95814\nOctober 16, 1974\nClyde Walthall, Press Secretary\n916-445-4571\n10-15-74\nEXCERPTS OF REMARKS BY GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nAmerican Trucking Association Board of Directors\nSan Francisco\nOctober 16, 1974\nIn the past year or two, we have been going through a prolonged\nperiod of uncertainty in America and the world. If you glance at any\nnewspaper, you quickly see an array of problems that would tax the\nwisdom of Solomon.\nThere is the energy problem--something you are rather familiar\nwith--declining productivity, strikes, high taxes, crime. All these\nhave an impact on business. The threat of war still hangs over the\nworld scene.\nBut the fundamental challenge facing America today is simply\nthe restoration of America's financial stability in a world economy\ndangerously out of kilter because of inflation.\nPutting our economic house in order is America's greatest\nimperative and it must take precedence over everything else.\nUnless we bring inflation under control, we can never expect\nto deal with any of the other problems we face as a nation or as\nindividuals.\nThe President has declared this to be a priority national goal\nand I doubt that anyone would disagree. The program he outlined to\nCongress includes a number of constructive steps: financial incentives\nto encourage capital investment for economic expansion, jobs and\nprosperity; increased food production; and efforts to conserve energy\nand reduce America's reliance on foreign oil.\nAll are necessary steps along the long road toward economic\nstability.\nIn all honesty, however, I must voice opposition to the proposed\nincome tax surcharge, however temporary that tax may be.\nTo combat inflation, we should be reducing excessive government\nspending, especially at the federal level and I submit it is counter\nproductive to increase government's revenues.\n-1-\nTrucking Assoc.\nIn his economic address to Congress, the President mentioned the\nfact that the federal government operated at a deficit in 19 of the\n25 years he served in Congress. By doing so, he touched on the primary\ncause of our current economic troubles. The truth is: there is one\nreason for inflation in America and that is simply that government for\ntoo long has been spending too much money.\nTwo generations ago, in the middle of the Great Depression,\nAmerica first began moving away from this country's historic commitment\nto balanced budgets and a free economy. It was then that the Keynesian\nphilosophy of planned inflation became official government policy.\nFostered first by the economic dislocation of the Depression and\nlater by the pressures of World War II, our country went into a decade-\nlong period in which government vastly increased its spending, its\nsize and its power.\nOur economic values were turned around. Instead of a model of\nthrift and solvency, government became a gross example of spend-thrift\nwaste and excess.\nThe experts who claimed they knew best told us that a little\ninflation is good for us. So we had a little inflation and then a\nlittle bit more. It was like giving a drunk another drink to sober\nhim up.\nSome of our nation's most able leaders, Dwight Eisenhower,\nEverett Dirksen and others, spoke out time and again against chronic\nfederal deficits, and a government that keeps on taking a bigger\nand bigger share of the national income.\nBut Congress was listening to the kind of people who told us\nwe don't need to worry about the national debt because \"we owe it\nto ourselves.\"\nFor a while inflation is like a warm bath---we sit back and relax.\nEverything seems easy and pleasant. In the euphoria of inflation's\nearly days, we failed to notice that output per man-hour had slipped.\nBy the 1960s we were lowest among the 14 major industrial nations\nin the free world. The country that introduced mass production, showed\nthe world how to build things better and sell them cheaper, suddenly\nfound everyone but us had what we used to call \"American know how.'\n- 2 -\nTrucking Assoc.\nMany products we used to sell so easily in foreign markets\nsuddenly became noncompetitive. And the world's greatest trading\nnation found itself for the first time in this century with a balance\nof payments deficit.\nIt is necessary to recall these historic trends if we are to\nunderstand what has happened to our economy. If you want to know\nwhich way to go in the future, you have to know which path you took\nin the past and where you stepped in a gopher hole along the way.\nThe tragedy is that our inflation problems are not the fault of\nthe free market system. We stumbled into inflation because we strayed\ntoo far away from the free market concept. Too many of us, and that\nincludes business, turned to government for answers that seemed\neasier than the hard competition of the market place.\nFor too many years, government has been growing in size and\npower, with no regard for the economic consequences. And government\nloved it.\nBut it is time for us to realize we have had too much government,\ntoo much red tape, too many taxes and too many regulations. Private\nbusiness and industry is the most over-regulated, overtaxed and\nunder-appreciated part of America's society. The simple truth is\nthat free enterprise in America is no longer free.\nIf we are ever to bring inflation under control, we have got to\nstart rooting the causes of inflation out of our system.\nAnd the greatest single cause of inflation is government itself.\nUnnecessary restrictions, red tape and regulations are robbing\nour people of the prosperity that is rightfully theirs.\nIn trying to perfect one of his inventions, Thomas Edison once\ntried 28,000 experiments and all were failures.\nWhen he was asked if he was not discouraged, he said, \"No. Now\nI know 28,000 things that won't work.\"\nThose who advocate more and more government regulation have been\nexperimenting for 40 years, trying to create an economic system in\nwhich everyone can somehow be made more prosperous by the toil of\nsomeone else. It is time they recognized how many things don't work.\n- 3 -\nTrucking Assoc.