Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
147873491
label
Chronological-March 1993 [2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
147873491
contentType
document
title
Chronological-March 1993 [2]
citationUrl
collections
Records of the Office of National Service (Clinton Administration)
Eli Segal's Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
147873491
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-99904469-20130661F-029-002-2018
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
6855f0a3876988a3
ocrText
FOIA Number: 2013-0661-F
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Office of Origin:
National Service
Series/Staff Member:
Eli Segal
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
1296
FolderID:
Folder Title:
Chronological - March 1993 [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
66
2
7
3
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001. resume
[Personally Identifiable Information] [partial] (1 page)
01/00/1993
b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
National Service
Eli Segal
OA/Box Number: 1296
FOLDER TITLE:
Chronological-March 1993 [2]
2013-0661-F
rs2927
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - 15 U.S.C. 552(b)]
PI National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute ((b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information 1(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA|
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRAJ
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells |(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
Karen
DRAFT
O.K
March 24, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR BRUCE LINDSEY
FROM:
ELI J. SEGAL
SUBJECT: National Direct Marketing Corporation (NDM)
I have been thinking about the note you received on NDM, the
direct response business of Miles Rubin, and I would like to
formalize a response at this time.
NDM (directly and through its Strategic Response Division)
is a direct communications agency and has represented a wide
range of accounts including among others:
The Clinton Campaign
The Smithsonian Institution
Rock The Vote
Architectural Digest
The National Committee To Preserve Social Security
Very Special Arts
Inc. Magazine
Americans For Responsible Television
P.C. World
Chevron Travel Club
Made in the U.S.A.
The California Democratic Party
Nissan, U.S.A.
The Campaign For Military Service
The corporation's major stockholders in addition to Miles
are Equitable Life, Donaldson, Lufkin and Jenrette, and
Westinghouse Credit.
The agency is considered one of the most prestigious in the
nation, and it has demonstrated an ability to achieve superior
results for its extraordinarily diverse roster of clients.
At my urging, Strategic Response undertook the program for
the Clinton Campaign in May of 1992, at a low point in our
financial fortunes, and in short order, they achieved the
following truly remarkable results:
*
Provided approximately two million dollars of up front
credit to the Campaign to get the program underway.
*
Raised a net amount of approximately $15 million for the
Clinton Campaign, GELAC, and the Transition.
*
Produced and distributed over 150,000 action video tapes
for the campaign -- all without any additional cost to the
campaign, as these costs were included within the
fundraising amounts which produced the $15 million net.
Even a cursory review of the letters which NDM produced for
us will show their creative excellence and uniqueness of
approach, which not only brought in all the funds we needed but
gave us over 150,000 "Clinton Team Members" who became actively
involved in the campaign.
Miles Rubin (and Jon Rubin, president of Strategic Response)
came through for us whenever we needed them. It is my opinion
that their work, truly historic in its results, was one of the
important elements in our overall success.
EJS:ke
DRAFT
March 24, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR BRUCE LINDSEY
FROM:
ELI J. SEGAL
SUBJECT: National Directo Marketing Corporation (NDM
)
I have been thinking about the note you received on NDM, the
direct reso nse business of Miles Rubin, and I would like to
formulize a response at this time.
NDM
National Direct Marketing Corporation (directly and through
its Strategic Response Division) is a direct communications
agency and has represented a wide range of accounts including
among others:
The Clinton Campaign
The Smithsonian Institution
Rock The Vote
Architectural Digest
The National Committee To Preserve Social Security
Very Special Arts
Inc. Magazine
Americans For Responsible Television
P.C. World
Chevron Travel Club
Made in the U.S.A.
The California Democratic Party
Nissan, U.S.A.
The Campaign For Military Service
The corporation's major stockholders in addition to Miles
are Equitable Life, Donaldson, Lufkin and Jenrette, and
Westinghouse Credit.
The agency is considered one of the most prestigious in the
nation, and it has demonstrated an ability to achieve superior
results for its
extraordinally diverse roster of clients.
At my urging, Strategic Response undertook the program for
the Clinton Campaign in May of 1992, at a low point in our
financial fortunes, and in short order, they achieved the
following truly remarkable results:
*
Provided approximately two million dollars of up front
credit to the Campaign to get the program underway.
* Raised a net amount of approximately $15 million for the
Clinton Campaign, GELAC, and the Transition.
*
Produced and distributed over 150,000 action video tapes
for the campaign -- all without any additional cost to the
campaign, as these costs were included within the
fundraising amounts which produced the $15 million net.
NDM
There is no one of whom I can think who did more
substantively for the campaign even a cursory review of the
letters which produced for us will show their creative
excellence and uniqueness of approach, which not only brought in
all the funds we needed but gave us over 150,000 "Clinton Team
Members" who became actively involved in the campaign.
Miles Rubin (and Jon Rubin, president of Strategic Response)
came through for us whenever we needed them. It is my opinion
that their work, truly historic in its results, was one of the
important elements in our overall success.
EJS:ke
To: BRUCE Lini
from : E1: -
Subject:
T
23/03/13
11:27
NO.129
901
FAX TRANSMITTAL
PLEASE DELIVER THE FOLLOWING PAGE(S) TO:
NAME:
Eli Segal
COMPANY:
DEPT.:
RE:
# OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET:
3
FROM:
Miler Rubin
DATE:
3/23/93
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
THERE IS A PROBLEM IN RECEIVING THIS TRANSMISSION, PLEASE CALL
AT 915/599-1388.
OUR FAX NUMBER IS 915/592-6930.
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
March 22, 1993
MR. ELI SEGAL
Dear Eli:
I have attached a short statement, drawn as coming from you, which
may be more formal than you would choose.
Given the memo and its clear attacks on me personally, I would like
those involved to understand exactly what it is we did for the
campaign.
As to the National Committee we are merely a vendor and do not
shape their policies. In fact, it can be said that since we took
over the account it has been run with pristine cleanliness; at our
suggestion Roosevelt was terminated; and the operation has, in my
opinion, become more effective in representing its membership's
real interests through the efforts of what now amounts to 80-odd
personnel who work in the Washington office.
However, it is probably a mistake to get defensive with re
the committee as it detracts from the real issue which is
are, our reputation, and what we have done.
I think that my reputation in the corporate world and Nancy's and
my accomplishments in serving both charities and government are
something we can be proud of.
wh
MR0393.22
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
NO. 129
903
23/03/13
11:28
National Direct Marketing Corporation, (directly and through its
Strategic Response Division is a direct communications agency and
has represented a wide range of accounts including among others:
THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN
THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
ROCK THE VOTE
ARCHITECTURAL DIGEST
THE NATIONAL COMMITTEE TO PRESERVE SOCIAL SECURITY
VERY SPECIAL ARTS
I** MAGAZINE
AMERI ANS FOR RESPONSIBLE TELEVISION
P.C. WORLD
CHEVRON TRAVEL CLUB
MADE IN THE U.S.A.
THE CALIFORNIA DEMOCRATIC PARTY
NISSAN, U.S.A.
THE CAMPAIGN FOR MILITARY SERVICE
The Corporation's major stockholders in addition to Miles
are Equitable Life, Donaldson, Lufkin and Jenrette, and
Westinghouse Credit.
The agency is considered one of the most prestigious in the nation,
and it has demonstrated an ability to achieve superior results for
its clients.
At my urging, Strategic Response undertook the program for the
Clinton Campaign in May of 1992, at a low point in our financial
fortunes, and in short order achieved the following truly
remarkable results:
Provided approximately $2,000,000 of up front credit to
the Campaign to get the program underway.
Raised a net amount of approximately $15,000,000 for the
Clinton Campaign, GELAC, and the Transition.
Produced and distributed over 150,000 action video tapes
for the campaign -- all without any additional cost to
the campaign, as these costs were included within the
fundraising amounts which produced the $15,000,000 net.
There is no one who I can think of who did more substantively for
the campaign -- even a cursory review of the letters which they
produced for us will show their creative excellence and uniqueness
of approach, which not only brought in all the funds we needed but
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
gave us over 150,000 "Clinton Team Members" who became actively
involved in the campaign.
Over and above the pr mary campaign itself we again turned to Miles
and Jon Rubin to raise the funds we needed for GELAC
nd
the
Transition and they came through.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
3/24
R.hm
As discussed Need to more m
forward ON this L, 6 P.M. today
(Note: all group will be checked L, The
FBI . Yours is bruely (slitcal.) I colled
Bruce cloot th Ankansa, group, but Lave-
it spoken to hi- yet.
El.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 22, 1993
The Honorable Jimmy Carter
1 Copenhill Avenue, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30307
Dear President Carter:
Thank you very much for your kind letter of March 8th.
I greatly enjoyed the opportunity to hear of your initiatives
in Atlanta, Los Angeles, and Baltimore. Your letter was
similarly thought-provoking, and I welcome the chance to
continue our dialogue.
I appreciate your willingness to help us assess the
efficacy of our new initiatives. One particularly useful
affiliation could begin nearly immediately; I enclose a copy
of an informational packet from the Commission on National
and Community Service, which describes the President's Summer
of Service Program. We are hopeful that the Atlanta Project
and the Heal the World initiative will submit applications in
Atlanta and Los Angeles, respectively, for this program. Your
leadership in this respect would be most appreciated. We would
also be most thankful for your thoughts regarding this program,
as it goes forward.
Again, it was a pleasure and honor to spend time with you,
and I look forward to working with you in the days ahead.
Very truly yours,
Tl. cl.Sq.l
ELI SEGAL
Assistant to the President,
Director of the Office
of National Service
Enclosure
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 8, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR RICK ALLEN
PETER EDELMAN
BILL GALSTON
JACK LEW
SHIRLEY SAGAWA
SUSAN STROUD
MELANNE VERVEER
FROM:
ELI J. SEGAL
SUBJECT:
Enclosed Article
I enclose an interesting article from the Philadelphia
Inquirer. This paper has done at least four stories on national
service since February 26.
Note the benefit formula for this program ($8,800 + $1,000
health insurance + $5,000) A little richer than our pre-college
formula, but essentially the same.
I cannot tell if the local communities are contributing
money (or in-kinds). If not, is this just a rich VISTA program
(given the loan forgiveness) with extra training thrown in?
Also, note the role and reward for part-timers serving only
nine hours per week.
I have written to Amy Hart, the executive director. Do we
know all of the Title D people and have we opened up dialogues
with them? If not, we should do so as soon as possible.
EJS:ke
02/26/93
10:37
717 233 4723
COM COMM COLL
4
001/003
Pennsylvania Association of Colleges and Universities
800 North Third Street
Harrisburg, PA 17102
717-232-8639
FAX NUMBER: 717-233-4723
FAX MESSAGE
TO:
Eli Segal
White House Office of National Service
FROM:
Amy Hart
DATE:
February 26, 1993
NUMBER OF PAGES: 3 (including cover sheet)
MESSAGE:
For your information
02/26/93
10:38
717 233 4723
COM_COMM_COLL
002/003
Flyers whip the Devils
St. Joe's wins at buzzer
Recchi's scoring helps to ignite a vital victory. Sports.
Last-minute shot puts George Washington away. Sports.
The Philadelphia Inquirer
Friday, February 26, 1993
Pa. putting
SERVICE from A1
One of the first to sign up was Jack
community service into the fabric of
Keifer, 24, a Drexel graduate who
every American's life."
will combine his year of service with
Though It was born during the
grad-school business studies and a
a new spirit
Bush administration, the idea has
part-time job as a teaching assistant.
picked up swift momentum with
The idea, he said, is to marshal
President Clinton's call to draw
Drexel's resources for Intelligent at-
nto service
young people into national service
tacks on the problems in neighbor-
and repay them with breaks in col-
ing communities.
lege tuition.
"It's not just about giving $10 to a
The Pennsylvania corps hopes this
homeless person. not just about
Community volunteers
year to enlist 125 full-time and 200
working in a soup kitchen once a
part-time "corpsmembers." as they'll
week." Kelfer said. "Why don't we
start next month, many
be called. Over the next three years,
figure out a better accounting sys-
in Philadelphia. Tuition
the corps plans to recruit 400 full-
tem for the homeless shelter, or de-
timers and 750 part-timers.
velop an operating system so they
help is part of the pay.
Two of the first crop will be head-
ing for Drexel University to help
organize community service work to
By Howard Goodman
INQUIRER WRITER
be performed by Drexel students,
Hoping to revive the spirit of the
mostly in West Philadelphia
Peace Corps and VISTA, a new Penn-
Another corpsmember will go to
sylvania Service Corps is preparing
the University of Pennsylvania, to
can improve their storage and deliv-
to send volunteers into communities
coordinate volunteers aiding a meal
eries? Why don't we have our engl-
service for the homeless.
neers design better heating or refrig-
that need help.
Three will be bound for Temple
eration systems for them?"
Next month, 35 to 40 people -
University. to help the school's Cen-
In the end, Kelfer says, he'll have
teenagers, young adults and not-so-
young adults - will convene in Har-
ter for Public Policy run a number of
his community service experience to
risburg for a week of training, then
programs aimed at revitalizing a sec-
go along with an MBA.
fan out to beleaguered neighbor-
tion of North Philadelphia.