\nInstead, they have cast industry and business in the role of\narchvillain, accusing you of monopoly powers, excess profits and of\ndefrauding the consumer.\nBut the real danger today is government's monopoly power over\nindustry and business. No one is regulating the regulators.\nIn Washington, the United States Senate resorted to a filibuster\nto halt a so-called consumer protection bill that would have vastly\nincreased government's power to control every facet of production and\nmerchandizing in America. They will try again. That bill will come\nlack and eventually be passed unless we make up our minds to turn\ngovernment around and tell them \"enough already.\"\nRight now, there is a lot of talk about government action in\nthe rapid transit field. Everyone is looking greedily at gasoline\ntaxes to pay not only for streets and highways, but for rapid transit,\nair pollution controls and even for planning which is a term they use\nto cover anything else they may think of.\nGovernment's track record in solving problems does not exactly\ninspire confidence. Let us look at one of your competitor industries\nthat was in business long before trucks were invented.\nA hundred years ago, the railroads were thriving. We have\naccepted a rewrite of history that would have us believe government had to\nregulate the railroads because of the excesses of early industrial\nbarons who built and ran the railroads. The truth is government was\ninvolved in railroading from the start and the railroads are a classic\nexample of what government can do to ruin business.\nThe President has called for a review of all our regulatory\nagencies. I support that.\nIt is time to start eliminating agencies which hurt more than\nhelp the consumer, the taxpayers and the businesses they regulate.\nThe Interstate Commerce Commission is a good place to start.\nI challenge anyone to prove there is a need to continue the ICC or\nthat it serves any useful purpose.\nIf it had been in business during the pioneer days, the 49ers\nwould still be trying to find out what the rules are for crossing\nthe Mississippi River.\n- 4 -\nTrucking Assoc.\nThis combination of red tape and high taxes is strangling\nindustry's ability to compete, to meet the demands of customers,\nto pay the wages of employees and to fulfill a necessary public\nservice at the least possible cost.\nFor half a century the railroads begged for relief from excessive\ngovernment regulations and claimed they could resolve most, if not all\ntheir problems, if they were free to operate as a private enterprise.\nTheir pleas fell on deaf ears and now we no longer have any private\npassenger rail service in this country.\nSo government took over the passenger trains and the first thing\nit did was exempt itself from the rules and restrictions that made\nit impossible to run a profitable private railroad industry.\nThe consumer does not gain when government takes over. He loses.\nAnyone who doubts that should take a look at the plight of the\nairlines. The Civil Aeronautics Board has decided it will no longer\nallow lower youth fares or discounts on international flights.\nSo what happened? Our international air carriers lost about\n$8 million in revenue. And the passengers found themselves paying\nhigher fares.\nGovernment regulations and red tape have perpetuated higher rates\nand higher costs, not just in transportation, but in almost every\nindustry regulated by government. And these days, almost every industry\nis regulated by government, coming, going and in between.\nGovernment regulations encrusted with bureaucratic barnacles\nare actually stifling the competition they were designed to encourage.\nSmall businessmen in America must spend 130 million man hours a\nyear filling out government forms. This adds $30 to $50 billion to\nthe cost of doing business. And that means higher prices for the\nconsumer. But the citizen taxpayer gets hit with a double whammy.\nGovernment has to spend between $15 and $20 billion a year to find\nplaces to stack all the forms it requires business to fill out.\nGovernment is the only business in the world which can continue\nto exist while ignoring every sensible rule of economics.\n- 5 -\nAmerican Trucking Assoc.\nWhen a business or an individual spends more than it makes,\nit goes bankrupt. When government does it, it sends you the bill.\nAnd when government does it for 40 years the bill comes in two ways\nhigher taxes and inflation. Make no mistake about it: inflation is\na tax and not by accident. Lenin once said, \"Through inflation\ngovernment can quietly and unobservedly confiscate the prosperity\nof its citizens.\"\nSomeone once said our government taxes everything except its\nimagination. But the encrusted bureaucracy, the ones with a vested\nself-interest in bigger government, go that one step further.\nThey have got an answer for everything except one that will work.\nRemember the great fuel shortage? You had better because it has\nnot gone away for long. Almost two decades ago, the oil and energy\nindustries were warning us that America was heading toward an energy\ncrunch. When it finally happened government was the first to cry,\n\"Why weren't we warned?\" And the next line was, \"We in government\nmust do something.' Something, of course, was massive governmental\nintervention, rationing, and even a demand that the government go\ninto the oil business.\nFortunately, the worst of the fuel crisis has eased. But does\nanyone believe it would have if we had instituted gasoline rationing?\nThey would still be trying to get the ration books distributed. May\nI warn you don't relax. Right now there are proposals in Congress\nto have government name two members to the board of each oil company.\nIf they do whose business is next?\nThe time has come to resist the Utopian schemers who pay only\nlip service to free enterprise.\nIt is time to ask ourselves: do we really believe in the free\nmarket? Or have we grown so soft we no longer relish its rugged\ncompetitiveness? Do we believe in closed cartels, a controlled\neconomy where government sets the price the producer will get for\nhis product, and the price the consumer must pay? And if there is\nany slippage on either end of the transaction, government puts up\nthe difference in the form of a subsidy paid for by the consumers\nand the taxpayers.\nI know you have heard this kind of talk before. I know your own\nindustry spokesmen have criticized over-regulation and high taxes.\nAnd some of you have heard me sound off on this subject because it\nis something I have been preaching for years.\nTrucking Assoc.\nBut the time for just sounding the alarm is over. We have to\nstart doing something to bring government under control.\nThere is only a very little time to make the right decisions,\nto free the productive capacity of America, to loosen government's\nstranglehold on our economy and on our pocketbooks.\nYou do not have to have deficit government if you raise enough\nhell so that those who run government are more concerned about what\nthe taxpayers think than the demands of special interest groups and\ntheir bureaucratic counterparts in government.\nI know government can be controlled if the people will work at\nmaking \"government by the people\" more than just a slogan.\nGovernment can be brought under control if enough people are\nwilling to stand the gaff and take the heat, and fight for common\nsense solutions.\nThe reason there is a cynical lack of confidence in government\nis because too many politicians are elected to office but never try\nto carry out their campaign promises.\nCampaigning becomes their occupation instead of working for the\nchanges our society must have if it is to survive.\nThere is only one way to make government bite the bullet on\ninflation, on high taxes, on all those things that should be a matter\nof concern. And that is to hold all elected officials accountable.\nMatch their performance with their promises, and if you find some who\ndon't measure up, vote them out of office.\nEither you will control your government, or government will\ncontrol you.\n######\n(NOTE: Since Governor Reagan speaks from notes, there may be changes\nin, or additions to, the above quotes. However, the governor will\nstand by the above quotes).\n- 7 -\n11/14\nOFFICE OF GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nRELEASE:\n.Ms., THURSDAY\nSacramento, California 95814\nNovember 14, 1974\nClyde Walthall, Press Secretary\n916-445-4571\n11-14-74\nEXCERPTS OF REMARKS BY GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nUnited States League of Savings Associations\nSan Francisco\nNovember 14, 1974\nIt does not take a Ph.D. to know the basic problem facing America.\nIt is inflation, and all the economic dislocations that have suddenly\nspilled out of the closet as a result of almost 40 years of deficit\nspending. Suddenly, America is forced to face up to something that\nevery businessman and every housewife has always known: you can not go\non forever spending more than you have without sooner or later facing\na day of reckoning.\nFor more than four decades, our people have been burdened with\nthe cost of massive social experiments, programs we were told would\nsolve all the problems of human misery.\nIt was all done with the best of intentions. We were told that\nit was for our own good. But the price was steep, and we have been\npaying it not merely in money, but in something far more precious:\na steady, unrelenting expansion of governmental control over almost every\nfacet of our lives.\nSomehow, no matter how many new programs we launched, the failures\nalways outnumber the successes. And every failure is followed by a\nbigger and costlier failure.\nBut let's face it, business itself in America has contributed\nto its own problems by turning more and more to government every time\na problem pops up. Government is always ready to oblige---with a little\nmore control and a tax increase. Business must recognize that government\nhelp leads to partnership, with government the senior partner every time.\nWe have turned our backs on our own great traditions. We built\nthis country on the twin pillars of faith and freedom. Neither freedom\nnor faith can survive without the other. We have turned to government\nonly when it was necessary to accomplish something that could not be better\nachieved in the private sector. And our national goal, until these past\nseveral decades, was always to reduce the need for government to the\nminimum consistent with an orderly society, thus insuring maximum\nindividual liberty.\n-1-\nLeague of Sr ings Associations\nWe have strayed from that course in the last several decades.\nAnd the problems we face are part of the result.\nThe recent bil shortage is an example. During the height of the\nshortage, there was a persistent clamor for more government controls,\nfor rationing. Government talked punitive taxes when it should have been\ntalking incentives.\nThe advocates of government controls went on a witch hunt\nfor\nscapegoats when they should have been looking for oil.\nFortunately, we did not heed their cries of panic. And there no\nlonger are lines at the gas stations.\nYes, we still have a long range energy problem that must be\nsolved, but the answer is not what they proposed: putting government\nin the oil business. But then who knows? They might have been as\nsuccessful as they have been with the Post Office.\nThe tragic, inescapable truth is: government does not have all\nthe answers. In too many instances, government does not solve problems.\nIt subsidizes them.\nGovernment does not produce revenue. It consumes it. The cost of\nill advised governmental tinkering, excessive regulation and wasteful\nspending has our private enterprise economy staggering under an\nintolerable burden of taxation, regulation and inflation.\nIt has affected every citizen and every industry, including your\nown. It is time we realized that profit, property and freedom are\ninseparable. You can not have any one of them without the others.\nFor forty years, we have been told that deliberately planned\ninflation each year is necessary to maintain prosperity. We were told\nthis was the New Economics.\nThose who still subscribed to classic economic theory knew that\ninflation is like radioactivity. It is cumulative. It piles up until\none day you find it is out of control as it is now.