"I think It's going to be a great way
hoods across the state half of them
Three corpsmembers will be going
for college students to get into com-
munity service," he said, "and we'll
to Philadelphia - for a year of com-
into Philadelphia high schools to
help struggling students stay in
have a better corporate America
munity service.
school by turning them into mentors
down the road."
They'll be paid $8,800. When
for younger children.
Participants will get three weeks
they're done, they'll receive $5,000
Four will Join the Philadelphia
of group training - in the begin-
toward college.
In June, they'll be joined by an
Ranger Corps, the guides who roam
ning, middle and end of their service
Fairmount Park.
year - and attend 10 weekend ses-
additional 85 to 90 volunteers. help-
Others will work for the YWCA of
sions. They'll discuss the place of
ing the homeless, organizing town
Chester; the National Clearinghouse
service work in a democratic society
watches, teaching young children -
for the Defense of Battered Women;
and learn how to write a grant pro-
and, organizers hope, spreading an
the Atwater Kent Museum: St. to
posal or run a meeting. They'll keep
ethic of social responsibility.
seph's University, and World Game
journals of their experiences.
"As far as we're concerned, some-
Institute, a West Philadelphia brain-
In addition to their $8,800 in pay
one will be a success if. after the year
child of R. Buckminster Fuller de-
and $1,000 in health insurance bene-
is up, they spend the rest of their life
voted to solving global problems.
fits, they can use their final $5,000
being the community service direc-
"I see this as a win-win-win-win-
tor in a homeless shelter, or If they
payment as a tuition credit or to pay
win-win situation," said Ronnie Man-
back a federal loan.
take a social conscience to Wall
lin. director of Drexel's community
Street," said Amy Hart, the Pennsyl-
Corpsmembers must commit to one
service volunteer program.
year of service, with a limit of two
vania corps' executive director.
"Not only is It wonderful for the
About 100 people have applied so
years.
university to do volunteer work. but
Unpaid part-timers must agree to
far. Hart said.
we can help to try to find solutions."
serve an average of nine hours a
The project is financed by a two-
Menlin said. "As for students, I see
year $5.8 million federal grant and
week for three years. At the end of
this as changing their lives. To help
administered by the state Associa-
somebody else - who does that help
tion of Colleges and Universities.
more, sometimes?"
Pennsylvania's corps is one of
The corps hopes to build a cadre of
eight model programs funded by the
leaders for community service. "We
Commission on National and Com-
want to see If we can develop leaders
munity Service. established by Con-
in the field long after their year is
MORE ON
gress in 1990. Its self-proclaimed goal:
up." said Michael Camunez, a pro-
"to renew a spirit of civic responsi-
gram director.
bility and national unity by weaving
PAGE 2
02/26/93
10:39
717 233 4723
COM COMM COLL
003/003
THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER
lay, February 26, 1993
Project puts a new spirit to work in Pa
their service, they'll receive $2,000
will work in 15 schools, beginning in
toward tuition for higher education,
September. They'll help with a state-
payment of a student loan or a down
wide scheme to transform poor
payment on a first house.
schools into community centers, a
Hart said most full-time volunteers
reform strategy advocated by psychi-
will be recent college or high school
atrist James Comer, director of the
graduates, or students wanting to
Yale Child Study Center.
take a year off. High school students
In addition. the commission is sup-
can join, but only If they agree to get
porting more than 100 other commu-
their high school diplomas during
nity service projects for elementary
their year of service; the corps will
schools, high schools and colleges and
pay for the GED exam.
for a modern-day version of the Civil-
Because the pay is so slight, many
jan Conservation Corps of the 1930s.
young volunteers probably will live
In all, the commission has made
at home with their parents. Or room
$150 million in grants.
together. Some colleges are offering
That's not much spread across the
free room and board.
entire nation, but to those already
"Two people are quitting full-time
committed to community service.
jobs to do this," Hart said. "One is a
the mood IS one of high anticipation.
probation officer, and one's an ad-
Said Manlin: "I am so excited, I
missions officer at the college."
don't even know how to express it.
The Commission on National and
This is really coming together and -
Community Service has given money
I have a 10 year-old daughter, and 1
to seven similar demonstration proj.
really want the world to change. and
ects. One is underway in Boston; oth-
I see that this is how it can happen."
ers are getting started in the Missis-
sippi Delta, Georgia, Maryland and
For More Information
Oklahoma, and with Seneca Indians
Pennsylvania Service Corps.
in New York state.
1705 N. Front St., Second Floor,
In New Jersey. plans are underway
Harrisburg, Pa. 17102. 717-233-
for an Urban School Service Corps,
8577.
in which 150 full-time volunteers
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 26, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR MARCIA HALE
FROM:
ELI J. SEGAL ap
SUBJECT: Meeting with the President
As you know, we expect to introduce legislation on April 20.
To accommodate that objective, it is necessary for us to meet
with the President fo. 30 minutes prior to his departure for the
summit. While a decision memo will be in his hands by the end of
today, we will need the meeting to follow up on some of those
decisions.
Since Rutgers on March 1, the President has had one meeting
and a few brief phone calls on national service. While I know
health care is more complicated, timber more visible, and Russia
more frightening, national service is a signature program with
more upside potential for the President than virtually anything
else. If we do not get legislation introduced by April 20 and if
we do not get the President's time well before that, I fear that
we are going to get swamped by other priorities (particularly
health care) as we move forward.
Please let me know when we can see the President (from our
perspective, Monday or Tuesday would be better than Wednesday).
EJS:ke
Attachment
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
3/26
Marcis
I know the pressure movie under,
so I hesitate to add b it.
On other scheduling mothers,
(1) how do .I set clasure ON
April 20 ( pee the otteched
memo) ?
(2) despite his memo, I a-
not now cm enthurcastic
5-11-2844 of George Stevens'
awards cesemony. Before you
schedule the President, please
give me aN government Lo
weyh iN.
Rank, for r O-R help.
al
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 23, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR MARK GEARAN
MARCIA HALE
MACK MCLARTY
HOWARD PASTER
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS
FROM:
ELI J. SEGAL
SUBJECT: Introduction of National Service Legislation
We expect to have a piece of legislation ready for
introduction on April 20 -- a date chosen just after the Congress
reconvenes and which happens to be National Youth Service Day.
We have a few national service policy issues yet to resolve
which will require some of the President's time next week. I
will be in touch with Marcia about this within a day or two.
Secretary Riley has a few school finance issues to raise as well.
The legislation, coupled with reform of our student loan
system, could be unveiled when the President and Mrs. Clinton
reward approximately 100 young people, aged 18-25, for their
community service at a high-visibility Rose Garden event, ideally
at 10:30 a.m. (This event should not be confused with the more
muted photo opportunity on April 22 -- the President's Volunteer
Action Awards, incidental to Volunteer Action Week.)
Marcia and George are supportive of this event, and I would
like clarification that it is set so we can: a) move forward
with Secretary Riley and the Department of Education; b) move
forward with the authorizing committees and appropriations
subcommittees of the Congress; and c) make sure the event
achieves our strategic, legislative and communication objectives.
EJS:ke
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 26, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR HOWARD PASTER
FROM:
ELI J. SEGAL
SUBJECT: Enclosed Letter
There are substantive, political, and logistical issues
aised by the attached letter.
As you know, our plan is to introduce our piece of
legislation with Dick Riley on April 20. By no later than
tomorrow, you should be receiving a copy of our decision memo to
the President on national service -- a necessary precursor to the
introduction of the bill. Among other things, we propose a
meeting just after the Summit with Senators Nunn and Mikulski,
along with Kennedy, Wofford, Pell and Congressman Ford, to get
their input on national service generally and "post-service
benefit" specifically.
Frankly, we can easily buy into Nunn's and Mikulski's first
suggestion (with some caveats) and get them to invest in our
initiative in the process.
The second is a lot trickier because it is really about
appropriations jurisdiction for the President's initiative more
than the structure of the new entity. While Senator Mikulski
will be unhappy that we propose to combine ACTION and the
Commission (as opposed to what she proposes in the attached), we
believe our substantive result is very much in the spirit of the
program she initiated in 1990.
We need to respond to the letter. The President will
indicate (ideally by Monday) whether he wants a meeting with the
Senators, which could be our response. If so, we will have to
think through the agenda, particularly the jurisdictional issue.
Do you see any problem waiting until Monday (or Tuesday) to
respond to the letter? Should we make courtesy calls in the
interim?
Let's discuss.
EJS:ke
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 30, 1993
Adele Simmons
President
MacArthur Foundation
140 South Dearborn Street
Suite 1100
Chicago, IL 60603-5285
Thank you for your time and for organizing
the meeting with community leaders last
Thursday, March 22. The trip was a great
success, largely because of your effort.
We will follow up with the ideas that were
discussed.
Sincerely,
a
Eli Segal
Assistant to the President
and Director of the Office of National
Service
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 30, 1993
Bill Daley
Amalgamated Bank
One West Monroe Street
Third Floor
Chicago, IL 60603
Thanks for organizing lunch at the Chicago
Club with members of the Mayor's staff. We
found the discussion very useful;
particularly interesting was Chicago's
community policing programs.
We'll keep in touch as we develop the
President's national service program.
Sincerely,
a
Eli Segal
Assistant to the President
and Director of the Office of National
Service
I've la in Lovil with Ed Bedore
already. Hapefully. same good will come
from this 833m.
W
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 26, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR HOWARD PASTER
FROM:
ELI J. SEGAL
ev
SUBJECT: Enclosed Letter
There are substantive, political, and logistical issues
raised by the attached letter.
As you know, our plan is to introduce our piece of
legislation with Dick Riley on April 20. By no later than
tomorrow, you should be receiving a copy of our decision memo to
the President on national service -- a necessary precursor to the
introduction of the bill. Among other things, we propose a
meeting just after the Summit with Senators Nunn and Mikulski,
along with Kennedy, Wofford, Pell and Congressman Ford, to get
their input on national service generally and "post-service
benefit" specifically.
Frankly, we can easily buy into Nunn's and Mikulski's first
suggestion (with some cave ts) and get them to invest in our
initiative in the process.
The second is a lot trickier because it is really about
appropriations jurisdiction for the President's initiative more
than the structure of the new entity. While Senator Mikulski
will be unhappy that we propose to combine ACTION and the
Commission (as opposed to what she proposes in the attached), we
believe our substantive result is very much in the spirit of the
program she initiated in 1990.
We need to respond to the letter. The President will
indicate (ideally by Monday) whether he wants a meeting with the
Senators, which could be our response. If so, we will have to
think through the agenda, particularly the jurisdictional issue.
Do you see any problem waiting until Monday (or Tuesday) to
respond to the letter? Should we make courtesy calls in the
interim?
Let's discuss.
EJS:ke
J JAMES EXON. NEBRASKA
STROM THURMOND. SOUTH CAROLINA
CARL LEVIN. MICHIGAN
JOHN W. WARNER. VIRGINIA
EDWARD M. KENNEDY. MASSACHUSETTS
WILLIAM S. COHEN. MAINE
JEFF BINGAMAN. NEW MEXICO
JOHN McCAIN. ARIZONA
JOHN GLENN. OHIO
TRENT LOTT. MISSISSIPPI
RICHARD C. SHELBY. ALABAMA
DAN COATS. INDIANA
ROBERT C. BYRO. WEST VIRGINIA
United States Senate
808 SMITH, NEW HAMPSHIRE
808 GRAHAM. FLORIDA
DIRK KEMPTHORNE. IDAHO
CHARLES S. ROBB. VIRGINIA
LAUCH FAIRCLOTH. NORTH CAROLINA
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
JOSEPH I LIEBERMAN. CONNECTICUT
ARNOLD L PUNARO. STAFF DIRECTOR
WASHINGTON. DC 205 10-6050
ANTHONY J. PRINCIPI. STAFF DIRECTOR FOR THE MINORITY
March 22, 1993
The Honorable William J. Clinton
The President
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Mr. President:
We congratulate you on making an early and significant
commitment to a national service initiative. Given all the
competing pressures, it took an act of real courage to insist on
this new effort in the first year of your Administration.
As you know, we are not newfound friends of national
service. We represent the hard core of commitment to this
concept as a fundamental eiement in the civic compact we form
with each other and our country as citizens. We are prepared to
champion your initiative in Congress and in every available
public forum.
That is why we want to make two key suggestions about
elements of your proposal, before the plan takes definitive form
in legislation.
First, we understand fully that you want to create an option
whereby students could attend college and then discharge loan
indebtedness through national service. If, however, the amount
of loan forgiveness available through post-college service is not
kept commensurate with the educational benefits available to
those who serve prior to college, then the borrow-and-serve
option could easily undermine the incentives for the serve-and-
earn approach.
11
The simplest way to prevent imbalance is to make the
educational benefits as equal as possible for pre- and post-
college service. An alternative is to tightly control access to
post-college service to those who are willing and prepared to
serve in a capacity that requires advanced skills, such as police
work or teaching. Indeed, from an economic point of view, it
makes sense to take that step even if you make pre- and post-
college benefits the same.
Second, some care needs to be taken in ensuring that your
initiative meshes well with the full- and part-time compensated
service elements of the National and Community Service
demonstration program that Congress authorized in 1990, but which
is only in its first full year of operation due to delays
attributable to the Bush Administration.
Actually, the demonstration program could provide an
opportunity to phase in your initiative in a manner that
continues to test the best methods for recruiting and deploying
volunteers effectively. Your proposal appears designed to let
states, localities and private non-profit groups compete for
federal support, under the overall direction of either the
federal administrator or the Governors. That objective could
easily be achieved if you combine Subtitles C and D of the
existing demonstration program and rewrite the legislation to
promote flexibility and provide for post-college service. In
addition, the reauthorization of the demonstration program would
supply you with a ready-made legislative vehicle.
We have other, more detailed recommendations we would like
to make about how your initiative can best be structured and
stand ready to work with your staff as you move toward specific
legislation. Quick movement toward a final proposal is essential
to maintain its sharp focus and popular momentum.
Mr. President, we share your vision of national service and
simply want to keep it from being blurred by the exigencies of
the legislative process. Please let us help you make this vision
a reality.
Sincerely,
Sam Mum
Babara a
Sam Nunn
Barbara Mikulski
cc: Elisegal
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 27, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR DAVID DREYER
FROM:
ELI J. SEGAL ep
SUBJECT: Enclosed Memo
Consistent with the President's calls for "public-private
partnerships" and "rights and responsibilities, as well as his
popular refrain that "we're all in this together," I think the
enclosed memo offers an excellent "big speech" opportunity for
the President to roll out community service in at least one non-
traditional way.
On March 1, the President challenged young people to
participate. On April 20, he will introduce legislation. In
May/June, he challenges universities to do better at a high
visibility commencement address. (And in at least one other
dramatic way of driving his message of service, I would use June
to couple a traditional service academy commencement address
(e.g. West Point) with a youth service commencement address (e.g.
City Year.)
I would like your thinking on this memo as well as your
reaction to a national service commencement address, perhaps done
in tandem with (but without in anyway trivializing) a more
traditional service academy address.
EJS:ke
CC: Marcia Hale
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 27, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR MARCIA HALE
FROM:
ELI J. SEGAL av
SUBJECT: Enclosed Memo
(1) If this works, here is what "service" would have on the
President's schedule:
March 1:
Unveils vision
April 20:
Unveils legislation
May 20:
Commencement Address challenge to
universities
June 10:
Commencement Address at Youth Corps
graduation, e.g. City Year
June 25:
Appears at opening of Summer of Service
(excellent visuals and political message of
defense conversion at Treasure Island, CA)
August 20:
Youth Summit in or around Washington, D.C.
(2) If there is any time on the timber summit schedule, we
could do a great service event. Bruce Babbitt tells me that one
product of the summit will include thousands of new service
opportunities in Oregon and Washington for young people --
clearing, reforesting, inspecting, etc.; excellent infrastructure
already in place. I know this is late, but it would be a special
opportunity to drive home a positive message, if you need one.
EJS:ke
Attachment
MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Susan
Rick and Dum Ett
Re:
challenge to college and university presidents
Date:
20 March 1993
In response to your note about aspects of a challenge from President Clinton to college
and university presidents, I would make the following suggestions:
Financial Aid
1.
use of college work study: The Higher Education Act now mandates 5%
use of annually allocated funds to place eligible (need-based, so not available to all)
students in community service positions. Additional funds are available through the
legislation to the institution for administrative costs associated with operating the
community service aspect of the college work study program.
Colleges and universities have the option of using a larger percentage or
all of their college work study allocation for this purpose. Senator Wofford is likely to
try to push this mandate from 5% to a higher percentage.
2.
loan forgiveness programs for students who choose public service jobs
after graduation: Several schools, eg Brown, Union, Stanford Law School (and other law
schools), UMass medical school, have such programs. Most are funded with private
donations. The UMass medical program loan forgiveness are funded from state funds
and require the recipient to practice in general medicine in Massachusetts for two years.
Other colleges and universities could establish similar programs with
private or state funds. They could be competitive programs (as at Brown) or available
more widely with state funds for service in targeted areas (eg, teaching, public safety).
3.
encourage use of state funds: States have available for use state college
work study funds and federal funds administered through the states for state student
incentive grants (SSIG). SSIG has a provision in the legislation that states can use part of
these funds to support students in community service work. Only two states use the
money for this purpose. The President could ask Governors and university presidents to
design community service programs using these funds.
4.
scholarships: Colleges and universities could make available scholarship
money (need- and/or merit-based) for students who have demonstrated a significant
involvement in community service, either prior to attending, during attendance, or upon
graduation. There are a number of schools with these programs - Stride-Rite Fellows at
Harvard, Starr Fellows at Brown, Gardner Fellows at Stanford. These could be funded
with private or state funds.
Many of these programs apply only to students who qualify for financial aid. This is
largely due to the opportunity we have had in the past several years to make
modifications in existing financial aid legislation. There are two concerns here: 1) that
we don't inadvertently condition receipt of financial aid on service, and 2) that some/most
programs be available for students who are not receiving financial aid, to be consistent
with the President's program.
Curriculum
This is the aspect of campus based service programs that is receiving the most
attention at this point. In the first couple of years of the campus service movements in
the mid-80s, we spent a lot of time thinking we needed to convince students to get
involved. Over the last few years we have been satisfied that we do not need to spend our
time getting students to serve - they have overwhelmed us with their numbers and their
enthusiasm. Their leadership has resulted in hundreds, maybe thousands of service
programs on campuses all over the country.
With a large number of university presidents involved and very significant
response from students, the issue has evolved to the point of trying to make connections
with the educational value of service. Most programs on campuses are not located within
the academic side of the university - more typically they are in student affairs or the
Chaplains office (egTucker Foundation at Dartmouth) with little or no connection to
faculty. The Campus Compact has led the way with encouraging faculty involvement,
course development, institution-wide curriculum planning.
At this point only a few schools really take this seriously (although almost all
schools have a few faculty who make the connection between classroom and
community). Rutgers is one, and Ben Barber has led the charge there. There are others.
The Compact runs a summer institute (funding from Ford) that brings teams of faculty
together from a campus to plan for curriculum efforts to integrate service and curriculum.
We have had good results from these institutes, but it is slow going compared to setting
up awards programs or scholarships. There are some specific ideas that could be put into
a challenge from the President.
Training
A memo is coming from Tom Ehrlich and Julien Phillips in the next week about
the role of universities in the training of community service program staff on campuses,
in schools, and community based programs like youth corps. This is a very important
issue and one that will be critical to the overall effort being able to grow quickly, support
the growth, and in ways that assure quality. The precedent we should keep in mind is the
role that universities played in the training aspect of the Peace Corps.
Research and evaluation
Admissions
Richard Danzig has argued for a number of years that the single most effective
way to get a lot of high schools to start service programs would be for the most selective
public and private colleges and universities to require, or at least heavily emphasize,
significant community service involvement in high school. Cynics claim that we would
then have high school students doing service only for their resumes.
Many colleges and universities would claim now that they look for community
service experience as one of a lot of values in evaluating applicants. There's a big
difference between current practice and having students check off community service on
their application materials and submit evidence of their service experience.
Awards
Public recognition of students, faculty, staff, alumni and/or community members
involved in service has enormous value to emphasizing the importance institutions place
on service. Every institution has many awards programs. Most do not cost much, if
anything.
Timing:
I suggest that Eli meet with the Executive Committee of the Campus
Compact on April 21 and discuss a draft of the President's challenge. Invite them to the
White House, and arrange for a brief discussion or walk-by from President Clinton.
The challenge could then be made at any one of a number of major
commencement addresses he is sure to be asked to give in late May and June. Will need
to give thought to accountability - collecting information about what the colleges and
universities do in response to the challenge.
Audience:
Major university commencement address with extensive press coverage
and communications work before and after to get extensive coverage of the challenge.
Mailing to all 3500 college and university presidents.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
FAX COVER SHEET
Office of National Service
Room 145 - OEOB
Washington, D.C. 20500
(202) 456-6444 Phone
(202) 456-6420 Fax
TO:
Alen Syal
ORGANIZATION:
FAX #: (718) 768-1681
PHONE #: (
)
FROM: E1: Segal
DATE: 3/18
NUMBER OF PAGES (including cover sheet):
COMMENTS: A, pee our conversation. I'll spuke to Bob
Kyr homorrow. Have a. 100A he.1. Lovete
Manibath, Yamin, KiaRa Ancl.
al.
(If you have any problem with the fax transmission, please call
(202) 456-6444.
The document accompanying this facsimile transmittal sheet is
intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it
is addressed. This message contains information which may be
privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure under
applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for
delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any disclosure, dissemination, copying or
distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the
contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this information in error, please notify us
immediately at (202) 456-6444.
March 18, 1993
Mr. Alan Segal
Bits & Pieces, Inc.
575 Boylston Street
Boston, MA 02116
Dear Alan:
This is to advise you that effective today, I am resigning
as a director and officer of Bits & Pieces, Inc.
Sincerely,
Eli J. Segal
EJS:ke
March 18, 1993
Mr. Alan Segal
B & P Publishing Co., Inc.
575 Boylston Street
Boston, MA 02116
Dear Alan:
This is to advise you that effective today, I am resigning
as a director and officer of B & P Publishing Co., Inc.
Sincerely,
Eli J. Segal
EJS:ke
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 29, 1993
Mr. Joseph Landis
President
Indian Creek Foundation, Inc.
573 Yoder Rd.
PO Box 225
Harleyville, PA 14308-0225
Dear Mr. Landis,
Thank you for your letter describing the interest of your Association in being a pilot site
for President Clinton's national service program. I am encouraged by the response of so
many people to the idea of young people being involved in helping to resolve many of the
issues faciang our communities.
We are working hard to develop legislation for the President, and will know many more
details of the national service program within the next several weeks. I have enclosed a
copy of the President's speech at Rutgers University, which articulates his current
thinking on national service.
Sincerely,
Elf.se
Eli J. Segal
Assistant to the President and
Director, Office of National Service
EJS:ss
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
FAX COVER SHEET
Office of National Service
Room 145 - OEOB
Washington, D.C. 20500
(202) 456-6444 Phone
TO:
BRian Atwood
ORGANIZATION: AID
'AX #: (
)
PHONE #: ( ) 647-9620
FROM: Eli Sy.1 (re Mike Mahdesian)
DATE:
NUMBER OF PAGES (including cover sheet) :
COMMENTS: Hill is a very special condidate for a position
it AID. I worked will Mike in th Hast campain
Chajor Fundraising responsibilities) and th Clinion canguya
(Easter EUROREAN Focus). Did " work w.ll energy effectivences
& VISION. If you need more info, please cell. Regards, El.
(If you have any problem with the fax transmission, please call
(202) 456-6444.
The document accompanying this facsimile transmittal sheet is
intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it
is addressed. This message contains information which may be
privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure under
applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for
delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any disclosure, dissemination, copying or
distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the
contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this information in error, please notify us
immediately at (202) 456-6444.
06 193 17:06 SERVICIO COPP. OFF.
R.2
Emerson
MEMO TO:
Clinton Transition, National Security, AID Cluster
MEMO FROM:
MichaeliMahdesian
(818) 340-8186 (H)
(310) 204-5040 (O)
POSITION SEEKING:
AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Senior Level/Executive Administrative Position
SPONSORS:
DEREK SHEARER. GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOUS
REFERENCES:
JOHN EMERSON, NANCY SODERBERG
OTHER REFERENCES: TONY COELHO, REP. LEE HAMILTON
I would like to be considered for a senior level position within the Agency for International
Development (AID). My strengths are in management. operations, and communications (see
attached resume). I've spent the last 6 years building up and running 1 profitable business
which sells supplies to major aerospace and industrial firms such as McDonnell Douglas,
Northrop. Allied Signal. TRW. and Chevron. In the wake of the devasting earthquake in
Armenia. I took a leave of absence 10 serve as Executive Director for the United Armenian
Fund's airlift to Armenia. I was deeply involved in all facets of the operation including filling
the planes from the U.S., Canada, and Europe. securing landing rights and handling other
formalities with the Seviet Amenian government, as well as setting up the distribudon of
goods there.
I have extensive political experience, including three years in Washington. D.C. with the
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (1983-85). As Special Assistant to DCCC
Chairman Tony Coelho. I worked integrally with the House Democratic Leadership.
Committee and Sub-Committee Chairs. particularly the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Through this. I gained particular expertise working with ethnic constituencies from Eastern
Europe and the Middle East. Most recently. I served as Director of Ethnic Outreach for the
Clinton Campaign in California. and attended the Transition Roundtable on Aid and Trade to
Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union in Little Rock
My background is rooted in international economic development I received my M.A. at
UCLA's School of Urban Planning specializing in international economic development (my
thesis was completed in Spain where I worked on an economic development plan for the
Autonomous Region of Navarra). I have lived abroad and traveled extensively throughout
Europe and Asia. I speak French, Spanish, and functional Armenian I'm fluent in most issues
of foreign policy and economic development, and feel that AID has enormous potential in the
post Cold War era. I would feel honored to serve the Administration at AID. and hope you
will take my application under consideration. Thank you.
cc: George Stephanopoulous. Derek Shearer, John Emerson
Presidential Transition Resume Routing Ford
C.O.D.