\nInflation today is the single greatest threat to our national\nwell being, to the prosperity of our people, threatening our very\nsurvival as a free society.\nThere is no mystery about inflation. It stems from one cause and\none cause alone\nexcessive government spending.\n-2-\nLeague of Bavings Associations\nThe only answer to inflation is a balanced budget: a systematic\nprogram to reduce government's debts and a wholesale effort to get\nrid of all the economic barriers that government has put in the path of\na prosperous economy.\nThe United States right now owes a total of almost $500 billion,\nhalf a trillion dollars. I know when you talk in sums like that it\nis difficult to picture how much of a burden that is. Perhaps a few\nillustrations will help.\nOur national debt is equal to:\nmore than 2½ times the amount of outstanding consumer debt; and\nfive times what business and industry spend on new plant and\nequipment in a year.\nThe interest alone on the national debt has become a staggering\nburden of almost $30 billion a year.\nIt is the third largest item in the budget.\nWithout that burden, the average family could have about $550\neach year to spend as it liked. Or if they wanted government to have\nit for some worthwhile programs, we could spend nine times what we\nspend on the entire space program.\n--or five times what we spend on agriculture, in an era when\nhunger stalks the world.\nor 20 times what we spend for pollution control; and\nthree times what Washington earmarks for education and manpower\nprograms.\nYou are more aware than most of the real cost of deficit spending.\nIt is causing critical dislocations in our private capital markets,\nwith government competing for the savings that fuel the free enterprise\nsystem.\nFor too many years, government policy has ignored the vital\nrole that saving plays in our economy. It has encouraged spending\nand discouraged saving.\nContinual deficit financing, year in and year out, is not the\npath to prosperity. It is the road to national bankruptcy. It is\nlike a self-fulfilling prophecy because the more the government goes\ninto debt, the more it must borrow. And the more taxes it must take\nfrom the productive private sector of our economy.\nYour own industry was built on the thrift of our people and you\nhave played a leading role in helping millions of Americans realize\nthe dream of owning their own homes.\nLeague of Savings Associations\nThe confidence and trust you have earned among savers across\nthe land has enabled you to lend tens of billions of dollars to\nconstruct and purchase homes. America has more individual homeowners\nthan any other country in the world. And the fact that every family\nhas the opportunity to own its own residence has been possibly the\nmost significant boost to our high standard of living.\nThe savings of more than 50 million Americans entrusted to\nyour\ncare have become the life blood of this country 's housing\nindustry. Without a steady flow of savings into institutions such as\nyours, it will be impossible to keep up with the continuing demand\nfor housing.\nYet instead of following policies that will stabilize our\ncountry's financial structure and the construction industry, government\nis pursuing programs that aggravate the problem.\nProbably the greatest problem stems from government's growing\ninvolvement in the money market and the home financing field. It is\nthe same pattern we have witnessed before when government sets out to\nsolve a problem by going into competition with the private sector.\nThe same government that sets the maximum interest rates you can pay\nthrows the rule book away when government seeks funds to finance its\nown activities. When the Treasury Department offers $1000 notes at\n9 percent interest while you are limited by law to a lower interest\nrate, it means a massive outflow of funds from savings and loan\nassociations.\nIf a private company had the power to fix prices, to manipulate\nthe money market to its own advantage and did so, the roof on the\nJustice Department would still be spinning.\nIf a private company could set rates for its competitors and\ndid it in a way that caused those competitors to lose business it\nwould be called unfair competition.\nIf a private company were guilty of rigging the market so that\nit was getting more and more of the business and its competitors were\ngetting less and less, they would call it a dangerous monopoly. And\nthe anti-trust division would be working overtime.\nBut that is what government has been doing, all with the best\nintentions, of course. When they drafted the anti-trust laws and\nadopted the regulations that guard against monopolies, no one\nanticipated a day when government itself would become the monopoly.\n- 4 -\nLeague of Savings Associations\nUnless the increasing trend toward more and more government\nborrowing is reversed, the time is not far off when government will\ndominate the home financing industry and savings and loan associations\nmay become little more than a memory.\nThat would be a tragedy for the nation.\nOver the years, your industry and others in the private financial\nfield have demonstrated that you can do a far better job of financing\nthe nation's housing needs than any level of government and at far\nlower cost to the consumers, the home buyers.\nThe whole history of government's direct involvement in housing,\nparticularly in financing, is a history of failure not once, or\ntwice, but time after time. The only really successful government\nhousing programs have been those in which government is an indirect\nparticipant, when it acts only as an insurer such as in the FHA and\nveterans' home loan programs.\nIn those programs, the financing is provided through private\ninstitutions.\nYet more and more federal housing programs are excluding the\nprivate financial institutions and going into this field directly.\nThis can only mean higher cost to the homeowners, along with\nthe inevitable red tape and foul-ups that we have come to expect when\ngovernment moves into areas where it has no experience and no\nlegitimate business.\nThere are things government can do not only to meet the housing\nneeds of America, but to bring inflation under control.\nIt can balance the federal budget and start paying off the\nnational debt so that it will not have to disrupt the private capital\nmarket.\nThen, it can take a long hard look at the excessive regulations\nit imposes on every industry and business in America.\nSome of those regulations are so obviously extreme they would be\nlaughable if they were not causing higher prices for all types of\ngoods and services.\n- 5 ass\nLeague of Savings Associations\nSmall businessmen in America spend 130 million man hours a year\njust filling out government forms. That blizzard of paperwork adds\n$30 to $50 billion a year to the cost of doing business and it means\nhigher prices on the products you buy.\nBut the cost does not end with the businessman's own expense.\nGovernment also spends between $15 and $20 billion a year just to\nfind places to stack all those forms and to finance an army of\npaper-shufflers.\nIt is time we call a halt to that kind of nonsense and to\nrevitalize the construction industry, the private financial\ninstitutions and help fight inflation, too.\nIt can do all this without any great new government programs\nor the spending and high taxes that produce inflation.\nCongress is now considering legislation that would, if passed,\nhave the effect of greatly expanding the amount of private investment\nmoney available for new, long-term mortgages. It would mean a flow\nof $16 billion in savings into your institutions alone---and much more\nthan that through banks, credit unions and other types of financial\ninstitutions.\nThe bill, which I know is familiar to all of you, would provide\na real incentive for our people to save---by giving every family a\n$1,000 federal income tax exemption on interest earned from deposits\nin savings and loan associations, banks, credit unions wherever\nour people invest their savings.\nThis kind of positive incentive would generate the capital\nnecessary to meet our construction needs.\nIt would help the saver, by reducing his taxes instead of raising\nthem. The $16 billion in savings and loans alone would be enough to\nprovide mortgage loans for 500,000 residential units, including 200,000\nnew homes. This, in turn, would stimulate 350,000 jobs in the\nconstruction and related industries and this would generate prosperity\nin other areas.\nTreasury is opposing this on the grounds that it would mean a\nloss of $1.8 billion of tax revenue for the federal government. I do\nnot argue with the figure.\nThep 6 -\nLeague of Savings Associations\nBut it is a short-sighted attitude, ignoring the fact that billions\nof dollars in new tax revenue would be generated by curing the problems\nof a slumping housing industry through private savings instead of\ntrying to dream up another government program.\nIt also ignores the fact that a continued slump in construction\nand housing will mean billions of dollars in government costs for\nunemployment and welfare benefits.\nI am told the average account in your institutions is about $4,000.\nWhat in the world is wrong with letting 100 million small savers earn a\nlittle more effective interest on their savings, when at the same time\nit will mean so much to the construction and housing industry?\nWhat is wrong with giving small taxpayers the same kind of tax\nbreak and higher interest return that is available to large foreign\ninvestors who can purchase high yield U.S. securities?\nIf the federal government really wants to fight inflation, it\nwill start adopting this kind of incentive to save and keep these\nfunds in our own domestic economy. Right now, government's policies\ndiscourage thrift. If a small investor earns $100 interest in a\nsavings institution and is a typical taxpayer in the 22 percent\nbracket, he gets to keep only $78 because income taxes take the rest.\nAnd because he has earned $100 gross through his savings, he might even\nfind himself in a higher tax bracket, which means that much more going\nto government instead of being retained where it helps the saver and\nthe economy, too.\nIf you want to fight inflation, if you really want to bring the\ncost of living under control and maintain America's prosperity, you\nhave to start encouraging the savings necessary to finance America's\nprivate industries. It is as simple as that.\nI believe we can control inflation. We can have a prosperous\neconomy, efficient government and lower taxes if we demand that\ngovernment take the steps necessary to make sure we do.\nOver these past eight years, I have had many enjoyable experiences\nin government. I have had the privilege of working with some of the\nfinest people I have ever known people drawn from all walks of private\nlife. Most of them are not career government employees. But in their\nshort span of service in Sacramento, I believe they have demonstrated\nthat government of the people and by the people can work if enough\nsincere people work at it.\n7\nLeague of Savings Associations\nWhen I went to Sacramento eight years ago, I had a belief that\ngovernment could be operated efficiently, using the same sound business\npractices you find throughout our private economy. Everything I have\nlearned these past years has reaffirmed that belief.\nWe took over a state government that was spending $1 million a\nday more than it was taking in; and we were the welfare capital of\nthe world.\nWe had no miracle formulas. What we did was to apply a little\ncommon sense to government.\nWe put a task force to work on reform at a time when our welfare\nrolls were growing by 40,000 new people every month. And after\nseven months of work, they came up with the most comprehensive reform\nprogram ever attempted in this country.\nDuring almost a year-long fight, the advocates of bigger and\nbigger government kep telling us the reforms would not work. They said\nthe caseload would increase instead of going down; we would dump a\nburden on the counties; property taxes would go up; the needy would\nstarve in the streets and we would have a $700 million deficit. That\nwas about 3½ years ago.