From: GEORGE Stephanopoulos
Name of Applicant:
Michael Mahderan Date: 1/6/92
Senior Staff Only: Will you sponsor this applicant?
yes
8
All Others: What is your recommendation?
Highly Recommended
Recommended
Consider
(1)
Campaign:
CG: Clinton/Core National Staff
CC: Coordinated Campaign Staff
DN: Democratic National Comm.
FI: Finance
VF: Full-time Volunteer
VP: Part-time Volunteer
NC: Not Campaign
(2)
Job Preference/Ares of Interest:
Accounting
Information Systems
Administration
Intergovernmental Relations
Advance
Legal
Cerical
Public Affairs/Press
Congressional Relations
(3)
Job Level:
Sub-cabinet
Senior Level
Entry Level
Other (Please Specify)
(4)
Agency/Department Preference (note top two choices):
Agriculture
Interior
Arts/Humanities
Justice
Education
Libor
Commerce
NASA
Defense
Office/Management & Budget
Energy
Office/Personnel Management
Environmental Protection
Science/Space/Technology
EECC
State
FDIC
Transportation
Health/Human Services
Treasury
Housing/Urban Development
Veteran's Affairs
Other (please describe)
(5)
Comment:
AID
see atlashed
letter
Please send this form and attached resume (for candidates) to:
Presidential Transition
Office of Personnel
1120 Vermont Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20270
TAN 06 193 17:06 SERVICIO COPP. OFF.
P.1
Pacifica Consulting Services, Inc.
3965 Landmark Street
Culver City, CA 90232
(310) 204-5040 (310) 204-5097 Fax
Date: 1-10-23
From: Mike Mandesian
Company: Clinton Transition
Number of pages transmitted
Attention: George Stephanopolous
(including this page)
Fax No.: (501) 399-7195
2
Please contact this office if there is a problem with this transmission.
Message and/or Special Instructions:
George-
Happy New Year! First, I want to thank you for
all help. I really appreciate it. Mourad told me
to get your this to you. It's a revised copy of the one Mousad
sent you (I was told to be more general in the area
"Position Seeking").
Sorry for the delay. / knew how busy you were and
didn't want to bother you. Good luck. Hope to see
you at the Inaugural. Thanks again -
Michael Mahdrian
WCHERYLUPCSI-FAX.DOC
MICHAEL MAHDESIAN
20651 Deforest Street
Woodland Hills, CA 91364
(818) 340-8186 (home)
(310) 204-5040 (work)
Public Affairs/Political Experience:
Clinton/Gore Campaign: Deputy Campaign Manager/California,
Director of Ethnic Outreach (1992)
Clinton California Finance Board (December 1991-92)
Organized Eastern European and Middle Eastern communities for state and national endorse-
ments, favorable media stories in ethnic print and cable outlets, field and GOTV activities
including large anti-Bush demonstrations. Also focused on getting Republican endorsements
and pro-Clinton op-ed pieces in regional and ethnic press. Raised money and did outreach
from December 1991 through the end of campaign.
United Armenian Fund (UAF), Executive Director, Armenian Airlift (1989-90)
Launched an ongoing airlift of humanitarian and medical supplies to earthquake victims in
Armenia. Sent 10 planeloads valued at over $5 million during first 6 months of operation.
Organized airlifts from U.S., Canada, England and France. Accompanied several planes to
Armenia to set up distribution with hospitals, volunteer relief groups, and small villages.
Interfaced with Soviet Armenian Govt. regarding landing rights and other formalities. The
UAF, an umbrella for the major Armenian organizations and churches, continues with
monthly airlifts to Armenia.
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), Washington, D.C.
Political Consultant/Fundraiser (1983-85)
Consulting work at DCCC included political fundraising, taking House Speaker Tip O'Neill
and Majority Leader Jim Wright to major cities in U.S. to meet constituent groups, business
leaders and local politicians, and bringing business leaders and constituent groups to D.C. for
consultative meetings with the Democratic Leadership and House Committee Chairmen.
Represented DCCC and Chairman Tony Coelho as ethnic constituency advisor to the DNC.
Hayden for Assembly, Policy Director, Press Secretary (1982)
Coordinated issue development, policy statements, constituency endorsements for Hayden's
first electoral victory. Also served as Press Secretary to Hayden and wife, Jane Fonda during
primary. Other functions included public speaking, fundraising, and speechwriting.
Laurel Springs Institute, Vista Training Program, Contract Supervisor (1979-80)
Wrote/secured contract for Laurel Springs Institute to train Vista Volunteers in community
organizing for Federal Region IX. Logistics director for the four state region. SP: CAM HR
Presidential Transition Resume Routing Form
Name of Applicant:
From: MICHAEL MANDESIAN Date:
Will you sponsor?
yes
8
C.O.D.
Recommendation:
Highly Recommended
W Recommended
Consider
(1)
Campaign:
CG: Clinton/Gore National Staff (H) 818-340-8186
CC: DN: Coordinated Democratic National Campaign Comm. Staff N 310-204-5040
FI: Finance
VF: Full-time Volunteer
VP: Part-time Volunteer
(2)
Job Preference/Area of Interest:
Accounting
Information Systems
Administration
Intergovernmental Relations
Advance
Legal
Clerical
Public Affairs/Press
Congressional Relations
(3)
Job Level:
Sub-cabinet
Senior Level
Entry Level
Other (Please Specify)
(4)
Agency/Department Preference (note top two choices):
Agriculture
Interior
Arts/Humanities
Justice
Education
Labor
Commerce
NASA
Defense
Office/Management & Budget
Energy
Office/Personnel Management
Environmental Protection
Science/Space/Technology
EEOC
State
FDIC
Transportation
Health/Human Services
Treasury
Housing/Urban Development
Veteran's Affairs
Other (please describe)
(5)
Comment:
Please send this form and attached resume (for candidates) to:
Presidential Transition
Office of Personnel
1120 Vermont Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20270
ATTN: note campaign position (as per categories listed above under "Campaign" section)
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001. resume
[Personally Identifiable Information] [partial] (1 page)
01/00/1993
b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
National Service
Eli Segal
OA/Box Number: 1296
FOLDER TITLE:
Chronological-March 1993 [2]
2013-0661-F
rs2927
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRAJ
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRAJ
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA|
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRAJ
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes |(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
MAHDESIAN
PAGE TWO
Private Sector Experience
Pacific Consulting Services, Inc., Owner, CEO, (1986 - Present)
Pacifica provides maintenance supplies, equipment, and consulting services primarily to
large industrial/aerospace customers throughout the Southwest including TRW, Hughes
Aircraft, McDonnell Douglas, Northrop, Allied-Signal, Motorola, Magnavox, Mitsubishi,
and AT&T. As CEO, responsible for overall company strategy, administrative oversight,
purchasing, and customer relations.
Other Activities
California Workmen's Compensation Task Force (1992)
Executive Finance Board Dianne Feinstein for Governor (1990)
Board of Trustees, New Perspectives Quarterly Magazine (1985-87)
Director of California Gary Hart Associates Fundraising Program (during his
aborted presidential campaign in 1987)
Education
UCLA School of Architecture/Urban Planning: M.A. in Urban Planning
(Regional Economic Development, Masters Thesis researched in Spain dealt with
economic issues of Basque Autonomy) 1981
USC: B.A. in Cinema (emphasis during last two years in International Relations)
(Finished undergraduate studies in Geneva studying the United Nations) 1976
Travel
Extensive travel throughout Europe and the Orient. Lived two years in Europe (1975-
77). Official travel delegations include: Congressional Delegation to Israel (1984) led
by Rep. Tony Coelho; Delegation to Mexico (1985) led by ex-Gov. Jerry Brown (met
with Bank of Mexico Director, U.S. Embassy officials, Carlos Fuentes, Octavio Paz);
Delegation to China (1986) also led by Jerry Brown (meetings with U.S. Ambassador
Winston Lord, Chinese Govt. and party officials in Beijing, Shanghai, Wu Han,
Canton, and Shenzhen); airlifts to Armenia (1989-90).
Languages
Almost fluent French and Spanish. Functional Armenian.
Personal
Born
(b)(6)
Married, two children.
References: John Emerson, Derek Shearer, Tony Coelho, Rep. Lee Hamilton
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Phyllis Coven
FROM:
John Emerson END
DATE:
January 12, 1993
SUBJECT: Resumes
I enclose, in no particular order, the following resumes.
I have designated sponsor/recommend/simply-passing-it-or and
specific positions where appropriate. The enclosed resumes are:
Maria Hummer: Mickey Kantor is sponsoring her
for FCC. She is a Republican, by the way.
Tevan Aroustamian: Pass on.
Jeff Phillips: Energy; recommend.
Peter Shutan: Justice, DEA, or drug czar.
Highly recommend.
Wilma Pinder: Pass on.
Steve Meixner: HUD; pass on.
Marilyn Barrett: Small business; pass on.
Paul Sczudlo: Tax lawyer; pass on.
Peter Bynum: Pass on.
Michael Haltzel: Sponsor: Ambassador to
Germany.
Tom Epstein: Sponsor - See letter for
positions.
Sandra Medof: Pass on.
Eileen Sheridan: Pass on.
Judith Johnston-Weston: Bureau of Indian
Affairs; highly recommend.
Memorandum to Phyllis X Coven
January 12, 1993
Page 2
Maeley Tom:
Sponsor; Minority Business
development; International Trade and Cultural
relations.
Carol Fenelon: Sponsor; AIDS czar staff;
N.E.A.; Education.
Suzanne Rosentsweig:
Justice; highly
recommend.
Hope Boonshaft-Lewis: Sponsor; Public Affairs
at State, Justice, Transportation, HHS, or
HUD.
Michael Mahdesian: Sponsor; A.I.D.
Elizabeth Clare Hunt: Pass on.
Diane Siegel: Highly recommend; various
Public Affairs positions - see letter.
Steve Nissen:
Sponsor; Director, Legal
Services Corporation.
Phil Recht: Sponsor; see letter.
Roselynne Swig: Sponsor; see letter.
Lynn Alvarez:
Sponsor; Justice; Legal
Services.
Herbert E. Alexander: Highly recommend.
March 24, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM;
ELI J. SEGAL
SUBJECT:
NATIONAL SERVICE LEGISLATION
Summary
We have made significant progress in developing National Service legislation. We plan to
circulate a draft for comment within the Administration by the end of this month, with the goal of
sending legislation to the Hill for introduction on April 20. We are working closely with the House
and Senate Committees and expect that Senator Edward Kennedy and Congressman William Ford, the
authorizing committee chairmen, will introduce the legislation enthusiastically for the Administration.
We are coordinating with the Department of Education so that our separate proposals can be
meshed together and presented to Congress as comprehensive legislation addressing both national
service and student aid reform/income contingent loans.
This memorandum summarizes my recommendations for national service legislation. Major
policy issues presented in detail for the first time are set off for decision at various points within the
body of the memorandum. Open policy issues, beginning on page 6, are presented with decision
options. Two political considerations of which you should be aware are flagged at the end of the
memorandum. We are also suggesting that we meet with you to discuss a variety of these matters
further.
Criteria for Service Projects
In the new law, we would propose defining general areas in which service could be performed
-- human needs, public safety, education and environmental protection. We would allow more
detailed priorities periodically to be set administratively to permit the program to be re-targeted as
priorities change. Attached (Tab A) is a list of anecdotal examples of service which we are
developing to answer the question, "What do you mean by service?" We have been consulting with
organized labor to develop examples of service which meet national needs without creating a jobs
displacement problem.
As we have discussed, at this point national service positions will typically not be professional
positions (teachers and policemen) but will nonetheless be real service that makes a difference and
accomplishes results (specifically in public safety and education). We continue to work with Bruce
Reed and Dick Riley to develop professional positions apart from the core national service initiative.
2
Unlike legislative issues on which we need to make immediate decisions, these examples can
be reviewed somewhat later in the process, but the examples we use should reflect your views. While
they will not be written into law, they can appear in committee reports, are critical for
communications, and will be very much a part of program implementation.
Federal Structure of National Service Program
Since national service will be one of your first domestic initiatives, the program will be
judged not simply as a service and education program, but as a case study in reinventing government.
Our recommendations are based on several principles: (1) the President should be able to
have a strong influence on setting priorities regarding the nature of funded activities; (2) ideally,
service will not become a partisan issue; (3) the federal role should be as lean and entrepreneurial as
possible, without inviting abuse through insufficient oversight and management; (4) we should avoid
overlapping federal agencies; (5) strong state roles should be balanced with clear and enforceable
federal standards.
Corporation for National Service
To promote an entrepreneurial program, we recommend that the new program be run by a
new government corporation, the Corporation for National Service, similar in structure to the
Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the Legal Services Corporation. The new corporation would
have a strong chair, with decisional powers over hiring and firing, federal grant applications and state
plans. The chair, as well as an advisory board and several top executives, would be appointed by the
President and confirmed by the Senate.
The national corporation would fund the federal share of a minimum wage stipend, as well as
health and child care benefits for participants. The corporation would also fund and administer the
National Service Trust which will provide the educational benefits.
We could accomplish most of our policy objectives with a more traditional form of
independent agency or commission, but there are several substantive and political reasons for the
"corporate" structure:
(1)
the corporate form communicates the idea of a new entrepreneurial approach to
government;
(2)
to permit more entrepreneurial management, we are proposing that new positions not
be covered by civil service, a step which is less of an attack on civil service and
politically more palatable when applied to a non-traditional government organization;
(3)
we are proposing a new form of state/federal coordination which we expect will be
viewed positively by the governors, but might engender more resistance if we are
simply doing business as usual at the federal level while we experiment at the state
level;
(4)
a government corporation can have all of the authority and accountability normally
associated with a government agency, with less burdensome procedures;
3
(5)
the corporate structure will facilitate both soliciting and accepting charitable
contributions at the national level to supplement public funds and establish a
public/private partnership.
Decision on Corporate Structure
Please indicate whether you approve or disapprove of the recommendation to adopt a
corporate structure, or whether it requires further discussion.
Yes
No
Need to discuss
Direct Federal Grants
We propose that half of the funds available under the new program be distributed on the basis
of recommendations made by the states (discussed more fully below), and that half of the funds be
allocated to the new corporation for direct grants to (1) other federal agencies; (2) innovative
programs; (3) private programs (like City Year) with the potential of expanding to multiple states (to
avoid the need for separate applications to numerous states); and (4) federally-targeted programs
across multiple states (such as reforestation or rural home health care). We recommend that the
corporation be given some discretion each year to reallocate funds between categories.
Existing Agencies
To streamline administration of service programs at the federal level, we propose that
programs presently run by ACTION and the Commission for National and Community Service be
brought together under the new corporation. Direct government programs (VISTA and the Older
American Programs from ACTION and the Civilian Community Corps from the Commission) would
be managed in an operating program division, while investment programs which fund activities
through grants would be managed in a separate division. K-12 service learning programs would
treated as a special sub-set of investment programs.
This organization structure will preserve the independent character of the different programs,
which in the case of VISTA and the Older American Volunteer Programs is particularly important to
affected constituencies, while permitting a greater degree of coordination and efficiency. Federal
funding for the Points of Light Foundation would be brought under the Corporation, which would
direct the use of these funds.
We are concerned that the new program not be eclipsed at its birth by the burden of
reorganizing existing programs, and would provide for at least a year of transition to permit the new
program to go through a start-up year while existing programs operate as they presently do. We
would allow the new Corporation's Chair to draw as necessary on the administrative resources now
housed at ACTION and the Commission.
Commission programs, which are very similar to the new activities to be funded under the
national service program, would in all likelihood merge immediately with the new program. VISTA
4
and the Older American Volunteer Programs, on the other hand, involve much more direct federal
administration and have much larger staff structures. These programs would continue to operate
more independently, with a gradual merger to be managed at a pace that allows the new program to
succeed.
We would provide for at least a year of transition, to give ACTION staff interested in staying
with the new corporation a strong incentive to demonstrate their ability and commitment, while those
not interested in staying will have ample and fair opportunities to seek alternate federal civil service
employment. To avoid a political firestorm about civil service exceptions, we propose grandfathering
all civil service employees who directly administer VISTA and the Older American Volunteer
Programs, while ACTION administrative personnel would be offered special consideration for new
positions at the new corporation (but not absolute job protection), as well as customary placement
rights for civil service hiring in other agencies.
State and Regional Offices
ACTION presently has both state and regional office to administer the VISTA and Older
American Volunteer Programs. In general, the state offices seem to have the reputation of being
accessible, particularly to disadvantaged and minority communities seeking VISTA volunteers. Some
offices are better than others, but it does not seem that we would gain a great deal by radically
changing the structure of the state offices.
The new Corporation for National Service would assign a staff member to work in each state
office. This would build into the program a practical mechanism for federal/state partnership in
which the corporation would work closely with states developing plans for federal approval (discussed
more fully below in the context of the State role). The cost would be relatively modest since state
ACTION offices are already in place and would infuse the entrepreneurial spirit of the new program
into the existing offices.
ACTION regional offices now serve review functions which could be handled more efficiently
at the national program offices of VISTA and the Older Americans Volunteer Programs. We propose
shifting these functions, reducing the overall staff and closing the regional offices. Since there are
presently a number of unfilled political slots in the regions, this can be described as either downsizing
or as shifting jobs to manage the new program. Career employees are represented by AFSCME,
which is presently guardedly supportive of national service. Attached (Tab B) is a description of
where these offices are located and how many jobs would be affected.
As we approach a public announcement, we will work closely with your political and
legislative staffs on outreach. While this is one issue where political pressure may force
reconsideration, as a policy matter, the appearance of a three level review structure has few
substantive supporters, and eliminating a level of review is consistent with the general thrust of the
Administration on making government more efficient.
Room
for
decision
block
5
Decision on Reorganization of Existing Agencies
Please indicate if you are comfortable with this recommendation or whether we need to
discuss it further.
Approve reorganization plan
Disapprove of reorganization plan
Need to discuss
State Role
We have assumed from the start that states will play a major role in the new program,
because they understand local needs, and because we are committed to keeping the new federal
corporation as small as possible. We propose that States be allocated thirty percent of the funds
under the new program by formula, and an additional twenty percent on the basis of competitive
applications. In every case states will be required to comply with national program criteria, and
submit plans for approval by the Corporation for National Service. To avoid micro-management,
these plans will be approved or disapproved in their entirety.
In reviewing options, we discovered that there is a wide range of views on how well state
administered programs work. While Governors like Roy Romer would implement programs we are
comfortable with, Bill Ford and Richard Daley are at odds with their governors and are distrustful of
delegating full control to the governors.
We have tried to provide Governors with a strong incentive to undertake the new program
energetically, and become personally and fiscally invested. At the same time, we have tried to
balance concerns that (1) some states might exclude politically unpopular constituencies on partisan or
regional grounds, and (2) a point raised by David Osborne in particular, that state bureaucracy may
be even more constraining in some States than federal bureaucracy.
To parallel the independent character of a corporation at the national level, we propose that
state authority be vested in independent State National Service Commissions. Members would be
appointed by the governors, and would include representatives from several interested communities
(students, educators, labor, business, etc.). Modelled on the present national Commission on
National and Community Service, state commissions will be bi-partisan and elect their own chair. To
support the commissions, federal funding would be provided for staff and administration, provided
that states meet a match requirement, which would begin at 20 percent and gradually increase in later
years.
To promote federal/state partnership, the Corporation for National Service representative in
each state would participate in State Commission deliberations. This would assure that the
Corporation fully understands state plans when they are submitted for review, and will provide early
warning of possible problems that might result in disapproval of a plan. The objective is for state
plans to be negotiated so that disapproval is never necessary, but to provide for a disapproval
mechanism as a sanction of last resort.
6
We are designing a match requirement to encourage private as well as local and state
government financial support of programs which receive federal funds. To make certain that at least
part of the match is in cash, we would require that 15 percent of the basic minimum wage stipend for
participants be funded through non-federal cash contributions. An additional matching requirement,
which could be satisfied by providing facilities, equipment, etc., would bring the total match to fifty
percent. Programs would also be able to supplement stipends and other benefits with their own
funds.
Decision on State Commission Approach
Please indicate whether you are comfortable with the State Commission approach.
Approve
Disapprove
Need to discuss
Issues Requiring Further Guidance
Education Benefits
After our last meeting, we floated the idea of a differential benefit ($5,000 for pre-college
participants; outstanding loan amounts not to exceed $10,000 for post-college participants). The idea
has attracted a significant amount of criticism from the Hill (including a letter to you yesterday from
Senators Nunn and Mikulski) and from groups promoting pre-college service. DLC criticism has
been less pronounced after discussions in which I explained that, on average, the differential would be
less than $2,000, since outstanding loans average less than $7,000.
Objections center on two issues: (1) concern that participation will be skewed towards college
graduates; and (2) the implication that pre-college service is of less value than post-college service.
The differential arose out of the concern you raised at last month's NEC meeting that a
stef
$10,000 educational benefit is too high for a recent high school graduate. The proposal was a
compromise to preserve the possibility of a $10,000 benefit (strongly supported by the DLC) and
strengthen the relationship between service and paying for college. Senators Kennedy and Wofford
and Congressman Ford are all more comfortable with lower benefits.
Given the criticism, I think we should re-think the differential. Setting the maximum benefit
at $6,500 for post-college participation would still allow repayment of the average loan balance of a
graduate from a four year state college with one year of service. I recommend either a smaller
differential (maximum post-college benefit of $6,500) or setting a single benefit level of $5,000 for all
participants.
Reducing the size of the differential may not solve our political problems. Rather than float a
revised proposal at this time, I would advise you to wait and resolve this issue at a meeting with key
Members of Congress just after the Summit. This would be more likely to produce a final resolution
7
after which they would sign on to the package. Participants at the meeting should include Senators
Kennedy, Nunn, Mikulski and Wofford and Congressman Ford.
Decision on Benefit Meeting
Please indicate whether we should arrange for a meeting before the April 20 introduction
target.
Yes
No
Need to discuss
Use of Educational Benefit
You have always talked about providing an educational benefit to pay for college and training.
Many assumed that this would be applicable to graduate school as well. As a practical matter, by
limiting the educational benefit to outstanding loans for college graduates, there will be numerous
cases where outstanding loans are below the maximum benefit level and the full benefit cannot be
utilized. In contrast, pre-college participants will presumably will use their full benefit in virtually all
cases. Further, some students (who can never be assured in advance of participation in your
program) may work through college and graduate debt-free -- but want to participate in the program
after graduation, to help pay for grad school.
Decision on use of benefits
Since we never discussed this issue, I would like to flag it for discussion or decision.
Benefits only for college and training
Excess benefits also for post-college education
Need to discuss
Maximum stipend
We are setting a federally supported stipend at minimum wage. We have always assumed that
programs would be allowed to supplement these stipends with their own funds. We have never
resolved whether there is a maximum stipend that should be allowed under our service program.
The arguments for limiting stipends, is to avoid service slots with "real" salaries which might
be inconsistent with the idea of service and which could attract political criticism. There is also a
concern that if there is no limit, state and local government will find ways to package proposals which
will substitute national service dollars for local dollars presently being spent to hire teachers,
policemen, nurses, public-interest lawyers, etc.
The argument for no limit (or a higher limit) is that in many instances, communities can gain
most, and young people give most, through service in a professional position. A higher wage limit
would allow "professional corps" to remain under the national service umbrella.
8
I recommend that in general, we cap the maximum stipend at twice the minimum wage.
However, I think we should allow higher wages in professional corps programs in limited cases, in
which I would limit federal support to the post-service educational benefit. This will avoid a
substitution problem, but allow for professional placements in targeted professions.
Decisions on maximum benefit level
Cap at twice minimum wage, with the noted exception:
Yes
No
Need to discuss
Education benefit only for limited professional corps:
Yes
No
Need to discuss
Age Limit
While it is easy to determine a starting point for eligibility in terms of high school graduation,
it is more difficult to set an upper age limit, and in fact, it may be preferable not to set an upper age
limit for participation. An age limit of 25 or 27 would exclude from participation many who
complete their education through a non-traditional course of study.
If we set the age limit anywhere over 30, we will appear to be discriminating based on age
rather than status. As a practical matter, educational benefits will be of relatively little interest to
many older participants, but in theory, they should be eligible if they meet all other program criteria.
This is an issue we have never discussed which I wanted to flag to make sure you are comfortable
with our assumption.
Decision on Age Limit
No age limit
Set age limit
Need to discuss
9
Program Name
We suggest using the name/ AmeriCorps for the college-age service program. We would
like you approval to test this name (including through focus groups). By the way, while many will
claim authorship of this name, you should know that Skip Rutherford played a key role.
Decision
Test AmeriCorps
Find other names
Need to discuss
Political Issues of Concern
Pell Grants
I continue to be concerned that our policy towards the Pell Grant program will be perceived
as a cut, particularly for middle income participants. If so, the national service initiative, which has
no income test for participation, will be subject to additional scrutiny and criticism. This
memorandum is not the appropriate place to present the case regarding Pell Grants, but the political
fallout could be damaging to the funding of the national service initiative. Bear in mind the
substantial difference between the size of our post-service benefit and the currently funded Pell Grant
level ($2,300).
Appropriations Jurisdiction
There is the possibility of a nasty jurisdictional battle within the Congress over which
Appropriations subcommittee will have jurisdiction over the new program. In the budget, we
remained neutral on this issue, which made Senator Mikulski unhappy. This issue is likely to
resurface as we approach the allocation decision in Congress in mid-April. We have talked with
Senators Mitchell and Pryor (and Howard Paster, among others) on this subject and would like the
benefit of your perspective.
EJS:jjl
Rick lell
March 24, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM;
ELI J. SEGAL
SUBJECT:
NATIONAL SERVICE LEGISLATION
Summary
We have made significant progress in developing National Service legislation. We plan to
circulate a draft for comment within the Administration by the end of this month, with the goal of
sending legislation to the Hill for introduction on April 20. We are working closely with the House
and Senate Committees and expect that Senator Edward Kennedy and Congressman William Ford, the
authorizing committee chairmen, will introduce the legislation enthusiastically for the Administration.