\nWe are no longer adding 40,000 new people a month to the welfare\nrolls, there are almost 400,000 fewer people on welfare than when we\nstarted.\nAverage property taxes have gone down for 2 years in a row in more\nthan 40 of our 58 counties and 3 years in a row for 30 of them.\nThe taxpayers saved between $1 and $2 billion and we have been\nable to increase welfare benefits for the truly needy by 40 percent.\nThe $700 million deficit was an $850 million surplus which we\ngave back to the people in the form of a 20 to 35 percent state income\ntax rebate for most taxpayers and a 100 percent rebate for every family\nearning $8,000 a year or less. Perhaps the most satisfying result\nhas been the fact that our reforms have become a model for the nation.\nEven some Democratic governors are borrowing our ideas for welfare reform\nbecause they, too, have learned that the welfare monster must be\ncontrolled or it will bankrupt the taxpayers.\nThere have been other efficiencies and beneficial results from\nour experiment with citizen participation in government. We have cut\nthe time needed to process a driver's license, largely by introducing\ncomputer age management techniques.\n8 -\nLeague of Savings Associations\nThere have been a total of three income tax rebates; we have\nprovided a $1,750 property tax exemption for every homeowner, special\nprograms for property tax relief for senior citizens and renters,\ncut the inventory tax in half and reduced the tolls on state run\nbridges a total of 11 times.\nThere has been no reduction of support for essential services.\nWe have doubled the amount of state support for public schools at\na\ntime when enrollment was growing only 6 percent. We have more than\ndoubled the amount we put into higher education, too and our state\nprogram of scholarships for deserving students has been given a\n900 percent increase in funding.\nFor the first time in more than 20 years, the incoming governor\nin California next January will inherit a balanced budget instead\nof a massive deficit. In fact, we expect he will have a surplus in\nthe neighborhood of $400 million.\nWe do not have to accept chronic economic crisis if we have the\ncourage to demand common sense in government.\nThe key to progress is not a federal subsidy or another government\nprogram. The true secret of America's greatness is freedom, the\ndynamic working together of millions of individuals, each seeking\nan individual goal in a society that assures them the freedom to\nclimb as high as their own drive, ambition and talent can take them.\nI think we still have that same sense of national purpose. Our\npeople are capable of achieving whatever may be necessary to protect\nthe system that makes it possible.\nThey know their own worth and instinctively, I believe a majority\nof our people know what we must do. All that is necessary is a\nleadership that has the wisdom and the courage to point the way.\n######\n(NOTE: Since Governor Reagan speaks from notes, there may be changes\nin, or additions to, the above quotes. However, the governor will\nstand by the above quotes).\n- 9 -\nHel\nthe\nthe\nOFFICE OF GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nRELEASE: 12 noon\nSacramento, California 95814\nWednesday, Dec. 4\nClyde Walthall, Press Secretary\n916-445-4571\n12-4-74\nPLEASE GUARD AGAINST PREMATURE\nRELEASE\nEXCERPTS OF REMARKS BY GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN\nGovernor's Conference on Criminal Justice\nSacramento Convention Center, Sacramento\nDecember 4, 1974\nThe single most fundamental responsibility of government at any\nlevel is to protect us from each other. You are here because that\nresponsibility in the main means protecting the citizenry against\nthe criminal element that exists in any society.\nThis is what makes your job in law enforcement and this conference\non criminal justice planning so important. When we say we want to\nsolve the crime problem, what we really mean is that we want government\nto be able to guarantee every citizen that most basic of all freedoms:\nfreedom from fear.\nFreedom from the threat of muggers\nFreedom to be able to walk the streets\n--To take a holiday without worrying that your possessions may\nbe stolen while you are away or your house burned down\n--The individual freedom to enjoy all the other rights and\nprivileges of a society which has always cherished the individual.\nMan has yet to perfect a system to fully protect the majority\nat all times and assure the rights of every individual but that is\nour ultimate goal. And this conference is part of our effort, to\nstreamline our criminal justice system and make it more efficient in\nprotecting the law-abiding people of our state.\nDuring these past eight years, our primary goal at the state\nlevel has been to give law enforcement all the legal tools necessary\nto make our streets safer. I believe we have undertaken some of the\nmost sweeping innovations ever adopted to fight crime.\n--We established the California Council on Criminal Justice to\nimprove detection techniques and provide additional funding for state\nand local criminal justice agencies.\nThe state put into effect the nation's first computer-to-\ncomputer crime information network.\n--We created the California Crime Technological Research Foundation\nto encourage and develop scientific ways of fighting crime.\n- 1 -\nCrime Conference\n--We adopted stronger laws to cope with a rising tide of violent\ncriminal activity; we sought through law to control illicit drugs and\nthrough education to make our people aware of the dangers of drug\naddicition.\nDuring the decade of the 1960s, a new and ugly spectacle erupted\nin America: violence on our campuses and riots in the streets. We\nresponded to this, by expanding and improving the Law Enforcement\nMutual Aid program to assist local policy agencies in riots, natural\ndisasters and other major emergencies.\nThere have been many changes in many areas of governmental concern\nthese past eight years.\nBut one of the achievements that has not received all the attention\nit deserves is that California has developed America's most effective\nsystem of dealing with major civil disturbances and emergencies.