We are coordinating with the Department of Education so that our separate proposals can be
meshed together and presented to Congress as comprehensive legislation addressing both national
service and student aid reform/income contingent loans.
This memorandum summarizes my recommendations for national service legislation. Major
policy issues presented in detail for the first time are set off for decision at various points within the
body of the memorandum. Open policy issues, beginning on page 6, are presented with decision
Two
options. Several political considerations of which you should be aware are flagged at the end of the
memorandum. we are also suggesting that we theet with you to discuss
various of these matters Further,
Criteria for Service Projects
In the new law, we would propose defining general areas in which service could be performed
-- human needs, public safety, education and environmental protection. We would allow more
detailed priorities to be set periodically administratively to permit the program to be re-targeted as
priorities change. Attached (Tab A) is a list of anecdotal examples of service which we are
developing to answer the question, "What do you mean by service?" We have been consulting with organized
problem.
labor to develop examples of service which meet national needs without creating a Liobs displacement
national service
As we have discussed, at this point these positions will typically not be professional positions
(teachers and policemen) but will nonetheless be real service that makes a difference and accomplishes
results. We continue to work with Bruce Reed and Dick Riley to develop professional positions apart
from the core national service initiative.
(specifically including in public safety and
education).
2
Unlike legislative issues on which we need to make immediate decisions, these examples can
be reviewed somewhat later in the process, but the examples we use should reflect your views. While
they will not be written into law, they can appear in committee reports, are critical for
communications, and will be very much a part of program implementation.
Federal Structure of National Service Program
Since national service will be one of your first domestic initiatives, the program will be
judged not simply as a service and education program, but as a case study in reinventing government.
Our recommendations are based on several principles: (1) the President should be able to
have a strong influence on setting priorities regarding the nature of funded activities; (2) ideally,
service will not become a partisan issue; (3) the federal role should be as lean and entrepreneurial as
possible, without inviting abuse through insufficient oversight and management; (4) we should avoid
overlapping federal agencies; (5) strong state roles should be balanced with clear and enforceable
federal standards.
Corporation for National Service
To promote an entrepreneurial program, we recommend that the new program be run by a
new government corporation, the Corporation for National Service, similar in structure to the
Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the Legal Services Corporation. The new corporation would
have a strong chair, with decisional powers over hiring and firing, federal grant applications and state
plans. The chair, as well as an advisory board and several top executives, would be appointed by the
President and confirmed by the Senate.
The national corporation would fund the federal share of a minimum wage stipend, as well as
health and child care benefits for participants. The corporation would also fund and administer the
National Service Trust which will provide the educational benefits.
We could accomplish most of our policy objectives with a more traditional form of
independent agency or commission, but there are several substantive and political reasons for the
"corporate" structure:
(1)
the corporate form communicates the idea of a new entrepreneurial approach to
Space
government;
(2)
to permit more entrepreneurial management of the new we are proposing
that new positions not be covered by civil service, a step which is less of an attack on
civil service and politically more palatable when applied to a non-traditional
government organization;
(3)
we are proposing a new form of state/federal coordination which we expect will be
viewed positively by the governors, but might engender more resistance if we are
simply doing business as usual at the federal level while we experiment at the state
level;
(4)
a government corporation can have all of the authority and accountability normally
associated with a government agency, with less burdensome procedures;
3
(5)
the corporate structure will facilitate both soliciting and accepting charitable
contributions at the national level to supplement public funds and establish a
public/private partnership.
Decision on Corporate Structure
Please indicate whether you approve or disapprove of the recommendation to adopt a
corporate structure, or whether it requires further discussion.
Yes
No
Need to discuss
Direct Federal Grants
(like City Year)
We propose that half of the funds available under the new program be distributed on the basis
of recommendations made by the states (discussed more fully below), and that half of the funds be
allocated to the new corporation for direct grants to (1) other federal agencies; (2) innovative
programs; (3) private programs with the potential of expanding to multiple states (to avoid the need
for separate applications to numerous states); and (4) federally-targeted programs across multiple
states (such as rural home health care). We recommend that the corporation be given some discretion
each year to reallocate funds between categories.
me Forestation or
Existing Agencies
Civilian
To streamline administration of service programs at the federal level, we propose that
programs presently run by ACTION and the Cómmission for National and Community Service be
brought together under the new corporation. Direct government programs (VISTA and the Older
American Programs from ACTION and the Community conservation Corps from the Commission)
would be managed in an operating program division, while investment programs which fund activities
through grants would be managed in a separate division. K-12 service learning programs would
treated as a special (sub- set of investment programs.
This organization structure will preserve the independent character of the different programs,
which in the case of VISTA and the Older American Volunteer Programs is particularly important to
affected constituencies, while permitting a greater degree of coordination and efficiency. Federal
funding for the Points of Light Foundation would be brought under the Corporation, which would
direct the use of these funds.
We are concerned that the new program not be eclipsed at its birth by the burden of
I
reorganizing existing programs, and
would provide for at least a year of transition to permit the new program to go through a start-up year
while existing programs operate as they presently do. We would allow the chair to draw as may2be
necessary on the administrative resources now housed at ACTION and the Commission.
new Corporation's
Commission programs, which are very similar to the new activities to be funded under the
national service program would in all likelihood merge immediately with the new program. VISTA
4
and the Older American Volunteer Programs, on the other hand, involve much more direct federal
administration and have much larger staff structures. These programs would continue to operate more
independently, with a gradual merger to be managed at a pace that allows the new program to
succeed.
We would provide for at least a year of transition, to give ACTION staff interested in staying
with the new corporation a strong incentive to demonstrate their ability and commitment, while those
not interested in staying will have ample and fair opportunities to seek alternate federal civil service
employment. To avoid a political firestorm about civil service exceptions, we propose grandfathering
all civil service employees who directly administer VISTA and the Older American Volunteer
Programs, while ACTION administrative personnel would be offered priority consideration for new
positions at the new corporation (but not absolute job protection), as well as customary placement
rights for civil service hiring in other agencies.
State and Regional Offices
ACTION presently has both state and regional office to administer the VISTA and Older
American Volunteer Programs. In general, the state offices seem to have the reputation of being
accessible, particularly to disadvantaged and minority communities seeking VISTA volunteers. Some
offices are better than others, but it does not seem that we would gain a great deal by radically
changing the structure of the state offices.
The new Corporation for National Service would assign a staff member to work in each state
office. This would build into the program a practical mechanism for federal/state partnership in
which the corporation would work closely with states developing plans for federal approval (discussed
more fully below in the context of the State role). The cost would be relatively modest since state
ACTION offices are already in place and would infuse the entrepreneurial spirit of the new program
into the existing offices.
ACTION regional offices now serve review functions which could be handled more efficiently
at the national program offices of VISTA and the Older Americans Volunteer Programs. We propose
shifting these functions, reducing the overall staff and closing the regional offices. Since there are
presently a number of unfilled political slots in the regions, this can be described as either downsizing
or as shifting jobs to manage the new program.
Career employees are represented by AFSCME, which is presently VERY supportive of national
service. Attached (Tab B) is a description of where these offices are located and how many jobs
would be affected.
guardedly
As we approach a public announcement, we will work closely with Rahm Emanuel and Joan
Baggett on outreach. While this is one issue where political pressure may force reconsideration, as a
policy matter, the appearance of a three level review structure has few, supporters, and eliminating a
level of review is consistent with the general thrust of the Administration on making government
more efficient.
your political
and states legislative
Substantive
5
Decision on Reorganization of Existing Agencies
Please indicate if you are comfortable with this recommendation or whether we need to
discuss it further.
Approve reorganization plan
Disapprove of reorganization plan
Need to discuss
State Role
We have assumed from the start that states will play a major role in the new program,
because they understand local needs, and because we are committed to keeping the new federal
corporation as small as possible. We propose that States be allocated thirty percent of the funds
under the new program by formula, and an additional twenty percent on the basis of competitive
applications. In every case states will be required to comply with national program criteria, and
submit plans for approval by the Corporation for National Service. To avoid micro-management,
these plans will be approved or disapproved in their entirety.
their
In reviewing options, we discovered that there is a wide range of views on how well state
Spuce
administered programs work. While Governors like Roy Roomer would implement programs we are
comfortable with, Bill Ford # at odds with his Republican governor and is distrustful of delegating
full control to e the governors. and Rich Daley are
Lare
We have tried to provide Governors with a strong incentive to undertake the new program
energetically and become personally and fiscally invested. At the same time, we have tried to
balance concerns that (1) some states might exclude politically unpopular constituencies on partisan or
regional grounds, and (2) a point raised by David Osborne in particular, that state bureaucracy may
be even more constraining in some States than federal bureaucracy.
To parallel the independent character of a corporation at the national level, we propose that
state authority be vested in independent State National Service Commissions. Members would be
appointed by the governors, and would include representatives from several interested communities
(students, educators, labor, business, etc.). Modelled on the present national Commission on
National and Community Service, state commissions will be bi-partisan and elect their own chair. To
support the commissions, federal funding would be provided for staff and administration, provided
that states meet a match requirement, which would begin at 20 percent and gradually increase in later
years.
To would promote federal/state partnership, the Corporation for National Service representative in
each state will participate in State Commission deliberations. This will assure that the Corporation
fully understands state plans when they are submitted for review, and will provide early warning of
possible problems that might result in disapproval of a plan. The objective is for state plans to be
negotiated so that disapproval is never necessary, but to provide for a disapproval mechanism as a
sanction of last resort.
We are designing a match requirement to encourage private as well as local and state
government financial support of programs which receive federal funds. To make certain that at least
6
part of the match is in cash, we would require that 15 percent of the basic minimum wage stipend for
participants be funded through non-federal cash contributions. An additional matching requirement,
which could be satisfied by providing facilities, equipment, etc., would bring the total match to fifty
percent. Programs would also be able to supplement stipends and other benefits with their own
funds.
Decision on State Commission Approach
Please indicate whether you are comfortable with the State Commission approach.
Approve
Disapprove
Need to discuss
(including a letter to
you yesterday from
Senators Mikulski and
Issues Requiring Further Guidance
Nunn)
Education Benefits
amounts
After our last meeting we floated the idea of a differential benefit ($5,000 for pre-college
participants; outstanding loans not to exceed $10,000 for post-college participants). The idea has
attracted a significant amount of criticism from the Hill and from groups promoting pre-college
service. DLC criticism has been less pronounced after discussions in which I explained that, on
average, the differential would be less than $2,000, since outstanding loans average less than $7,000.
Objections center on two issues: (1) concern that participation will be skewed towards college
graduates; and (2) the implication that pre-college service is of less value than post-college service.
Attached (Tab C) is a letter received today from Senators Nunn and Mikulski on this subject and an
article from TIME which discusses the criticism,
The differential arose out of the concern you raised at last month's NEC meeting that a
$10,000 educational benefit is too high for a recent high school graduate. The proposal was a
compromise to preserve the possibility of a $10,000 benefit (strongly supported by the DLC) and
strengther the relationship
keep your campaign promise that benefits would pay for a college education. Senators Kennedy and
Wofford and Congressman Ford are all more comfortable with lower benefits.
service between and
with one year of service
maximum
paying for
Given the criticism, think we should re-think the differential. Setting the benefit at $6,500
college.
for post-college participation would still allow repayment of the average loan balance of a graduate
from a four year state college, I recommend either a smaller differential (maximum post-college
benefit of $6,500) or setting a single benefit level of $5,000 for all participants (which would require
two years of service to pay off the average state college loan balance)
at this time,
Reducing the size of the differential may not solve our political problems. Rather than float a
revised proposal I would advise you to wait and resolve this issue at a meeting with key Members of
Congress, This would be more likely to produce a final resolution after which they would sign on to
the package. Participants at the meeting should include Senators Kennedy, Nunn, Mikulski and
Wofford and Congressman Ford.
just a Fter the Summit.
7
Decision on Benefit Meeting
Please indicate whether we should arrange for a meeting before the April 20 introduction
target.
Yes
No
Need to discuss
Use of Educational Benefit
You have always talked about providing an educational benefit to pay for college and training.
Many assumed that this would be applicable to graduate school as well. As a practical matter, by
limiting the educational benefit to outstanding loans for college graduates, there will be numerous
cases where outstanding loans are below the maximum benefit level and the full benefit cannot be
utilized. In contrast, pre-college participants will presumably will use their full benefit in virtually all
cases. Werean also *pect-pressure to allow benefits to be osed-for other purposes, such as
Insert
unpayments on a-Hirst home.
attached
Decision on use of benefits
Since we never discussed this issue, I would like to flag it for discussion or decision.
Benefits -only for college and training
also
Excess Benefits for post-college education
^
Need to discuss
Maximum stipend
We are setting a federally supported stipend at minimum wage. We have always assumed that
programs would be allowed to supplement these stipends with their own funds. We have never
resolved whether there is a maximum stipend that should be allowed under our service program.
C
The arguments for limiting stipends, is to avoid service slots with "real" salaries which might
be inconsistent with the idea of service and which would attract political criticism.
0
There is also a concern that if there is no limit, state and local government will find ways to package
proposals which will substitute national service dollars for local dollars presently being spent to hire
new teachers, policemen, nurses, etc. public-interest lawyers,
The argument for no limit (or a higher limit) is that in many instances, communities can gain
most, and young people give most, through service in a professional position such as teaching. While
the Police Corps proposal is proceeding, there is no plan to fund Teacher Corps at present, and a
higher wage limit would allow for the option of keeping "professional corps" under the national
service umbrella.
40 remain
Further, some students (who can never
be assured in advance of
participation in your program) may
work through college and
graduate debt-free - - but
want to participate in the program
after graduation to help pay for
grad S chool
8
I recommend that in general, we cap the maximum stipend at twice the minimum wage.
However, I think we should allow higher wages in professional corps programs in limited cases, in
which I would limit federal support to the post-service educational benefit. This will avoid a
substitution problem, but allow for professional placements in targeted professions.
Decisions on maximum benefit level
L
Cap at twice minimum wages with the noted ception:
no underlining
no
Yes
No
Need to discuss
Education benefit only for limited professional corps:
Yes
No
Need to discuss
Age Limit
While it is easy to determine a starting point for eligibility in terms of high school graduation,
it is more difficult to set an upper age limit, and in fact, it may be preferable not to set an upper age
limit for participation. An age limit of 25 or 27 would exclude from participation many who
complete their education through a non-traditional course of study.
If we set the age limit anywhere over 30, we will appear be to be discriminating based on age
rather than status. As a practical matter, educational benefits will of relatively little interest
ive to many older participants, but in theory, they should be eligible if they meet all other
program criteria. This is an issue we have never discussed which I wanted to flag to make sure you
are comfortable with our assumption.
re
Decision on Age Limit
No age limit
Set age limit
Need to discuss
9
Program Name
post-
benefit
Millions of Americans have been touched by your call to service, but relatively few. will be
able to participate in your service program. By finding a way to bring those outside the program
under your service banner, you can maintain their support and expand the power of your initiative
using the name
We suggest that you use two names to describe your effort: AmeriCorps for the college-age
service program, AmeriCan for the broader effort to encourage all Americans to serve. Programs
other than AmeriCorps would fall under the AmeriCan rubrie, which could also be used to promote
non stipended service. we would like your approval to test thesethis
hame Decision (including through focus groups), ( By the way, while many
Test
will claim authorship of
Use AmeriCorps and American
these name Skip Rutherford
Fesk Use AmeriCan Find other
played a key role.)
names
Need to discuss
you should know that
Political Issues of Concern
Pell Grants
I continue to be concerned that our policy towards the Pell Grant program will be perceived
as a cut, particularly for middle income participants. If so, the national service initiative, which has
no income test for participation, will be subject to additional scrutiny and criticism. This
memorandum is not the appropriate place to present the case regarding Pell Grants, but the political
fallout could be very damaging to the funding of the national service initiative. Bear in mind the
Substantial difference between the size of our post- service berefit and
Appropriations Jurisdiction
the currently- funded Fell Grant level ($2300).
There continues to be a significant controversy within the Congress over which
Appropriations subcommittee will have jurisdiction over the new program. In the budget, we
remained neutral on this issue, which made Senator Mikulski very unhappy.
This issue is likely to resurface as we approach the allocation decision in Congress in mid-April.
is the possibility of a nasty jurisdictional ba Hle
EJS:jjl
we have talked with Senators
Mitchell and Pryor (and Howard Paster,
among others) on this subject and
would perspective. like the benefit of your
KOBC RI
Rick
Eli --
Shirley
I ran out of steam around 11:00 and as you can see, the memo
is still not finished and needs some more editing.
Podesta was not in but I spoke with Todd Stern who suggested
that you need to call Marcia Hale to set a time for a meeting and
that we can work backwards to a deadline for the memo. The
length of the memo does not seem to be a problem, and getting it
to him on Friday will not preclude a weekend or early week
meeting.
Please let me know if I need to call Marcia regarding the
schedule or if we should send a note from you. Todd thought a
meeting would be necessary given the scope of the decisions.
Feel free to call me at home tonight (I will get home around
11:30) or in the morning (I will be leaving by 7:00).
March 24, 1993
Memorandum to the President
From:
Eli J. Segal
Subject:
National Service Legislation
Summary
legislation
We have made significant progress in developing
a
legislative proposal to implement National Service We plan
to
circulate draft legislation for comment within the Administration
2
by the end of this month, with the goal of sending legislation to
the Hill for introduction on April 20. We are working closely
with the House and Senate Committees and expect that Senator
Edward Kennedy and Congressman William Ford, the authorizing
committee chairmen, will introduce the legislation
enthusiastically for the Administration.
We are coordinating with the Department of Education so that
our separate proposals can be meshed together and presented to
Congress as comprehensive legislation addressing both national
service and student aid reform (to provide / income contingent
loans
This memorandum summanzes the MY recommendations we for the (egislation
Since it has been several weeks since we discussed the issue
at length, I think it is important to present our recommendations
to you at this point. Major policy issues which I am presenting ed
in detail for the first time are set off for decision at various
points within the body of the memorandum. In addition, there are
several open policy issues beginning on page on which we
need
further guidance from you. Along with these issues, at the end
of the memorandum I will flag several political considerations
which you should be aware of)
Criteria for Service Projects
In the new law, we would propose defining general areas in
which service could be performed -- human needs, public safety,
education and environmental protection. We would allow more
detailed priorities to be set periodically by regulation to
permit the program to be re-targeted as priorities change.
administratively
Attached is a list of anecdotal examples of service which we are
developing to answer the question, "What do you mean by service?"
As we have discussed, these positions, at this point, will
not be professional positions (teachers and policemen) but will
nonetheless be real service that makes a difference and
accomplishes results. We continue to work with Bruce Reed and
Dick Riley to develop professional positions apart from the core
Julio
national service initiatve.
Unlike legislative issues on which we need to make immediate
decisions, these examples can be reviewed somewhat later in the
process, but the examples we. use should reflect your views.
While they will not be written into law, they can appear in
committee reports, are crtical for communications, and will be
very much a part of program implementation.
Federal Structure of National Service Program
Since national service will be one of the your first
domestic initiatives, we are very aware that the program will be
judged not simply as a service and education program, but as a
case study in reinventing government.
regarding the nuture of traded activities;
Our recommendations are based on several principles: (1)
the President should be able to have a strong influence on
setting priorities when the program is implemented; (2) ideally,
service will not become a partisan issue; (3) the federal role
should be as lean and entrepreneurial as possible, without
inviting abuse through insufficient oversight and management;
(4) we should avoid overlapping federal agencies; (5) strong
state roles should be balanced with clear and enforceable federal
standards.
Corporation for National Service
To promote an entrepreneurial program, we recommend that the
new program be run by a new government corporation, the
Corporation for National Service This new corporation, similar
in structure to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the
Legal Services Corporation would have a strong chair with and over
decisional powers over hiring and firing as well as approving
both direct federal grant applications and state plans. The
chair, as well as an advisory board would be appointed by the
President and confirmed by the Senáte.
The national corporation would fund the federal share of a
minimum wage stipend as well as health and child care benefits
for participants. The corporation would also fund and adminsiter
the National Service Trust which will provide the educational
benefits.
There are several reasons for the "corporate" structure,
some substantive and some political:
the corporate form communicates the idea of a new
entrepreneurial approach to government;
to permit more entrepreneurial management of the
new corporation, we are proposing that new
positions not be covered by civil service, a step
which is less of an attack on civil service and
politically more palatable when applied to a non-
traditional government organization;
we are proposing a new form of state/federal
coordination which we expect will be viewed
positively by the governors, but might engender
more resisitance if we are simply doing business
as usual at the federal level while we experiment
at the state level;
a government corporation can have all of the
authority and accountability normally associated
with a government agency, with less burdensome
procedures;
stet
te a corporatincill have lea rouble then anagen
the corporate structure will make it easier therhing to
provide for charitable contributions to solicited
and accepted to supplement public funds and
establish a public/private partnership.
and
accepting charitable contributions
and
Decision
We could accomplish most of our policy objectives with
a more traditional form of independent agency or
Although
commission Please indicate whether you approve or
disapprove of this recommendation, or whether # this issue
requires further discussion.
Yes
to establish adopt
No
structure the
a comporate a
compoute
Need to discuss
shuthe
Direct Federal Grants
hultot
1/4 computshi former
We propose that a significant portion of the funds available
under the new program be distributed on the basis of
1/4
recommendations made by the states, (discussed more fully below) The
but that a portion of the funds we propose third, be
allocated to the new corporation for direct grants to (1) other
federal agencies; (2) innovative programs; Land (3) private (toeliminate
theirwould otherwise need to apply separately to numerous states) We would
programs with the potential of expanding to multiple states and
reserve up to one-half of finds for federal allocation
to
in a giver year, we would
state in a
me
half
give the corporation discretion
to allocate find between
remaining waits
special federally targeted indestate programs
some
Federal
federal the tods would be
and
leg, in subressed urban schools the
Paufee Northuesti.
state programs.
K-12
Existing Agencies
To streamline federal administration of service programs, we
propose that existing service programs presently run by ACTION and
the Commission for National and Community Service and the Points
sep
of Light Foundation should fall under the new corporation.
sent
Direct government programs (VISTA and the Older American Programs
atend
from ACTION and the Civilian Conservation Corps from the
Commission) would be managed in an operating division, while
investment programs which fund activities through grants would be
managed in a separate divison. This will make it possible to e
maintain the independent character of the different programs,
Community
which in the case of VISTA and the Older American Volunteer
Programs is very important to affected constituencies, while
permitting a greater degree of coordination and efficiency in
central administration.
particularly
We are concerned that the new program not be eclipsed at its
Birth by the burden of reorganizing existing programs, and
would provide for at least a year of transition to permit the new
program to go through a start-up year while existing programs
operate as they presently do. We would allow the chair to draw
as may be necessary on the administrative resources now housed at
ACTION and the Commission.
As a practical matter, most Commission programs (which are
very similar to the new activities to be funded under the
segurate
national service program) would merge immediately with the new
corporation. VISTA and the Older American Volunteer Programs now
The run by ACTION on the other hand, which have much larger staff
structures would continue to operate largely independently,
with a gradual merger to be managed at a pace that allows the new
program to succeed.
programs
and
that
To avoid a political firestorm about civil service
additional
exceptions, we propose grandfather ing all civil service employees
at VISTA and the Older American Volunteer Programs while we give
ACTION administrativ personnel priority consideration for new
positions at the new corporation (but not absolute job
STeT
protection) as well as customary placement rights for civil
service hiring throughout the govel If we provide for at
least a year of transition, ACTION staff interested in staying
with the new corporation will have a strong incentive to
demonstrate their ability and commitment while those not
interested in staying will have ample and fair opportunities to
seek alternate federal civil service employment.
State and Regional Offices
ACTION presently has both state and regional office to
adminster the VISTA and Older American Volunteer Programs. In
general, the state offices seem to have the reputation as being
accessible, particularly to disadvantaged and minority
communities seeking VISTA volunteers. Some offices are better + accounts
of
than others, but it does not seem that we would gain a great deal
by radically changing the structure of the state offices.
that
assign a
We propose the new Corporation for National Service place a
staff member in each state office (in smaller states perhaps-
there would be more than one state assigned to a representative)
This would build into the program a practical mechanism for
with
federal/state partnership in which the corporation would work
closely with states developing plans for federal approva. without
micro-managing the state process. This is discussed more fully
below in the context of the State role. The cost would be
relatively modest since state ACTION offices are already in place
and would infuse the entrepreneurial spirit of the new program
into the existing offices.
in
ACTION regional offices now serve review functions which
could be handled more efficiently at the national program offices
of VISTA and the Older Americans Volunteer Programs. We propose
shifting these functions, reducing the overall staff and closing
the regional offices. Since there are presently a number of
unfilled political slots in the region this can be described as
either downsizing or as shifting jobs to manage the new program.
5
In addition to appointed positions which are unfilled, there
are also career positions which are filled by staff represented
by AFSCME, which is presently very supportive of national
service. We propose giving career people the first right to fill
positions created at the national level, but realistically the
move would not be attractive for many Attached is a list which
describes the jobs in regional ACTION offices. As we approach a
public announcement, we will work closely with Rahm Emanuel and
Joan Baggett on outreach. While this is one issue where
political pressure may force reconsideration, as a policy matter,
the appearance of a three level review structure has few
supporters, and eliminating a level of review is consistent with
the general thrust of the Administration on making government
more efficient.
Decision on Aporgomization
Please indicate if you are comfortable with the
reorganization plan described above, or whether we need
to discuss it further.
Indent/
Approve
as tab
as B
Disapprove
Need to discuss
locations
number and of
Formila
and
State Role
atto
of
fails
We have assumed from the start that states would play a
major role in the new program, because they are better able to
evaluate local needs and because we are committed to keeping the
new federal corporation as small as possible. We propose that
States be allocated one third of the funds under the new program
$
by formula, and that an additional be awarded to states
on the basis of competitive applications. In every case states
will be required to comply with national program criteria, and
would submit plans for approval by the Corporation for National
Service. To avoid micro-management, these plans will be approved
or disapproved in their entirety.
stet
In reviewing options, we discovered that there is a wide
range of views on how well state administered programs work.