\nBetter communications, improved training, and the Mutual Aid program\nmake for what is probably the most detailed program of planning to\ncope with emergencies ever devised.\nAs you well know, a confused and ill-coominated response by law\nenforcement can turn even a small scale emergency into a major\npotential disaster. Our goal was to make sure there would be no\nconfusion and no hesitation at any time to use the full strength of\nlaw enforcement to protect the people of California.\nComprehensive planning in advance every detail from logistics\nto communication- is the only way to achieve the kind of coordination\nyou must have to deal with major emergencies.\nWe now have an ability to respond quickly to emergencies whenever\nand wherever they may occur thanks to a program personally supervised\nover the years by Ed Meese, in which many of you here today took part.\nThis conference and your recommendations can have the same kind\nof impact on the entire criminal justice system. Ongoing programs\nsuch as yours are necessary because the problems associated with the\nfight against crime are constantly changing. Court rulings create\nnew difficulties for law enforcement on what seems to be an almost\nclockwork basis.\nThe findings of our Select Committee on Law Enforcement Problems,\nissued more than a year ago, provide a blueprint of the action we\nmust take to make sure that the guilty are brought to justice.\n- 2 -\nCrime Conference\nI believe the experience of the past eight years has demonstrated\nthat there is a cause and effect relationship in the crime rate. When\nwe passed a tougher law on drunk driving, the number of arrests went up,\nand the number of traffic deaths caused by drunk driving went down.\nWhen California toughened the penalties for rowdyism on campus\nand provided specific legal tools, the campus violence subsided.\nWhen we strengthened laws against armed robbery a few years ago,\nthe rate of increase in this crime flattened out.\nIf any of you wonder whether the technical advances you have heard\nabout are worth it, let me assure you that technology does play a\ncritical part in the fight against crime. If we hope to keep crime\nunder control in the computer age, we must constantly be searching for\nnew and more sophisticated ways of stopping the criminals in our midst.\nWhen sky-jacking became a national problem, electronic detection\ndevices provided a way to greatly minimize the ability of sky pirates\nto operate.\nIf every sky-jacker knew that he would face swift and certain\npunishment within weeks after he was caught, the problem would go away.\nThe same deterrence is readily apparent in other scientific\nsafeguards against crime. Automatic locking components on steering\nwheels have slowed down the number of automobile thefts.\nHome alarm systems and electronic warning devices have had an\nimpact on the burglary rate.\nOther things which fall into the category of simple common sense\nhave helped, too, things like the Secret Witness programs sponsored\nby our news media, the marking of personal possessions with identifying\nserial numbers.\nWe are all concerned about crime and its consequences. But\nconcern is not enough. We must translate concern into effective action.\nCrime is not an abstract problem, to be debated as some sort of\nacademic exercise. It is a daily threat to the lives and safety\nof our people.\nThe dollar cost alone exceeds $16 billion a year. But what price\ntag do we put on the tragedy crime brings to its victims?\nThe work of our Select Committee on Law Enforcement Problems\nemphasized the necessity of the type of action which your committees\nhave been studying.\n- 3 1.\nCrime Conference\nResearch on sentencing patterns in the 1960s demonstrated beyond\nquestion that there must be a more uniform policy in deciding which\ncriminals shall go to prison and which shall be eligible for probation.\nWe asked for a law that would require a mandatory prison sentence:\nfor all heroin pushers and for everyone who uses a deadly\nweapon in committing a crime. I would like to ask why such legislation\nmet instant death or premature burial in a committee of our state\nassembly.\nWe asked that California implement a suggestion of Supreme Court\nChief Justice Warren Burger by adopting a substitute for the so-called\n\"exclusionary rule. \"\nMany of you are attorneys, and I know you are familiar with the\nvarious court rulings that have handicapped effective law enforcement\nnot merely in California, but throughout the nation.\nMore than any other factor, the exclusionary rule on evidence\nhas become a legal loophole by which the guilty have escaped justice.\nThe law must be clear. It is the job of the courts to make it\nclear or we can never hope to have effective law enforcement.\nMore than a century ago, De Tocqueville said: \"To suppose that\na state can subsist, when its fundamental laws may be subjected to\nfour-and-twenty interpretations at the same time, is to advance a\nproposition contrary to reason and to experience.'\nWhen a policeman stops a car for a traffic violation and finds\na cache of drugs inside, there cannot be a blanket policy that\nprevents a court from considering this evidence. Yet that, in too\nmany cases, is exactly what the exclusionary rule means. A legal\ntechnicality that ignores the existence of a crime is not a logical\nnor a valid extension of Constitutional rights. It is a loophole\nand because it exists, the fight against crime has suffered too many\nsetbacks.\nWe must demonstrate to the criminals, to all who would break\nthe law, that we are deadly serious about the task of making our\ncities and states safe from crime.\nCertainly, our courts must always protect the rights of the\naccused. But we must also make certain the Constitutional protections\nwe all support do not become a shield for the guilty.\nPerhaps the single greatest need is a change in attitude, from\nthe permissiveness of the 1960s to a realistic approach to crime in\nthe 1970s.\n- 4 -\nCrime Conference\nUnfortunately, too many people, including those holding public\npositions of responsibility, persist in viewing crime as a sociological\ncase study rather than an urgent problem of public safety.\nThe attitude toward drug abuse is an example.\nIn the past decade, drug addiction became the most massive law\nenforcement problem in America. It caused tragedy for hundreds of\nthousands of young people and their families and it is responsible for\npart of the great upsurge in burglaries and violent crimes. In a very\nreal sense, drug abuse quite literally threatenes to destroy part of\nan entire generation of young Americans.\nDespite this undeniable truth, there still are those who seriously\npropose to go easy on the drug laws, to \"decriminalize\" marijuana.\nI am in complete agreement with Attorney General Saxbe that widespread\nmarijuana use would be the inevitable result.\nThat is why I have vetoed every proposal submitted to me that\nwould in any way weaken the fight against drug abuse, including the\nuse of marijuana.\nI believe any action that gives the appearance of tacitly condoning\nthe use of marijuana is a crime in itself---a crime against our very\nsociety. Our young people are a resource worth saving.\nI realize how difficult it has been for many of you to stand\nagainst those who favor permissiveness. And I know from personal\nexperience how widespread the misinformation has been about marijuana\nand its consequences.\nIt is little wonder that some of our young people were lulled\ninto accepting the drug culture when they witnessed prominent citizens,\nprofessors, even some politicians, scoffing at the concern many of\nus wereexpressing about marijuana.\nIn almost every meeting with young people, I have to answer a\nquestion that comes as an angry accusation about my refusal to go\nalong with lessening the penalty for use of marijuana.\nThey still quote those voices from the '60s who told them it\nwas no more dangerous than a martini.\nIronically, the very acceptance of marijuana by so many young\npeople has led to studies which now show how valid were our early\nconcerns.\n- 5 =\nCrime Conference\nEight years ago, the head of the Student Psychiatry Center at\nthe University of California was among those who dismissed the gears\nabout marijuana and called for legislation to make its use legal.\nNot any more. His own contact with those who came to him for\ncounsel and treatment has turned him completely around. He frankly\nstates he was totally wrong in his earlier statements.\nHis own research has convinced him that a chronic use of\nmarijuana leads to a deterioration of bodily functions that may be\nimpossible to reverse. And the impact on the mind is ever more\ndisturbing.\nHere is a man who once sided with those who said marijuana is\n\"harmless\" and subscribed to all the other claims made on behalf of a\npermissive attitude toward its use. Today, he has the courage not\nonly to admit he was wrong, but to warn others through his writing\nand speaking that there is no valid argument for makingmarijuana legal.\nEarly in this administration, we instituted a program called\nprobation subsidy. We regarded it as a step forward, one that offered\na way to steer some offenders out of the prison system by offering\nstate cash incentives to counties for every prisoner on probation.\nThe goal was excellent the result was not. When studies by the\nBureau of Criminal Statistics showed that our initial expectations\nwere too optimistic, we asked for a repeal of this program. Unfortunately,\nthe legislature has yet to act. It should do SO. The goal of our\ncorrections policy must be first and foremost the safety of the public.\nRehabilitation programs must be an alternative offered as an\nincentive only after offenders have demonstrated a sincere desire to\nregain a useful place in society.\nFrankly, I do not believe government has all the answers and\nfew governments ever voluntarily change things.\nWe must listen to the people and the people must make government\nmore responsive to the crime problem.\nA few years ago, after the Supreme Court outlawed capital punishment,\na mass movement on the part of our people forced an initiative on this\nsubject. And by a 2 to 1 vote, capital punishment was reinstated.\nThe legislature finally acted, because the people make their wishes\nunmistakably clear and the people were right.\n- 6 -\nCrime Conference\nThere is a role for the individual citizen in the fight against\ncrime. Our people must hold accountable every public official who\nwould throw a barrier in the path of effective law enforcement.\nThe individual, through his own vigilance, can be of great help\nto law enforcement by reporting every crime, by demanding swift\njustice and whatever reforms are necessary to make certain that the\nguilty are made to pay for their crimes.\nI do not pretend that the task is easy. Protecting freedom\nrarely is and that is what the fight against crime is all about.\nA year ago, when our Select Committee on Law Enforcement Problems\nissued its report, they emphasized the role of individual responsibility\nin a way that bears repeating. They said:\n\"Whether based on religion or individual ethical values, the\nultimate solution to the problem of crime will not be found without\nthe active participation of all our people.\n\"A more efficient criminal justice system is only a part of what\nis necessary to reduce the threat of crime. Possibly the most\nimportant factor is the attitude of the people themselves. There must\nbe greater respect for the law itself, for the principles of truth\nand justice.\n\"The police, the prosecutors, the courts and the corrections\nsystem can only do so much. In the final analysis, our system of\njustice is based on the principle of indivudal responsibility.\n\"If we are to solve the crime problem, our people ultimately\nmust demonstrate, in their daily lives, a moral and ethical fortitude\nnecessary to encourage and assure a greater respect for law---not\nsimply because of a fear of punishment. but because only the law-\nabiding can hope to enjoy a lawful society.\"\n######\n(NOTE: Since Governor Reagan speaks from notes, there may be changes\nin, or additions to, the above quotes. However, the governor will\nstand by the above quotes).\n- 7 -"
}