While Governors like Roy Romer would implement programs we are
comfortable with, Bill Ford is at odds with his Republican
governor and is distrustful of delegating full control to the
governors.
inentive for
provide
We have tried to balance the need to give Governors enough
authorit to energetically undertake this responsibility/ and
become personally and fiscally invested, with concerns that some
states might exclude politically unpopular constituencies on
partisan or regional grounds, and concerns, raised particularly
by David Osborne, that state bureaucracy may be even more
constraining in some States than federal bureaucracy.
the natural secure organ At resourtine,
To parallel the independent character of a corporation at
the national level, we propose that state authority should be
vested in independent State National Service Commissions.
Lue
Members would be appointed by the governors, and would include
balared
representatives from several interested communites (students,
educators, labor, business, etc.). Modelled on the present
national Commission on National and Community Service, the new proposed
state commissions will be bi-partisan and would elect their own
federal
chair. To support the commissions, federal funding would be
provided for staff and administration, provided that states meet
gradually ramp up.
a match requirement, which base would begin at 20 percent and
1
To further promote federal/state partnership, the federal
Corporation's representative in a state will participate in
State Commission deliberations. This will assure that the
Corporation fully understands state plans when they are submitted
for review, and will provide early warning of possible problems
muly
LIAMS
that might result in disapproval of a plan. The objective is for
state plans to be negotiated so that disapproval is never
necessary, but to provide for a disapproval mechanism as a
sanction of last resort.
We are designing a fund matching requirement to encourage
private as well as local and state government support of programs
each
later years.
could
(approximately $1500 )
OUR
went
which receive federal funds. To make certain that at least part
of the match is in cash, and applied towards the basci stipend of
participants, we would require that 15 percent of the basic
minimum wage stipend for participants be funded through non-
federal cash contributions. We would allow additional matching
overatty
requirements to be met in-kind (providing facilities, equipment,
etc.)
Programs would also be able to supplement stipends and
other benefits with their own funds.
se
shart
we
Decision
all achieves
loca
The State commission approach seems to us to be a good
in
would
way to have the States assume a very significant role
in this program, while building in some checks and
X
balances (without micro managing) Please indicate
whether you are comfortable with the Commission
approach.
(pported
invest
Approve
State
she
Disapprove
prgree
hand
Need to discuss
ill not bold
be
Issues Requiring Further Guidance
funded
4 the
two
Junes
Education Benefits
parts
The differential benefit ($5,000 pre-college; outstanding
loans not to exceed $10,000, post-college) which we floated for
of
He
discussion after our last meeting has attracted significant
amount of criticism from the Hill and from student groups.
mutch
Objections center on two issues: (1) concern that participation
will be skewed towards post college par tielpation and (2) the
college service.
implication that pre-college service is / of less value than post-
At this point, the differential benefit is being criticized
by Senators Nunn and Mikulski. DLC criticism has been less
pronounced after discussions in which I explained that on average
the differential would be less than $2,000, since outstanding
loans average less than $7,000.
The differential benefit arose out of the concern you raised
at last month's NEC meeting that a $10,000 educational benefit is
too high for a recent high school graduate. The proposal was
designed as a compromise to preserve the possibility of a $10,000
benefit (strongly supported by the DLC) and to keep your campaign
promise that benefits would pay for a college education.
these semie
Given the criticism, I think we should re-think the
differential
Setting the benefit at $6,500 for post college
yesterday
these
The
Cletter
attached ussa5_c
,as well groups ash promoting pre service
name
would still allow repayment of the average loan X balance of a
Smaller
graduate from a four year state college. I would recommend
either a differential with a maximum post-college benefit of
$6,500 or setting a single benefit level if $5,000 (which would
require more than one year of service to pay off the average
state college loan balance)).
two
S
Reducing the size of the differential may or may not solve
our political problems. I would advise you to resolve this at a
meeting where the principal congressional players participate and
I would
become invested in the outcome. An intermediate soncession by
changing our proposal would be unlikely to finally resolve this
advise
matter Participants at the meeting should include Senators
against
Kennedy, Nunn, Mikulski and Wofford and Congressman Ford.
an
pre April 20
Please indicate whether we should arrange for a meeting.
singly
Yes
pell
No
Need to discuss
Refer
Use of Educational Benefit
and
training.
You have always talked about providing an educational
benefit to pay for college Many assumed that this would be
applicable to graduate school as well. As a practical matter, by
limiting the educational benefit to outstanding loans for college
graduates, there will be numerous cases where outstanding loans
are below the maximum benefit level and the full benefit cannot
be utilized. In contrast, pre-college participants will
presumably will use their full benefit in virtually all cases.
As an additional background consideration, there is likely to be
pressure to allow benefits to be used for other purposes, such as
downpayments on a first home.
Since we have never discussed this issue, I would like to
flag it for discussion or decision.
benefits appliable 4
^
College only
Post-college
and
Need to discuss
Praining
Benefits please to
education
the Applical
Should there be a maximum stipend
We are setting a federally supported X stipend at mimimum-
wage. We have always assumed that programs would be allowed to
supplement these stipends with their own funds. We have never addressed
resolved whether there is a maximum stipend that should be
allowed under our service program
minimumwaye
C
should
bea
The arguments for limiting stipends is to avoid service
federally
slots with "real" salaries which might be inconsistent with the
supported
idea of service and which would attract political criticism
There is also a concern that if there is no limit, state and
with
local government will find ways to package proposals which will
substitute national service dollars for local dollars presently
being spent to hire new teachers, policemen, nurses. etc.
Corahymer limit)
troubled
The arguments for no limit would be to allow/school
districts, hospitals and other "professional" service providers
to find a way to enter our program by using their own funds to
provide the balance of a full salary and offer our post service
benefit. Since there are limited funds available for police
corps, and teacher corps is not proposed to be funded, this would
allow for some investment in these positions through our national
service program. This would not be consistent with our earlier
discussion that police and teacher corps should be treated
separately.
to presene a
while prepusal
I recommend that in general we cap the maximim stipend at
twice the minimum wage because we run the risk that the line
between "service" and "professional", work will be completely
the Feacher there you prenat, corr
blurred if we allow full salaries to be paid. To leave the door
open for this type of funding in a very controllable way, we
?
&
might allow for professional models to be submitted for funding
PLEASE
through the innovative federal share of the program.
a (sen 1 higher + allow hmit Emin for wase) new
Decision
Cap at twice minimum wage:
Yes
his May For skill, some both the besture use ofther Allow talents. No
Need to discuss
To mayne proudly and the
professional models under federal innovative
funding share of the program:
Yes
No
Need to discuss
Age Limit
Pell Grants
Appropriations Jurisdiction
Displacement
Program Name
We are using AmeriCorps as a working name and need to know
if you are comfortable with this name.
Yes
No
Need to discuss
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 17, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR GEORGE STEPANOPOULOS
FROM:
ELI J. SEGAL
SUBJECT: National Volunteer Week (April 18-24)
I fear losing momentum on our national service agenda in the
aftermath of arch 1, especially with the looming Ma} 3 deadline
for healthcare introduction. Therefore, I look at National
Volunteer Week (NVW) as a critical period for us. I don't know
the extent to which you are familiar with NVW activities (a week
coincidental with, among other events, Earth Day, Holocaust
remembrance, return of Congress from spring recess and unless we
get it done before recess, campaign finance reform, not to
mention the Gay Rights March the following weekend).
During that week, the following happens in Washington, D.C.,
along with hundreds of other volunteer events around the U.S.:
a) President's Volunteer Action Awards (I expect the
President will present the awards on April 23.)
b) Youth Service Day (April 20) (Hillary is scheduled to
appear in the Rose Garden)
c) USA Awards for Service
d) Big Brother/Big Sister Awards
Beyond this, I expect the following to be in place during
the week:
a) Our legislation, including the Department of Education's
post secondary school finance piece, should be ready for
introduction.
b) We will be announcing the approximately six sites for our
Summer of Service (note: there could be some interesting
communications and political angles on this).
Mr. George Stephanopoulos
March 17, 1993
Page Two
c) We will have taken our inventory of all existing
executive branch service and volunteer activities (a massive
undertaking involving the cooperation of all Cabinet
officers, etc.) which offers many media opportunities as
well.
The issue is the extent to which we want to integrate any
and/or all of these activities into an already busy week. Or,
stated another way, are the communications needs of the national
service agenda great enough for us to do more than just a photo
opportunity incidental to the Pre ident's Volunteer Action
Awards?
I argue yes. I don't think this is parochial. National
Service is our best shot for a clear-cut 1993 legislative
triumph, delivering on one of the President's central campaign
commitments. While others may feel "this is a sure thing" so why
invest in it, a) I'm troubled by our being tied to the more
pedestrian and more confrontational student loan reform agenda,
and b) it belies logic to do anything other than going to your
strength.
Let's get together on this right away so I can plan
accordingly.
EJS:ke
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 17, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR GEORGE STEPANOPOULOS
FROM:
ELI J. SEGAL
SUBJECT: National Volunteer Week (April 18-24)
I fear losing momentum on our national service agenda in the
aftermath of March 1, especially with the looming May 3 deadline
for healthcare introduction. Therefore, I look at National
Volunteer Week (NVW) as a critical period for us. I don't know
the extent to which you are familiar with NVW activities (a week
coincidental with, among other events, Earth Day, Holocaust
remembrance, return of Congress from spring recess and unless we
get it don before recess, campaign finance reform, not to mention
the Gay Rights March the following weekend).
During that week, the following happens in Washington, D.C.,
along with hundreds of other volunteer events around the U.S.:
a) President's Volunteer Action Awards (I expect the
President will present the awards on April 23.)
b) Youth Service Day (April 20) (Hillary is scheduled to
appear in the Rose Garden)
c) USA Awards for Service
d) Big Brother/Big Sister Awards
Beyond this, I expect the following to be in place during
the week:
a) Our legislation, including the Department of Education's
post secondary school finance piece, should be ready for
introduction.
b) We will be announcing the approximately six sites for our
Summer of Service (note: there could be some interesting
communications and political angles on this).
Mr. George Stephanopoulos
March 17, 1993
Page Two
talker
c) We will have finished our inventory of all existing
executive branch service and volunteer activities (a massive
undertaking involving the cooperation of all Cabinet
officers, etc.) which offers many media opportunities as
well.
The issue is the extent to which we want to integrate any
and/or all of these activities into an already busy week. Or,
stated another way, are the communications needs of the national
service agenda great enough for us to do more than just a photo
opportunity incidental to the President's Volunteer Action
Awards.
I argue yes. I don't think this is Shial parochial. National
Service is our best shot for a clear cut 1993 legislative triumph delivering
against our campaign commitments. While others may feel "this is
on
a sure thing" so why invest in it, a) I'm troubled by our being
one
of
tied to the more pedestrians and more confrontational student
loan reform agenda, and b) it belies logic to do anything other
the
than going to your strength.
President's
Let's get together on this right away so I can plan
Central
accordingly.
EJS: ke
1
DRAFT
March 17, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR GEORGE STEPANOPOULOS
FROM:
ELI J. SEGAL
SUBJECT: National Volunteer Week (April 18-24)
02 ovr natural service esende
I fear losing momentumin the aftermath of March 1,
especially with the looming May 3 deadline for healthcare
introduction. Therefore, I look at National Volunteer Week (NVW)
as a critical period for us. I don't know the extent to which
you are familiar with NVW activities (a week coincidental with,
among other events, Earth Day, Holocaust remembrance, return of
Congress from spring recess and just March)
and unless we get it done before recess, campaign finance reform -not
to
mentur the Greys RYLA Much the following weekend).
During that week, the, following happens in Washington, D.C.,
along with hundreds of other events around the United States:
a) President's Volunteer Action Awards (I expect the
President will present the awards on April 23.)
b) Youth Service Day (April 20). (Hillary is scheduled to
appear in the Rose Garden).
Ithink
c) USA Awards for Service
d) Big Brother/Big Sister Awards
}
in recent years the this
Presedent (sesculed awards
to R R winness.
Beyond this, I expect the following to be in place during
the week:
a) Our legislation, including the Department of Education's
post secondary school finance piece, should be ready for
introduction.
of
Service
our
Third
b) We will be announcing the approximately six Seasons of
Service sites for Summer (note: there be some
interesting communications and political angles on this).
c) We will have finished our inventorying of all existing
executive branch service and 'volunteer' activities (a massive
undertaking involving the cooperation of all Cabinet
officers, etc.) which offers many media opportunities as
well.
The issue is the extent to which we want to integrate any
and/or all of these activities into an already busy week. Or,
stated another way, are the communications needs of the national
service agenda great enough for us to do more than just a photo
opportunity incidental to the President's Volunteer Action
Awards.
I argue yes. I don't think this is parochial. National
Service is our best shot for a clear cut 1993 legislative triumph
against our campaign commitments. While others may feel "this is
a sure thing" so why invest in it, a) I'm troubled by our being
tied to the more pedestrians and more confrontational student
loan reform agenda, and b) it belies logic to do anything other
than going to your strength.
Let's get together on this right away so I can plan
accordingly.
EJS: