Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "312303621",
    "label": "Staff Secretary Chron File [3]",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/312303621"
}

{
    "id": "312303621",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/312303621",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Staff Secretary Chron File [3]",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/312303621",
    "collections": [
        "Records of the Office of Staff Secretary (Clinton Administration)",
        "General Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-oss/7422171/7422171-20160970F-008-012-2021.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-oss/7422171/7422171-20160970F-008-012-2021.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-oss/7422171/7422171-20160970F-008-012-2021.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/312303621",
    "naId": 312303621,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "otherTitles": [
        "7422171-20160970F-008-012-2021"
    ],
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-oss/7422171/7422171-20160970F-008-012-2021.pdf",
    "mediaId": "a76480b26289e0fb",
    "ocrText": "FOIA Number: 2016-0970-F\nFOIA\nMARKER\nThis is not a textual record. This is used as an\nadministrative marker by the William J. Clinton\nPresidential Library Staff.\nCollection/Record Group:\nClinton Presidential Records\nSubgroup/Office of Origin:\nStaff Secretary\nSeries/Staff Member:\nGeneral Files\nSubseries:\nOA/ID Number:\n104673\nFolderID:\nFolder Title:\nStaff Secretary Chron File [3]\nStack:\nRow:\nSection:\nShelf:\nPosition:\nS\n40\n7\n5\n1\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJune 7, 1999\nMR. PRESIDENT:\nAttached is a DPC options memo on issuing a racial profiling\ndata collection EO (or directive) prior to Wednesday's\nroundtable discussion with civil rights and law enforcement\nrepresentatives. I've also attached a short memo from Chuck\nRuff with his views. I recommend you read both.\nMaria asked me to convey her thoughts; she thinks:\nit's important to note (as Chuck does) that the VP and AG\nhave been publicly critical of racial profiling;\ncivil rights groups may not view a data collection EO as\nbold leadership on this issue; and\nfederal law enforcement agencies may not be unalterably\nopposed to the Edley approach.\nDPC has a different view from Maria, especially on the last\npoint. You should know that DPC did preview the EO with\nWade Henderson, who responded favorably for the most part.\nMinyon Moore thinks it's important to tackle this issue in\nincremental steps (like this one), and believes it's worth doing\nbefore Wednesday's meeting.\nSean Maloney\n150\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJune 6, 1999\nMR. PRESIDENT:\nAttached is a DPC options memo on issuing a racial profiling\ndata collection EO prior to Wednesday's roundtable discussion\nwith civil rights and law enforcement representatives. I've also\nattached a short memo from Chuck Ruff with his comments.\nMaria is traveling, but thinks:\nit's important to note (as Chuck does) that the VP and AG\nhave been publicly critical of racial profiling;\ncivil rights groups will not view a data collection EO as\nbold leadership on this issue; and\nfederal law enforcement agencies may not be unalterably\nopposed to the Edley approach.\nDPC has a different view from Maria on this last point.\nSean Maloney\n306728\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJune 4, 1999\nExecutive Order\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT\nRacial Profiling\nFROM:\nBruce Reed\nSUBJECT:\nExecutive Order on Racial Profiling\nYou are scheduled to participate Wednesday in an hour-long roundtable discussion with\nabout 30 representatives of the civil rights and law enforcement communities, possibly including\nJesse Jackson, Kweisi Mfume, Al Sharpton, Wade Henderson, Hugh Price, FOP President Gil\nGallegos, Boston Police Commissioner Paul Evans, and Baltimore Police Commissioner Thomas\nFrazier. This discussion is meant to help the civil rights and law enforcement communities find\ncommon ground on how to deal with police abuse and misconduct, including racial profiling.\nAlthough the Attorney General, Chuck Ruff, and I have met with most of the invitees in\npreparation for this meeting, many remain skeptical about each other's motives and about what\nthe meeting will accomplish. We are hopeful that your involvement in the roundtable will help\nkeep the civil rights and law enforcement communities working together on this issue.\nAlso in preparation for this meeting, we have worked with the Departments of Justice and\nTreasury to draft an executive order on this issue. The order starts with a preamble expressing, in\ngeneral but strong terms, opposition to the use of racial profiling as a tool of law enforcement.\nThe order then directs federal law enforcement agencies to set up a system to collect data on the\nrace, ethnicity, color, and gender of the persons they stop, search, or otherwise examine. Within\none year of implementing this system, the Attorney General must report the data collected and\nmake any appropriate recommendations on how to promote greater fairness in federal law\nenforcement. Justice, Treasury, and the DPC believe that this order would constitute an effective\nway of demonstrating federal leadership in this area. The executive order essentially would do at\nthe federal level what the civil rights community most wants done at the state and local levels\n(and what legislation by Congressman Conyers would require): institute a strong system of data\ncollection and reporting to determine and disclose exactly where racial and other discrimination\nexists in traffic stops and other contacts with law enforcement.\nChris Edley has proposed a different kind of executive order, which would expressly\nprohibit (though, as explained below, perhaps with an exception) federal law enforcement\nofficers from taking race, ethnicity, and other specified traits into account when making stop and\nsearch decisions. This approach would require you to confront quite explicitly a difficult issue\n(which the data collection order allows you to avoid, at least for now): whether to allow the U.S.\nBorder Patrol to continue its current practice of using a person's perceived national origin or\nethnicity (essentially, whether the person looks Hispanic) in deciding what cars to search near the\nborder. The Edley executive order would either (1) effectively prohibit this practice, in the face\n2\nof the strong view of both the INS and Main Justice that it is an integral part of effective border\nenforcement, or (2) include a specific provision allowing the Border Patrol (the largest federal\nlaw enforcement agency and the one that most regularly conducts traffic stops) to continue this\npractice notwithstanding that it at least appears inconsistent with the general principles\nunderlying the order. Because DOJ, Treasury, and the Counsel's Office object to the first\napproach on substantive grounds (believing that where national origin is an element of the\nsuspected criminal offense, this kind of practice is both appropriate and necessary) and because\nDOJ and the DPC object to the second approach on political grounds (believing that it will cause\na firestorm within the Hispanic community), all your agency and White House advisors oppose\nEdley's alternative executive order.\nA more difficult question concerns whether to issue any executive order on Wednesday.\nThe Justice Department strongly believes that the data collection order is necessary to show that\nwe are making progress on this issue and doing something more than just talking. Both Justice\nand Treasury also believe deeply in the need for data collection and reporting, and worry that if\nwe do not issue this order now, we also will find reasons not to issue it in the future. Counsel's\nOffice, on the other hand, recommends that you put off issuing the data collection order and\nsimply engage in general discussion of racial profiling at the conference. Chuck notes that the\norder may displease both sides of the debate the civil rights community because it does not\nexpressly prohibit all federal law enforcement officers from engaging in all kinds of racial\nprofiling, the law enforcement community because it does demand collection and reporting of\nracial and other data (which most law enforcement groups strongly oppose at the local level). He\nalso notes that we will be issuing this controversial order before any members of the civil rights\nand law enforcement communities have had a chance to speak with you directly on the issue,\nperhaps appearing to preempt the very discussion in which you will be participating.\nDPC believes this is a close issue, but ultimately comes down on the side of releasing the\nexecutive order on Wednesday. To the extent that release of this order on Wednesday will\nprovoke criticism on one side or the other (or both), we do not think the order will become any\nless controversial with the passage of time. (We are mindful that the crime bill is being marked\nup this week by the House Judiciary Committee and that the support of the law enforcement\ncommunity for our crime proposals is important; we believe, however, that through careful\nconsultations, we can minimize any adverse effect of this executive action on the broader debate\nin Congress.) We also believe, as noted above, that this executive order does something useful\nand allows us to exercise leadership in this area.\nSign the executive order to collect data on federal law enforcement stops.\nDo not sign the executive order to collect data on federal law enforcement stops.\nLet's discuss.\n306733\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJune 6, 1999\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT\nFROM:\nCharles Ruff C\nSUBJECT:\nExecutive Order on Racial Profiling\nA few comments on Bruce's memorandum concerning the racial profiling executive\norder:\n1.\nAlthough the proposed executive order would parallel the data collection\nmandated for the states by the Conyers legislation, in my view it would be seen by the civil\nrights community as reflecting less forceful leadership on the issue of racial profiling than\nthey are expecting. This is so particularly because both the Vice President and the Attorney\nGeneral are already on the public record with statements declaring racial profiling to be\nimproper.\n2.\nThe issue of current Border Patrol practice is a difficult one, and we are\ntrying to work through with the INS how its need to enforce a law that has national origin\nas its central element can be squared with the presumptive impropriety of using ethnicity\nand national origin as a factor in making law enforcement decisions. The Border Patrol's\ncurrent practice does permit it to use ethnicity and national origin as one element in\ndeciding whether to make highway stops north of the Mexican border, and our goal, at a\nminimum, must be to ensure that any use of those indicia is carefully circumscribed and\nmonitored so that it does not become the equivalent of a New Jersey Turnpike traffic stop.\n3.\nOn the issue of when to issue the executive order, I have two concerns.\nFirst, since it will be seen as overriding state law enforcement objections and as being less\nthan the civil rights community expects, to issue it before meeting with both groups will\nleave both disappointed (and angry) and, as a matter of process, will give them the\nimpression that you came to the meeting with your mind made up. Second, I fear that the\nspecifics of the order will become the sole focus of the discussion and eliminate any\nmeaningful chance to discuss the broader issues on the agenda.\nI believe that the meeting will work better if you come to listen to the\nopposing (or at least different) views of the participants, make clear your strong belief that\nracial profiling is wrong, and then issue the executive order shortly thereafter, having taken\nthe groups' recommendations into account. You will have to be prepared to address the\nspecial problem of the Border Patrol but can do so in a setting in which you will have\nmade your basic principles clear and can express concern that any use of national origin by\nthe INS must be carefully constrained and monitored. I acknowledge the risk that the\nmeeting will not be as newsworthy if you do not issue the order, but I believe the risk is\ngreater that the participants will react badly to the timing (and the substance) of the order if\nit is issued beforehand.\nTIME OF TRANSMISSION:\nTIME OF RECEIPT\nWHITE HOUSE\nSITUATION ROOM\n'99 JUN 6 PM3:17\nPRECEDENCE:\nIMMEDIATE\nRELEASER:\nX\nPRIORITY\nROUTINE\nDTG:\nMESSAGE NO:\nCLASSIFICATION: unclassified\nPAGES: 6\n(Including Cover)\nFROM: Sean Maloney\n62702\nGFL/WW\n(NAME)\n(PHONE NUMBER)\n(ROOM NO.)\nMESSAGE DESCRIPTION:\nTO (AGENCY)\nDELIVER TO\nDEPT/ROOM NO. PHONE NUMBER\nCamp David\nCommander Gilday For the President)\nPlease give Commander Gilday 2 copies\nREMARKS:\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nFnday\nJune 11\nMr. President-\n'99 JUN 14AM8:45\nAs someone who grew up\nnamed Aun Frank, I have watched\nyour leadershipin Kosovo with\npride. Your courage & sleadfast.\nness made a huge di Pleance.\nThank you for what you have done\nso that my chi Idien -& - & all children-\nwill live in a better world.\nAun lewis\nCOS\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nFnday\nJune 11\nMr. President- -\n'99 JUN 14AM8:45\nAs someone who grew up\nnamed Aun Frank, I I have watched\nyour leadershipin Kosovo with\npride. your courage & sleadfast.\nness made a huge di Pleance.\nThank you for what you have done\nso that my children -& - & all children- -\nwill live in a better world.\nAun lewis\n307631\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nFnday\nJune 11 11\nMr. President-\n'99 JUN 14AM8:45\nAs someone who grew up\nnamed Aun Frank, I have watched\nyour leadershipin Kosovo with\npride. your courage & sleadfast.\nness made a huge di Pleance.\nThank you for what you have done\nso that my children -& - & all children-\nwill live in a better world.\nAun lewis\nI\nAnnlewis\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nTo The President\nI\nTHE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN\n3-19-99\nUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\nEASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS\n600 W. CAPITOL, ROOM 149\nStaffectay\nLITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201\nBILL WILSON\n(501)324-6863\nJUDGE\nFAX (501)324-6869\nMarch 11, 1999\nDid not receive letter\nuntil 3/15/99 when\nMs. Linda Dixon\nd returned to my\nClinton/Arkansas Office\neffice from Hope\n111 Center Street, Suite 1500\nLittle Rock, AR 72201\nL\nDear Linda:\nAttached is my letter to the President which I understand will be delivered to him this\nSaturday.\nI deeply appreciate your assistance!\nKudos\nK\nWm. R. Wilson, Jr.\ng lidw Thind\nJudge\nDan:\nDebbie did not add to this note that the reason this case was not logged is that the first letter we\ngot from Judge Nims has already been closed out. Woyneab checked regarding the handling of\nthese letters, and Janice LaChance from OPM said that the response needs to come from\nOPM not from the White House. I believe Woyneab was going to let Phil know about this.\nOther letters regarding the same subject have been coming in man\ngiven to Shannon to give to Woyneab also fyi\nJan\nok', interoffice if The\nand be have need to BC to been on look care-m Case- it welluse CALL jur for ship Phose\nan-\nNeed\n-\nNo\ndid not log\nI\nwill give to wayna\nyes\nmatch up w/ tax\nour t judges letter\nfter you have seen\nout of tickler\n3-19-99\nAfter you have seek,\nwe will send to\nBunkhardt -\nDAN -\nok\nMATCH UP C w/ TAX COURT\nJUDGES LEITER\nBA\nSent to\nOriginal\nfor OPM 3/3/\nAgency liaison\nUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\nEASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS\nStott\n600 W. CAPITOL, ROOM 149\nSN\nLITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201\nBILL WILSON\n(501) 324-6863\nJUDGE\nFAX (501) 324-6869\nMarch 11, 1999\nRe: Premiums for Federal Employees Group Life Insurance (FEGLI)\nMr. William Jefferson Clinton, President\nWhite House\n1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20500\nBY MESSENGER\nMy Dear President Clinton:\nYour Office of Personnel Management has drastically increased rates for life insurance,\nespecially for judges who are 70 years of age or older (an increase of more than\n$13,000 per year for those who have taken out the maximum amount of life\ninsurance).\nThis amounts to a 10% pay cut for these older judges most of whom are no longer\ninsurable. So, they can't simply drop out of FEGLI and take out other insurance.\nEnclosed are:\n1.\nA copy of my letter of today to Ms. Lachance, Director of OPM; and\n2. A copy of Mr. Ralph Mecham's letter of March 1, 1999 to Ms.\nLachance.\nMr. Mecham's letter gives an excellent overview of the problem, and points how\nterribly unfair the drastic rate increase is.\nI think the increase is not only unfair, but probably violates Article III. In any event,\nit is a body blow to the independence of the federal judiciary, and I think merits your\nkeen attention.\nPresident Clinton\nMarch 11, 1999\nPage Two\nThank you for your consideration.\nVery respectfully,\nWm. R. Wilson, Jr.\nUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\nEASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS\n600 W. CAPITOL, ROOM 149\nLITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201\nBILL WILSON\n(501) 324-6863\nJUDGE\nFAX (501) 324-6869\nMarch 11, 1999\nRe: Premiums for Federal Employees Group Life Insurance\nMs. Janice R. Lachance, Director\nOffice of Personnel Management\n1900 East Street, N.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20415\nBY FAX\nDear Ms. Lachance:\nAs a member of the Board of the Federal Judges Association, I believe that I am\nobliged to report to the federal judges in Arkansas, and elsewhere in the Eighth Circuit,\nregarding the recent premium increases.\nAs you know, for judges who are seventy or older and who have taken the full amount\nof available insurance, the new schedule amounts to a pay cut of more than $13,000\nper year.\nAs you surely know by now, this news comes as a shock. I have several questions:\n1.\nWhy such a drastic increase;\n2.\nWas the Federal Judiciary kept abreast of the proposed increase as it was\nbeing planned -- if so, who -- if not, why not; and\n3.\nRegardless of who might have been consulted in the judicial branch, why\nwasn't such a drastic increase announced broadly and early on.\nSome of the judges who are 70 years old (perhaps many of them) have placed this\ninsurance in irrevocable trusts, and they are caught. I would expect that all or most\nMs. Lachance\nMarch 11, 1999\nPage Two\nof these older judges are uninsurable in the private market -- as a practical matter.\nA 58 year old federal district judge tells me that he has checked his rates and that he\ncan get private term life insurance for approximately half of what he is paying for the\nmaximum FEGLI. I have not checked these numbers myself, but the judge with whom\nI talked is extremely thorough and I believe that this is a fact. If it is a fact, what has\ngone wrong here?\nAs I dictate this letter I have received a copy of Mr. Leonidas Ralph Mecham's letter\nto you dated March 1, 1999. While I am not yet \"fully advised in the premises\" it\nappears that he is right on point with every point.\nIt seems to me that a grievous error has been made by the OPM, and that it should be\ncorrected forthwith.\nPlease advise.\nCordially,\nMas\nWm. R. Wilson, Jr.\nCC: President William Jefferson Clinton\nOFFICE\nOF\nTHE\nUNITED\nADMINISTRATIVE\nSTATES\nCOUNTS\nLEONIDAS RALPH MECHAM\nADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE\nDirector\nUNITED STATES COURTS\nCLARENCE A. LEE, JR.\nAssociate Director\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20544\nMarch 1, 1999\nHonorable Janice R. Lachance\nDirector\nOffice of Personnel Management\n1900 E Street, N.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20415\nDear Ms. Lachance:\nI am writing to express the strong objection of the judiciary to the Office of Personnel\nManagement's recent determination to increase rates and change the table age bands for the\nFederal Employees' Group Life Insurance (FEGLI) program as to judges, and to request that\nOPM take immediate action to rescind this negative action against judges of the United States\nwho hold lifetime appointments to office during good behavior under Article III of the\nConstitution. Specifically, we urge immediate repeal of these rate schedule changes with\nrespect to federal judges and judicial officers.\nJudges have relied to their detriment on the continued availability of FEGLI Option B\ncoverage based on a rate structure reasonably resembling the existing one. In the absence of\nany legislative mandate or change in circumstances justifying alteration of this structure as to\nArticle III judges, I would assert that the doctrine of equitable estoppel counsels rescission of\nthis rate change, which will have the effect of making Option B coverage constructively\nunavailable to many if not most judges.\nThe Problem\nUnder the new schedule, beginning on May 1, 1999, many Article III judges will be\nrequired to pay twice as much for the very same life insurance benefits which they had in\neffect on April 30, 1999. A judge who is age 70 or older and wishes to continue to carry five\nmultiples of FEGLI Option B coverage will have to pay more than $13,000 in additional\npremiums per year. As a result, for a circuit judge who is age 70 or older and carries Basic,\nOption A Standard, and five multiples of Option B-Additional, the premium will total\napproximately $27,135 per year - a two-fold increase. These changes threaten the financial\nstability and estate plans of judges and their spouses and families, in a manner unlike any other\nfederal employees'. For many of these judges, the option to disenroll from FEGLI and\nA TRADITION OF SERVICE TO THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY\nHonorable Janice R. Lachance\nPage 2\npurchase life insurance from a private insurance carrier is no longer available since they may\nnot now be insurable on account of age or health.\nHistorical Background\nCurrently, approximately 500 Article III judges who are age 65 or older are enrolled in\nFEGLI Option B. Approximately 400 judges age 50 or above are enrolled in FEGLI Option B\nas well. For these judges, FEGLI coverage amounts to \"whole life,\" whereas it has constituted\n\"term insurance\" for other federal employees electing it. Prior to the enactment of the \"Federal\nEmployees' Life Insurance Improvement Act,\" Pub. L. No. 105-311, Article III judges were\nthe only federal employees who did not face the termination of FEGLI Option B upon\nretirement. See 5 U.S.C. § 8714b(c)(1); Winner V. Cornelius, 622 F. Supp. 1153 (D. Colo.\n1985); Moynahan V. United States, 620 F. Supp. 277 (E.D. Ky. 1985) (a federal judge who\nhas retired from the bench is entitled to the same level of coverage under FEGLI as the judge\nreceived while on the bench).\nMoreover, the new law does not require any change in the time-honored treatment of\nArticle III judges in this program. Indeed, the Senate Report which discussed the legislation\namending section 8714b(c) in 1984 clearly expresses the intent to treat Article III judges as a\ndistinct class of employees for purposes of FEGLI Option B. See S. Rep. No. 98-55, at 29\n(1983). In sum, for fifteen years, Article III judges have been allowed to keep all of their\nFEGLI insurance in force indefinitely by continuing to pay the premiums which became\neffective at age 60.\nConsequences for Judges\nBecause judges' FEGLI coverage amounts to \"whole life,\" many of them view it as\nboth protection against untimely death and an estate builder as well. Indeed, for many judges\nFEGLI is the centerpiece of their estate plans. When these judges planned their finances and\nestates, they could not reasonably foresee that OPM would someday effect these drastic\nincreases in the rate schedule. By doubling the premiums which these judges are required to\npay, these changes effectively deny judges continued access to FEGLI.\nArticle III judges have a statutory right to group life insurance, and I believe that they\nhave a constitutional, statutory, and contractual right to retain it without significant alteration.\nArticle III, section 1 of the Constitution directs that judges of the United States receive \"a\nCompensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.\" Under\nArticle III, a judge receives payment of his or her salary for life. Part of a judge's\ncompensation is the fringe benefit of life insurance authorized by statute and contracted for by\nthe government. It is my strong sense that OPM's arbitrary action violates the terms and\nconditions of Article III judges' employment with the United States.\nHonorable Janice R. Lachance\nPage 3\nAs you may know, many Article III judges have foregone lucrative private sector legal\ncareers to serve the public in this capacity. Since 1993, they have received but one cost-of-\nliving salary adjustment. As a result, the value of a judge's salary is worth $22,000 less today\nthan it was in 1992. It is both grossly unfair and unnecessary for OPM to take an action that\nfurther exacerbates the real loss of compensation which judges have recently experienced.\nOPM's action to increase rates and change the table age bands was taken without giving\nany notice and opportunity for comment to either the third branch of government or to its\nofficers and employees. It was accomplished in a manner that seems inconsistent with the\nspirit and intent of the Life Insurance Improvement Act. At the time of enactment of this\nlegislation, it was the sense of Congress that this new law would enable employees to carry\nOption B insurance into retirement. See 144 Cong. Rec. H10191 (daily ed. Oct. 8, 1998)\n(statement of Rep. Mica). By making Option B insurance so costly for enrollees age 65 and\nover, OPM has made this statutorily mandated improvement both inaccessible and unusable.\nIndeed United States bankruptcy judges and magistrate judges, who now have this insurance\ncoverage available to them for the first time in recalled or retired status, may well find the\npremium rates so costly as to effectively price Option B insurance beyond their means.\nOPM's change in the FEGLI premium rate schedule also imposes an unfair financial\npenalty on voluntary judicial service. Presently, senior judges voluntarily adjudicate more\nthan 15 percent of the federal judicial caseload. This steep increase in premium rates will\nprimarily affect these judges. As a consequence, some of them may be forced to retire\ncompletely from the judicial office and obtain more lucrative employment in the private sector\nin order to pay the increased cost of FEGLI premiums.\nFor judges who have made an irrevocable assignment of the ownership of their FEGLI\npolicy, the situation is even more grave. Because assignors may not cancel assigned insurance\n(this power is vested in the assignees under OPM's regulations for assignment of FEGLI\npolicies), these judges have no choice but to continue to pay FEGLI premiums,\nnotwithstanding that they may no longer be able to afford to do so.\nIncongruity with Legislation\nAs I understand it, OPM deems the restructuring of the FEGLI premium rate schedule\nnecessary because of potential changes in the demographics of enrollees under the Life\nInsurance Improvement Act. This justification seems specious. The Congressional Budget\nOffice, in its analysis of the potential cost of the Life Insurance Improvement Act, estimated\nthat between 1999 and 2003, premium payments from retirees with Option B coverage would\nincrease by $183 million but that claims payments would rise by only $108 million. Thus, the\nEmployees Life Insurance Fund will, as a result of this legislation, experience a $75 million\nincrease in revenues. As I understand it, the Employees Life Insurance Fund currently has\ntotal reserves well in excess of $19 billion. In its two most recent reports on the status of\nHonorable Janice R. Lachance\nPage 4\nFEGLI, OPM reported that for fiscal year 1997 revenues over expenses were about $1.3\nbillion and that for fiscal year 1995 revenues over expenses were about $916 million. See\nUnited States Office of Personnel Management, The Fact Book: Federal Civilian Workforce\nStatistics 100 (1998); United States Office of Personnel Management, The Fact Book: Federal\nCivilian Workforce Statistics 68 (1997). Obviously, the Employees Life Insurance Fund is and\nwill continue to be financially solvent, and there is absolutely no need to generate additional\nrevenues through premium rate increases.\nFurther, the OPM rate changes seem extraordinary given the Internal Revenue\nService's proposed changes to its table of \"Uniform Premiums for $1,000 of Group Term Life\nInsurance.\" For enrollees age 65 to 69, the Internal Revenue Service premium rate is $1.27\nper $1,000, and for enrollees age 70 and over it is $2.06 per $1,000. Under the OPM\nschedule, enrollees age 65 to 69 would pay $1.95 per $1,000, and enrollees age 70 and over\nwould pay $3.033 per $1,000. This calls into question the integrity of your agency's actuarial\ndata. I should also note that Towers Perrin, an international benefits consulting firm, surveyed\nseveral insurance companies for the Administrative Office in 1998. At the time, Metropolitan\nLife Insurance reported that employee cost for supplemental life insurance for enrollees age 65\nto 69 is $1.44 per $1,000, and for enrollees age 70 and over it is $2.224 per $1,000. In view\nof this substantial differential, I must ask what additional benefits inure to federal employees to\njustify the additional cost of $1 per $1,000 of insurance?\nProposed Remedies\nIn light of the above, I request that you consider the following. First, I urge that OPM\nadministratively determine that the premium insurance rates for Article III judges shall remain\nfixed at the current age band (which is 60 and above), just as they have been since the early\n1980's. At a minimum, I ask that OPM suspend the introduction of the new premium rate\nbands (ages 65-69 and 70 and over) until there are detailed discussions between OPM and\nJudicial Branch leaders. I also urge that you act to reverse the impact of the rate table change\nupon judges who have assigned the ownership of their policies, pending OPM discussions with\njudiciary leaders.\nShould you determine to deny these reasonable administrative requests, I ask you to\nconsider legislative remedies to mitigate the impact upon Article III judges. First, I believe\nthat the judiciary should be given statutory authority to use its appropriated funds to offset the\nadditional cost of this insurance for judges age 65 and over. As an alternative, I would ask\nthat OPM endorse legislation authorizing the judiciary to contract for a separate life insurance\nplan for judicial officers and employees and to use its appropriated funds for the payment of\nbenefit premiums as the Judicial Conference of the United States may determine appropriate.\nThe rate increases should be suspended until these steps are completed and in effect.\nHonorable Janice R. Lachance\nPage 5\nFinally, as a matter of policy and to enable government agencies to continue to be\ncompetitive employers, I request that OPM seek legislation authorizing agencies to pay the\nentire cost of basic life insurance for their officers and employees. I understand that in a 1997\nhearing before the House Civil Service Subcommittee, key witnesses including Margery\nBrittain, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company's Vice President for National Accounts,\ntestified that FEGLI is unusual in that most large employers pay 100 percent (as opposed to\nFEGLI's 33 percent) of the cost of basic life insurance for employees. I believe that judicial\nofficers and employees deserve better than what they currently receive under the FEGLI\nprogram. If the federal government is to remain competitive, we must progress beyond a\n1960's style benefits system.\nIn closing, I trust that you will seriously consider my requests and that you will\npromptly act to reverse the effect of this FEGLI premium rate change as to all federal judicial\nofficers. I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible on this matter.\nSincerely,\nLeonidas Ralph Mecham\nDirector\ncc:\nHonorable Thad Cochran\nHonorable Daniel K. Akaka\nHonorable Joe Scarborough\nHonorable Elijah E. Cummings\nHonorable Wm. Terrell Hodges\nHonorable David R. Hansen\nHonorable Alan H. Nevas\nUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n149 U.S. courthouse\n600 WEST CAPITOL\nLITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201\nBILL WILSON, JUDGE\nPresident William J. Clinton\nWhite House\n1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20500\nTHE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN\n3-19-99\nUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\nEASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS\n600 W. CAPITOL, ROOM 149\nLITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201\nBILL WILSON\n(501)324-6863\nJUDGE\nFAX (501)324-6869\nMarch 11, 1999\nDid not receive letter\nuntil 3/15/99 when\nMs. Linda Dixon\nd returned to long\nClinton/Arkansas Office\n111 Center Street, Suite 1500\noffice from Hoge.\nLittle Rock, AR 72201\nL\nDear Linda:\nAttached is my letter to the President which I understand will be delivered to him this\nSaturday.\nI deeply appreciate your assistance!\nKudos\n&\nWm. R. Wilson, Jr.\nSean -\nHow should we handle?\ncarl\n-\nbeanding\n07/08/99 15:01 202 456 9130\nNSC-INTERAMERICA\n001\nNATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL\n'99 JUL 9 AM8:25\nFAX COVER SHEET\nNATIONAL\nFrom: Lillian Rice, Inter-Am, NSC\nSECURITY\nTo:\nCarol Cleveland\nCOUNCIL\nAgency: WHO Staff Secretary\nFax Number: 62215\nDate/Time: July 8, 1999\n17th & Penn, N.W.\nWashington, D.C.\nNo. of pages to follow: 1\n20504\nMessage:\nPlease see attached.\nDid you get a complete,\nclear transmission? If not,\nAlso, please let me know if my query is not clear or\nplease call:\nif you need more information. Unfortunately, the\n(202) 456- 9139\ncable in question is classified and cannot be faxed.\nMany thanks,\nLllier\n07/08/99\n15:01\n202 456 9130\nNSC-INTERAMERICA\n002\nAs I mentioned, the Mexican government is interested in getting\na better understanding of what institutional structures in the\nEOP help to coordinate the policy-making process. There are 3\nparticular issues here:\n1. mediating access to the President\n2. maintaining institutional memory / records keeping\n3. coordinating the interests of different agencies and\nmaintaining clear lines of authority.\nIt would be helpful to know the role of the Staff Secretary's\noffice relative to other bodies in the EOP, especially as\nrelates to (1) and (2). .\nFile\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nAugust 18. 1999\n'99 AUG 17 PM2:03\nDear Mr. President:\nAttached please find the transcript of your remarks at\nthe AFL-CIO Executive Committee meeting in\nChicago.\nYou requested a copy to review and to discuss with\nTony Coehlo.\nPlease let me know if I can be of further assistance.\nSincerely,\nKarun Karen A. Tramontano\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nOffice of the Press Secretary\nInternal Transcript\nAugust 3, 1999\nREMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT\nIN MEETING WITH AFL-CIO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE\nQ\nWell, we're happy to welcome the President, happy to\nhave this opportunity. Six and a half years ago, working people\nin America were in desperate need of a champion. And over the\npast six and a half years, our President has been the champion\nthat they were looking for.\nAnd you know the litany of issues as well as I do, in terms\nof what the achievements of our President has been, under the\ntoughest of circumstances in terms of the Congress that he had to\ndeal with, and taking on both domestically as well as\ninternationally, SO many different issues.\nAnd standing up strong on behalf of workers and their rights\nand their protections and enforcement of the laws that have been\npassed over the years, affecting workers and their jobs;\nadvocating the most progressive social programs, in terms of\nhealth care and fighting hard to preserve Social Security and\nMedicare; standing up for working families when it comes to\nmaintaining and expanding programs as he's doing with the\nprescription drugs and the Medicare program; what he's doing in\nterms of standing up strong and courageously when it comes to\nwhere the surplus should be dedicated -- and you're as familiar\nas I am with all of his successes.\nAnd it's a great opportunity for us to be able to express\nour thanks to the President and we have been proud of him in his\ninternational work, as well. Somebody, as we were going around\nthe table, complimented him on the Kosovo situation. I was in\nGeneva, as were some others -- Sandy was there -- when the\nPresident spoke out on child labor -- the first time in the\nhistory of the ILO for the President of the United States address\nthe ILO in Geneva; last year at the WTO he spoke out strongly on\nbehalf of core labor standards and putting a human face on\nglobalization.\nFor all of this, Mr. President, we say thank you very much,\nyou've been a real champion of working families and we look\n-MORE-\n2\nforward to continuing to work aggressively with you on the very\nissues that you're focused on, and accomplishing as much as we\ncan during your administration.\nWe're happy that the President has brought along some good\nfriends. It's a historic occasion when we have three members of\nthe Cabinet with the President of the United States here at the\nsame time. And we're happy to welcome Secretary of Labor Alexis\nHerman, (applause); Secretary of Transportation Rodney Slater,\n(applause) ; and one who knows Chicago well, Secretary of Commerce\nBill Daley. (Applause.) And they're a part of the great team\nthat the President has had, and back in Washington, John Podesta\nis working and he's doing SO much of what the President's program\nis, and has been a major contact for us on our agenda and our\nissues. And with the President here today is John's assistant,\nKaren Tramontano. (Applause.)\nAnd as has been said, in addition to the President, the Vice\nPresident has been one of our strongest supporters and has done a\ngreat job in promoting the issues of working families, and\npromoting the rights of workers to organize, and all of their\nother basic rights. So it's an outstanding team. But it's my\npleasure and my privilege to introduce the leader of that team,\nour own President, Bill Clinton. (Applause.)\nTHE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Thank you very much. Well,\nthank you very much, John. I want to thank all of you for giving\nme a chance to come by and visit with you today. When John found\nout that I was going to be in Chicago today, he invited me by.\nAnd the last time we met, I think, was over the telephone last\nOctober, with this group. So I wanted to come.\nI have just come, interestingly enough, from a meeting. Mr.\nBuffenbarger (phonetic) came with me, so I gave him a ride over\nhere in the caravan, because we'd been over meeting, celebrating\nour Welfare-to-Work partnership, and the fact that we have now\ncut the welfare rolls to half what they were when I took office;\nand in no small measure to the support we received both from\nbusiness and labor people, helping people to move from welfare to\nwork. And I'm glad have the chance to come by here.\nI wanted to begin by saying -- when we talked last October\nby phone, I was asking for your help in the election, and you\ngave it, and we won. And I am very grateful. And believe it or\nnot, even though we've -- you can't tell from the priorities\nbeing pushed by the Republicans in the Congress, it had a\nprofound impact on the climate of Washington -- the fact that,\nfor the first time since 1922, the President's party, in the\nsixth year of a presidency, picked up seats in the House of\nRepresentatives. It literally happened last in 1822.\n-MORE-\n3\nAnd they know it, and it changed the whole kind of climate\nthere. And I wouldn't be surprised if, as a result of that, we\nwound up with some significant advances in the next 60 days that\nwould not have otherwise happened -- and a lot of the things that\nwe used to have to fight off, we're probably not having to fight\nso hard on now because of what happened in the last election.\nAnd it wouldn't have happened without you, and I'm very grateful.\nI would like to just make a couple of other brief points,\nand then I'd like to listen to you. First, happy birthday,\nLinda. (Laughter and applause.)\nWhen I took office in '93, you know, the Republicans could\nhave a reasonable argument, I guess, that the ideas that we had\nwere wrong -- because they hadn't been tested. And you ought to\ngo back and read what all those guys said in '93 about our\neconomic plan. Phil Gramm said that we'd have a bigger deficit,\nand it was going to put the economy in the tank and all that.\nYou know, you just ought to go back and read what they all say.\nAnd, now, we have fought for the right things, and we have\nfought against the right things. We beat their Contract with\nAmerica; we beat their attempts to weaken OSHA and all the labor\nstandards, and the Davis-Bacon Law, and all of that. And the\nevidence is in, and I don't think it's subject to any dispute.\nAnd I think you need to really make sure your members\nunderstand that as we go into this 2000 election, because there\nis no question, now, that sensible -- that Democratic economics\nwork better for the American people than Republicans do.\nSomebody asked me the other day what I thought about Governor\nBush raising all that money and I said, well, just shows you we\ndidn't discriminate, and who benefited from our economy. And\nthey'v all got amnesia now, so they think they can get their\ncrowd in and do just as well. But they can't.\nBut you should feel proud of that -- both what we were for\nand what we were against.\nSecond, if you look at where we are now, it seems to me that\nthere are a number of very large issues facing us. And I'll just\nmention three or four. But it all is within the context of, what\nare we going to do with this moment of prosperity? And what are\nwe going to do with the surplus?\nI think we've got to deal with this question of the aging of\nAmerica. We've got to take the bulk of this money and save it to\nfix Social Security and Medicare, and provide a modest\nprescription drug benefit. Three out of four seniors don't have\naccess to prescription medicine that is adequate -- that's either\n-MORE-\n4\naffordable or adequate in coverage. So that's the first thing I\nthink we have to do.\nSecond thing I think we have to do, before we cut taxes, is\nmake sure that we've got an appropriate investment in education,\nmedical research, national defense and the other critical areas\nto our country's future. A lot of that affects union members, by\nthe way. If we over-cut the basic operations of government, or\nwe can't fund our other fundamental responsibilities.\nThe third thing I think we have to do is to not have a tax\ncut that's SO big that we can't pay off the debt within the next\n15 to 16, 17 years, because if we keep this debt going down --\nwe're going to pay $85 billion down on the national debt this\nyear. And every time we do that, it keeps interest rates lower,\nwhich means more investment, more jobs, higher earnings, higher\nwages, and lower home mortgage rates, and credit card rates, and\ncollege loan rates and car payment rates for ordinary people.\nAnd I believe it's now the progressive thing to do, and I\nwould hope that the AFL-CIO would actually advocate -- I want you\nto think about it; have your economists tell you if they think\nI'm right -- but we're living in a global economy where money\nmoves around the world at the speed of light, and interest rates\nare set in a global environment, and we now -- if we can keep\npaying this debt down and keep these interest rates low, there's\ngoing to be a whole lot more labor people working. And the next\ntime we have a crisis like this Asian financial crisis, we'll be\nrelatively less vulnerable to it. So I feel very strongly about\nthis, and I hope we can do that.\nBut the main thing is, if we give all this money away in a\ntax cut now, the basic beneficiaries of the tax cut will be my\ngeneration, the baby boom generation, who will then turn around\nand ask the American people to take care of us when we retire --\nwhen we could have fixed Social Security and Medicare, now, and\ninstead we chose to put our hands out and take the money right\nnow, instead of fixing it so that we wouldn't be a burden on our\nchildren when we do retire. And, parenthetically, it also gives\nyou a much stronger American economy. So I think it's a huge\nissue, and I think we're right on it.\nNow, let me just mention a couple of other things. We have\ntwo -- I think, two significant problems with the economy now.\nOne is that after working like crazy for five years to get the\nmanufacturing base of the country going again, and gaining nearly\n1 million manufacturing jobs, we're now losing manufacturing\njobs, because of the aftermath of the Asian financial crisis,\nprimarily. And because the Europeans are much more protectionist\nthan we are.\n-MORE-\n5\nAnd I've asked -- I know the Vice President met with some of\nyou recently, but I've asked the National Economic Council to get\nour Cabinet people together, all of them that work on the\neconomy, and try to come up with another manufacturing strategy.\nWe had one in '93, and it worked, and then this Asian financial\ncrisis came along and we started losing a lot of jobs.\nYou know, we have some power on the trade front. Secretary\nDaley helped us -- we have restored steel imports to their pre-\ncrisis levels, but that doesn't necessarily overcome the\nproblems. We have to figure out how we can grow the\nmanufacturing base again. I think it is a grave mistake for the\nUnited States to give up on the idea that an important part of\nour overall economic strategy should be to have a strong\nmanufacturing base. And I was very proud of the fact that we\nwere gaining manufacturing jobs for the first time in 20 years,\nreally. And it's been very frustrating to me since the crisis\nhit in '97. So we will work with you on that.\nThe other big problem is, there's still a lot of places that\nthis economic recovery hasn't reached. There are a lot of small\nand medium-sized towns that lost the only town factory that never\nrecovered. There's the isolated places, like Appalachia or the\nIndian reservations. There are the inner-city neighborhoods and\nthe Mississippi Delta, where we haven't seen a restoration of\neconomic opportunity.\nAnd as you know, we went around to some of those places a\ncouple of weeks ago. And I'm trying to persuade the Congress to\ntake this empowerment zone concept that we've worked very hard on\na lot of you have helped us on -- and adopt a national\napproach that would give people the same financial incentives to\ninvest in our distressed and forgotten areas that we give them to\ninvest overseas now.\nAnd this is something I'd really like to see labor get\nbehind. I'm not saying we shouldn't get people incentives to\nhelp develop the Caribbean, but I think they ought to have the\nsame incentives to develop poor places in West Virginia, or\nKentucky, or Mississippi, or on an American Indian reservation\nor South Phoenix, or East Los Angeles, or what have you.\nAnd I think, you know, this could offer a real opportunity\nfor certain kinds of investments to go in where we would need\nand which would give you an opportunity, maybe, even to expand\nthe base of your membership, to expand your apprenticeship\nprograms, to do all kinds of things that we could maybe work\ntogether on.\nBut I think we ought to really be working at this, because\n-MORE-\n6\nif you ask yourself: if I were in a union that hadn't lost jobs\nbecause of the manufacturing crisis, if I were in another kind of\nunion, I'd be sitting here thinking -- and all of my members had\nwork and we were all happy -- I'd be sitting here thinking, how\nin God's name can we keep this thing going without having\ninflation, which would cause the Federal Reserve to raise\ninterest rates too much, which will put us back in the recession?\nHow can I keep it going?\nWell, if you think about it, the expansion of investment and\njobs, and the creation of new consumers in areas where they\ndidn't exist before, is an inflation-free way to grow the\nAmerican economy. So it actually makes, relatively speaking, a\nlot more sense to look at whether there can be more jobs in some\nof these isolated places.\nAnd there are all kinds of questions that have to be faced\n-- you know, Teamster-like questions. How are you going to get\n-- if you had a manufacturing operation in a little town in\nEastern Kentucky, how do you get the trucks in and out of there?\nHow are you going to get the stuff in and out? I mean, there's\nlots of different questions.\nBut I want to make a serious effort in the last year and a\nhalf I've got on the job to try to build a framework of economic\nopportunity in places that have literally have not been touched\nin over 30 years. And if we can't do it now, we'll never get\naround to it.\nSo if we can deal with the manufacturing issue; if we can\ndeal with this issue; and then deal with these big issues, I\nthink -- number one, I think it's the right thing to do for the\ncountry. And number two, I think it's a good setting for the\ncoming election.\nAnd that's the last point I want to make. You know, I'm not\nrunning for anything. I can't run for anything. It's a good\nthing the Constitution limits you, or I'd run again. (Laughter\nand applause.) It's probably a good thing we've got this\nconstitutional limit. \"\nBut I just want to tell you something about the present\nstate of play. I want to make you a prediction. I believe that\nthe presidential race will be within two to three points, and I\nbelieve that we have a better than 50-50 chance of winning it. I\nwill be surprised if we don't. Now, I know that contradicts\nevery conventional wisdom today. I know what these polls say. I\nknow all that.\nBut what I know is -- you have to understand, the\n-MORE-\n7\nRepublicans have a great advantage going into a presidential race\nbecause they have -- a lot of people don't think they're supposed\nto vote for Democrats for President. And in every eight-year\ncycle, people intend to change parties. They sort of think they\nought to.\nRichard Nixon ran dead even with John Kennedy in 1960. At\nthis point in 1959, he was 21 points behind, not 13 or 14.\nGeorge Bush was 17 points behind Michael Dukakis in August, of\nthe November election. The people of this country have not\nstarted focusing on this election yet. They haven't thought\nabout what our record is, who played a part in it, what the real\nissues are.\nYou know, I've been through this a lot. And let me remind\nyou, I was in third place in June of 1992. Third place. When I\ngot the votes to be nominated for President, I was running third.\nSo what I think, for whatever it's worth, my advice is that\nwe should all focus on making sure people know what our record\nis, people know what the issues are, where we stand on them,\ngetting everybody else to say where they stand on them. And we\nought to look good, sound good, be happy and work like hell. And\nI think it'll work out. This is what I believe.\nAnd I don't want you all to be discouraged about this. You\nknow, the Republicans, they want back in real bad. They miss\ngoing to the state dinners and all that, and they're interested\nin power. But if you look at what they're saying, they're trying\nto be very careful, and they're trying to avoid taking positions\non a lot of things.\nBut, slowly but surely, every week another position gets\ntaken. And then, slowly but surely after that, you get to\npublicize those positions. And then the American people, as they\ngo along, will make a real and reasoned choice. And I believe\nthat we have an excellent chance to be victorious, because our\nideas have been good for the country, and they've been tested\nagainst theirs, and the evidence is, ours work and theirs don't\n-- and people agree with us on the great challenges.\nNow, they have great money. They have great skills. I\ndon't want to minimize that. They have great capacity to do\nthis. But I feel very comfortable that this is going to be a\npretty close race, and I think the chances are much better than\n50-50, I believe, that we'll win it. That's what I believe. If\nwe all keep our heads up, and keep our heads clear and trust the\nAmerican people, and fight.\nAnd I know that the money bothers a lot of people. They'll\n-MORE-\n8\nprobably out-spend us $200 million this time, in total. They\nout-spent us $100 million last time, and we won. Keep in mind,\nthat congressional victory you won, we were being out-spent by\n$100 million.\nBut it's okay, if we have enough, and we fight and we stay\nin a good frame of mind. So I really believe the best thing is\nfor all of us to take a deep breath, show a lot of confidence, be\nproud of what we have done, focus on the continuing problems and\nchallenges, and just keep going to work every day and fighting.\nI think that the chances are it's going to come out all right.\nAnd, you know, you've all done too much for me. If I didn't\nbelieve this, I wouldn't tell you. I'd just be quiet. I'm\ntelling you what I really believe after a lifetime of working\nthis.\nAnd I also personally believe in my Vice President. I know\nhim, and he is a winner. And he has gotten a lot of hits here,\nand everybody's had a lot of fun doing it. But it's a long road\nthat doesn't turn. And if somebody asked me if I had to take\nhits or roses in August of the year before the election, I'd say\ngive me the hits now and the roses later. I'd a lot rather have\nit that way than the reverse. And I predict to you that will\nhappen, too.\nSo you all just have a good time here, and keep doing what\nyou're doing, and everything's going to be fine. That's my\nprediction. (Laughter and applause.)\nQ\nThe President has a few minutes, and would be\ninterested in hearing from some of you. Jay Mason (phonetic).\nMR. MASON: First, let me thank the President for your call\nregarding the candidate situation and election. I'm very\nappreciative but, beyond that, in your conversation, you asked\nwhether you thought the mood was changing. And I said I didn't\nthink so, and you alluded to your speech in Chicago and Geneva.\nThe mood is not changing, as far as the employers are\nconcerned. We're just working hard, we're just working smart,\nthese kind of things -- we're more persistent. You may not know\nthis, but in that situation where we've been at it since the\nmiddle '70s, 1974 with the first election -- '91, '95, '97, '99\n-- in each situation we lost by a few votes because of major,\nmajor violations of the law by the employers, by the employer in\nthis case -- a series of employers, because this isn't one\nemployer, it was a history of one employer after another not only\nresisting the union, but violating the law wholesale. And we've\ngotten some extraordinary remedies that have not been granted\n-MORE-\n9\nbefore, yet we had to keep coming back and back.\nSo my feeling is, as I said to you on the phone, that the\nmood has not changed as far as those of us who are out there\ntrying to organize. It's just as difficult, except that we're\ndoing it better, we're doing it smarter. And we're staying more\npersistent, and we're committing the resources. That's one half\nof the equation.\nThe other side of the equation is that the changes that have\nto take place, in the board and in the laws of this country,\nwhich give workers an equal, an even playing field. And that\ndoesn't exist, whether it's car-check recognition, or changing\nthe law. And we believe over the next two years -- I believe\nvery firmly that one of your legacies over the next two years\nis to help change those laws, help make the playing field fairer\nSO that we don't have to spend enormous amounts of money -- I\nwon't begin to tell you what it costs to run an election with\n5,000 workers and 60 organizers, bringing them in from all over\nthe country, getting the assistance of the Federation, and my\nfellow colleagues around this table, in terms of providing\nassistance. It's a major undertaking.\nAnd I think that if we're going to move into the 21st\ncentury, I think it's about time that we develop the kind of\nrelationship with employers and this government -- the greatest\ndemocracy in the world -- make it more democratic for workers'\nopportunity to join a union.\nTHE PRESIDENT: Well, I agree with that. What I was saying\nto you, though, is that I believe that the public is less -- is\nmore sympathetic to the union movement than it was before. And I\nthink part of it is because there was a reaction against the\nexcessive anti-unionism of previous administrations and in the\nRepublican Congress coming in. And part of it is, frankly, I\nthink that the union movement has been very effective, at least\nsince I've been President, in trying to advance the interests of\nits members in a way that shows an understanding of the global\neconomy, and the kind of competition and the factors that whoever\nthe employers are up against. And it's been very impressive.\nBut when you see -- and another thing is, I think people are\nsuper-sensitive in this country right now to anything that smacks\nof abuse of power. And you see -- I never thought I'd live to\nsee the day when the doctors would say they were thinking about\njoining a union because of the absence of a patients' bill of\nrights. And I think that -- so I agree with you.\nAnd we're just so close, as you know, to having a working\nmajority for labor in the Congress. I think we'll have to win\n-MORE-\n10\nthe House outright, but you've got a few of those Senators that\nwill vote with us from time to time in the other party, if we can\nmake up a few gains here. And I think we should -- I think we're\nvery close. I didn't address that, but I think that we are\nagain, if we fight, and keep our heads on straight, and don't\nmess up -- and I don't have any real -- you know, if I can keep\nthe economy rocking along here, I think the chances of our\nprevailing in the congressional races are quite good.\nQ\nMorty Bach (phonetic) ?\nMR. BACH: Mr. President, I'd like to address for a moment\nthe comments you made about attracting investment into some of\nthe chronically distressed areas. I think it will be virtually\nimpossible to sustain economic development in these areas if the\nfuture workforce the kids that are in school today on the\nwrong side of the digital divide unless the overall plan\nencompasses I know what you and the Vice President and the FCC\nand many of us are trying to do in getting the E-rate --\nconnecting these schools is a matter of priority in these\ndistressed areas -- connecting them to the Internet and even\ntaking it to the next step, and finding a way to bring computers\ninto the home, SO that the entire family understands that you\ncannot really have economic development if you're on the wrong\nside of that divide.\nI think first, I applaud the White House for taking the\nlead on the whole E-rate issue. But they' 11 have to find a way\nto really prioritize the very areas that you're talking about if\nwe expect to have sustained growth, you know, in those places.\nTHE PRESIDENT: You know, Morty, there was just -- I think\njust in the last two weeks, there was a study which came out,\nbasically, that confirmed what you've said -- that there is still\na digital divide, there's still a big difference in who has\naccess to the Internet and who doesn't; who's using it and who\nisn't.\nAnd Senator Barbara Mikulski, who's a good friend of a lot\nof yours, called me the other day on the telephone and said that\nshe thought that the Democratic Party should make one of its main\ncommitments, not only for the remainder of my term but into at\nleast the next two years beyond my term, coming up with more and\nmore ideas and efforts to bridge the digital divide. And not\njust in the schools, but for adults, as well.\nAnd if you have - you or anybody who's here, within the\nsound of my voice -- has any more ideas about that -- you know, I\nknow the Vice President cares a lot about this in general; he\nknows more about it than I do. But I do think it's something\n-MORE-\n11\nthat the Democratic Party ought to be --\n[Gap in tape.]\n-- for me are, and we have the Welfare-to-Work program. My\nconcern is that you should be complimented on the job of cutting\nthe welfare rolls. But we have people working at $5.15 an hour.\nWhat is our plan in going to the next level? Because you can't\nlive on $5.15 an hour. And I have people that have been in the\nWelfare-to-Work program for three, four years. They're still\nthere. And I'm concerned about those people that are trapped in\nbetween.\nTHE PRESIDENT: Well, let me just say, I think there are\nthree things we ought to do, to start out with. First of all, we\nought to raise the minimum wage again. I think we've got a good\nchance to pass that in this Congress, this time. If I play it\nright, and you all help me, when we get down to the lick-log of\nthe next 60 days, I think we've got a chance to pass another\nincrease in the minimum wage. And I think it's quite important\nto do.\nThe second thing is -- and this is something that I would\nlike to ask the public employees among us here to help us with --\nthere has been an alarming decline -- and I know this is not\nexactly what you're talking about, but I've got to mention this,\nbecause we've got people who represent public employees around\nthis table -- there has been an alarming decline in food stamp\nusage among poor families, that is greater than the number of\nthem that move from welfare to work in jobs paying enough that\nthey're not eligible for food stamps anymore. Much greater.\nThere's now lots of evidence about it, but it appears that\nthe only conceivable explanation for this is that a lot of people\n-- you know, maybe a few people just don't want to take them\nanymore, because they're drawing a paycheck. But that's hard to\nbelieve. Food stamps -- people who work for a living and have\nchildren, who have low incomes, are eligible for them and should\ntake them because it's good for their kids. It appears that a\nlot of people take these jobs, and they do not know that they're\nstill eligible for food stamps. And nobody tells them, and they\ndon't get them. So that's a real problem.\nThe third thing, I think, is -- I think we actually need a\nstrategy for people who move from welfare to work in lower-wage\njobs, SO that we actually identify what it is they need to keep\nmoving up. And there's a big fight going on in Congress now -- I\ndon't know if you all have weighed in on this or not, but when we\n-- the public employees' unions should be quite interested in\nthis -- when we passed welfare reform, we let every state --\n-MORE-\n12\nincluding New York; every state in the country -- got to keep the\namount of money, every year thereafter, that they were getting in\nFebruary of '94 when the welfare rolls were at an all-time high.\nNow, some states have had modest declines in welfare rolls.\nNew York has, but largely because you've got a lot of immigrants,\nso you have to keep replenishing the rolls. But, like, Wisconsin\nhas had a 90 percent decline in the welfare rolls, and there's\nbeen a 50 percent decline nationwide.\nA lot of the Republicans in Congress have gone back to the\nRepublican governors, and what they want to do is to recoup some\nof that money. They're saying, you don't need it anymore and\nyou're not spending it. And it's quite true that, right not, a\nlot of them aren't spending it.\nBut I would be prepared to, in effect, let states that have\na reduction in their welfare rolls -- let's say below 50 percent\nor below 60 percent or whatever -- keep that money if they spent\nit on people who should be in transition - - to upgrade their\nskills, their education, their training -- or if they spent it on\ntheir children in the schools you're going to have 2 million\nschoolteachers quit in the next few years, with the biggest class\nsize in American history finally we've got kids more numerous\nthan the baby boomers in school, and you're literally going to\nhave 2 million schoolteachers retire just in the next couple\nyears.\nSo my view is, we ought to say -- and if you guys agree with\nthis, it could help us to preserve this we ought to say, no,\nwe'll let the states keep the money, but they need to spend it on\nthe people who move from welfare into work, but are making very\nlow wages, have very low skills, have very limited prospects of\nfuture mobility. And we ought to spend the money either to move\nthem up or, if that's not a problem, then we ought to put the\nmoney down into the public schools, where the money could go to\nhelp hire teachers, or have smaller classes or do something else\nthese kids need.\nI personally think that would be a lot better expenditure\nthan just letting the Congress take it back and paying for the\ntax cut. But to be fair, if you were Governor of Wisconsin, you\nmight have a hard time spending that money. If you were Governor\nof Michigan, you might. But if we said, but you can spend it on\nthe people making $5.50 an hour, or their children in the\nschools, then you would be able to do it.\nQ\nOne last question. Andy, and then Tom, and that'll be\nthe end.\n-MORE-\n13\nANDY: Mr. President, I just want to get back to the\npresidential race, with something you said. I think in all of\nthese races we're well-served when we have a high-quality\ncandidate who has something to say and we have an effective\ncampaign. I think in 1992 we had a Governor Clinton, who's the\nbest campaigner this party has ever had. We certainly had\nsomething to say.\nBut you were also very well-served by two gentlemen not\namongst us anymore, named Ron Brown and Paul Tully, who spent an\ninordinate amount of time before there was a nominee, really\nplotting the presidential campaign, and giving us all hope and\ndirection to say no matter where we come out on this election,\nyou know, we are going to run an effective campaign.\nAnd now it's clear there's going to be a primary in the\nDemocratic Party, and you're certainly have a quality candidate\nand people who stand right on the issues. The real question is,\nwhen we come out of that primary, are we going to have an\neffective campaign? And where are the Ron Browns and Paul Tullys\nof today, who aren't engaged in the day-to-day combat in New\nHampshire and Iowa? And where are the fundraisers of today who\ncan raise the money so that when we have a nominee in March, that\nwe really are ready to go, don't have a lapse, don't have a gap.\nAnd I just think the party would be well-served to think\nabout what we could do now to prepare for then, to make sure we\ndo have a successful campaign, because we clearly have a quality\ncandidate who stands right on the issues.\nTHE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, that's a darn good\nquestion. But let me try to give you an answer to it.\nI think that, in all fairness, in different ways Paul Tully\nand Ron Brown are irreplaceable. But the functions that they\nwere working on in '92, while we played out our nomination --\nand, you know, one thing I'll say, you've got to give Senator\nBradley -- you know, we'll have the two most knowledgeable people\nof all the people running for office, will be both in our\ncampaign, right? So we'll have a lot of interesting things said,\nand a lot of interesting things to learn.\nBut the important thing is, we can't let it lead to some\nsort of big schism in the Democratic Party. So far, I think both\nBill Bradley and Al Gore have comported themselves in such a way\nas to minimize that, and I hope they will continue to do so,\nbecause that will have a lot to do with it.\nI think, on the money issue, I can tell you that I have\npersonally taken that on. I am working very, very hard to make\n-MORE-\n14\nsure that what I think, as I said, is a totally historically\npredictable situation in the polls -- by the way, which is\nmarginally better than it was two months ago, and better than the\nhistorical parallels. So it's not that big a deal. You know, if\nwe're back here in a year with this, then I'll be a little\nconcerned. But we're not. This is not where we are, here.\nSo what I want to say to you is, I'm going to try to take\ncare of the money. That is, I am personally committed to helping\nthe Senate and the House and the DNC, and working with all these\nlocal things. And I am killing myself at it. And I'm really\nworking at it. And if you've got any more ideas for what I can\ndo, I will do it.\nThe second thing I wanted to say about it is -- I went to an\ninteresting dinner last night at Senator John Kerry's house, that\nJoe Andrew and the leaders of the DNC did for a bunch of high-\ntech wizards who are still Democrats. People that have made\nfortunes with these little Internet companies, trying to help us\nfigure out how we can better communicate with people, so that we\ncan do another version of what we did in '98.\nLet me remind you that '98, the turnout was not higher than\nit was in '94. It was about the same. Now, the numbers were\nhigher because we registered a lot of people, because of Motor-\nVoter. But the percentage voting turnout was about what it was\nin '94. The difference was, more of ours voted and more of\ntheirs didn't -- just like in '94, more of ours were discouraged\nand more of theirs voted, because they were mad and ours were\ndiscouraged.\nSo one of the things that I want to do is to make sure that\nwe do better than the Republicans in maximizing the use of\ntechnology to mobilize voters, identify voters, get them to vote,\nget information out, engage them -- you know, all this stuff you\ncan do. And if you have anything you want to say to us about\nthat, you can.\nOn the strategy for the general election campaign, frankly,\nI think we have got to be about the business of putting together\nthree or four people to do what Ron Brown had thought through all\nby himself before I got to be the nominee. But we know -- I'm\njust telling you what: I know about this deal. I know that they\nhave appealing, intelligent politics working for them. But\nthey're wrong on the issues. And, you know, it's like I told you\nat that dinner the other night. People say, oh, Clinton's a\ngreat speaker, what are we going to do?\nYou know, I could be the best speaker since Daniel Webster,\nand if we'd been wrong on everything, the economy would be in the\n-MORE-\n15\ntank and the Democrats would be nowhere. You know, once you get\nin your speaking is not near as important as whether your ideas\nare right or not, if you implement them.\nAnd so I feel -- I really do believe that as -- this thing\nwill ripen. Every election has got a different rhythm. It's\nlike a different song, you know -- it uses exactly same notes as\nthe last song did, but the melody is a little different every\ntime, otherwise nobody would ever sell any records.\nAnd so the melody of this election, it's still ripening.\nIt's aging. But I admit to you, Andy, we've got a little more\nwork to do on the general election strategy of how we get\neverybody together. I am mindful that it's a problem. I am glad\nyou mentioned it. But I think we'll be ready when the time\ncomes. That's all I can tell you. And on the money thing, all I\ncan tell you, if we don't do it, it won't be because I'm not\ntrying -- because I am well aware of what a problem it is, and\nI'm hitting it.\nQ\nLast one, Tom Boffenbauer (phonetic.)\nMR. BOFFENBAUER: Thank you, John. Mr. President, I would\nlike to just share for a moment some of the events of this\nmorning that the (inaudible) is proud to be a sponsor of. And\nthat is the work-to-welfare celebration that we had down on the\npier. And there is a lot of work to be done.\nBut it was really heartening this morning to be joined by\nthe Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Transportation, the\nSecretary of Commerce - - in the eyes of a trade unionist, what an\nunusual combination in one room at one time -- but to honor the\ncompanies that were the original partners. And I want to extend,\non behalf of those companies and the members that we represent,\nand by several unions in this room -- the Teamsters and the\nUniteds and the Company Xerox and UPS and United Airlines.\nAnd as we talk about welfare to work, and the thousands of\npeople who now have a little bit of hope for the future, because\nthey did find a job transitioning from welfare to work -- under a\nunion contract -- and that they became union members, and not one\nin those companies that I mentioned was a minimum-wage job. And\nI think the partners -- and the point I want to make -- the union\npartners in this, and the employers they represent, offer the\nreal key to bringing a group that needs it to prosperity.\nYou did a great job this morning, Mr. President, listening\nto those stories and exposing all those other employers in that\nroom, who do not have a union. And they have to think long and\nhard, because as they talked among themselves afterwards, they\n-MORE-\n16\nhad their eyes opened a little bit, that unions and their members\n-- God knows, their leadership -- don't have horns and tails. We\nbring something -- to America that they haven't realized in the\npast. So, Mr. President, thank you very much on behalf of all\nthose that have a little bit better life.\nTHE PRESIDENT: Thank you. (Applause.)\nOne of the -- I'm sure you had the same reaction I did to\nthe bank executive, the woman bank executive, who got up and gave\na whole speech about how stupid employers were when they didn't\noffer adequate benefits. I mean, it was an amazing speech. But\nyou couldn't have heard this sort of speech given five or six\nyears ago.\nThis woman got up and said, you know -- she was there with\nher former welfare recipient, who had just won a national award\nin their company and was given a free trip to Beverly Hills --\nthis woman had been on welfare six months ago. It was an amazing\ndeal, unbelievable. But she basically launched an assault on\nshort-term employer attitudes, instead of giving adequate\nbenefits of all kinds. It was very impressive. And I thank you\nfor your leadership.\nQ\nAnd we thank you for your leadership.\nTHE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Thanks for letting me come by.\n(Applause.)\nEND\nTheo-\n1/20/00\nThis came in\nlast week, but\ndidn't notice it\nwas to sean\nmaloney! - Cindy\nORM\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nNovember 8, 1999\n'99 NOV 9 PM3:24\nMEMORANDUM FOR SEAN MALONEY\nASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT\nAND STAFF SECRETARY\nFROM:\nMARK F. LINDSAY Bradley I. Kiley for Mark F. Lindsay\nASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT FOR\nMANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION\nSUBJECT:\nAgency Responsibilities for Business Continuity\nand Contingency Plans (BCCPs)\nMany of you have been following the Executive Office of the President (EOP) Y2K progress very closely\nand are actively involved in ensuring that your organization is capable of continuing operations in the\nevent of unforeseen Year 2000 problems beginning January 1, 2000. Now that the Office of\nAdministration has successfully renovated all of the EOP Mission Critical systems, it is extremely\nimportant that EOP organizations finish the next critical steps. These include completing the drafting,\ntesting and submission of your Business Continuity and Contingency Plans (BCCPs).\nThe BCCP is your organization's best defense in providing continuity of operations in the event of any\nY2K failures. Because each organization has unique operational and management issues, the BCCP is\nsomething that every organization must develop to address its specific needs. While the EOP BCCP team\nis available to provide ongoing assistance, it is impossible for the team to complete this plan without the\nactive participation of your staff.\nSince early October 1999, members of the EOP BCCP team have been working with your agency\nrepresentatives to review your BCCP and to conduct test exercises. Immediately following these\nexercises, a BCCP debrief occurred so that offices could refine their plans based on lessons learned\nduring the exercises. Enclosure (1) provides you with an updated report on the BCCP status of each EOP\norganization. Enclosure (2) provides you with a copy of your organization's proposed annex to the\nBCCP. Please provide any feedback that you or your staff may have to my BCCP points of contact\nKevin Paulsen at x56407 or Dottie Cleal at x56401. Your input is needed no later than November 12,\n1999 so that we may finish our Y2K efforts on schedule.\nBased on your input, the BCCP for your organization will be finalized, approved and published for use by\ninternal and external agencies. The EOP BCCP (with appropriate annexes) will serve as the primary,\nformal procedure governing EOP operations in the event of unexpected Y2K related problems. These\nplans should be adequately communicated and rehearsed and made available to assigned members of\nyour staff to avoid possible confusion at a later date.\nI anticipate that this will remain an important senior management and leadership issue and I look forward\nto your continued interest, support and involvement.\n11/5/19991:12 PM\nEXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT\nBUSINESS CONTINUITY AND CONTINGENCY PLANNING\nSTATUS OF AGENCY ANNEXES\nToday\nAGENCY\nJuly\nAugust\nSeptember\nOctober\nNovember\nDecember\nWHO-Office of Press Secretary, POC Jenni Engebretsen\nRed- Denotes offices contacted, no\nWHO-Millennium Council, POC Josefina Velasco\nplan produced.\nWHO-Office of Cabinet Affairs, POC Anne Bovaird\nX\nYellow- Denotes plan received,\nWHO- Office of Legislative Affairs, POC Michael Williams\nawaiting Exercise.\nWHO- Office of Correspondence, Christina Stacey\nGreen- Denotes plan Exercised\nWHO-Counsel to the President, POC William Winkler\nX\nLight-blue- Denotes post -\nWHO-Office of Records Management, POC Terry Good\nExercise annex update.\nWHO-Chief of Staff, POC Carolyn Wu\nDark blue- Denotes pending sign\nWHO-Office of Communications, POC Shawn Johnson\noff by POC and Senior office\nWHO-Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, POC Adreinne Elrod\nX\nX\npersonnel.\nWHO-Office of Policy Development, POC Courtland Willman\nX- Denotes plan signed off on\nWHO-Office of Presidential Advance, POC Denise Diorio\nby POC and Senior office\nWHO-Office of Presidential Scheduling, POC Anne Whitworth\nX\nX\npersonnel.\nWHO-Office of Public Liaison, POC Kendee Yamaguchi\nX\nX\nWHO-Office of the Executive Clerk, POC Timothy Saunders\nWHO-Office of the First Lady, POC Eric Woodard\nX\nX\nUpcoming\nExercises:\nWHO-Oval Office, POC Betty Currie\nX\nX\nOffice of\nWHO-Travel Office, POC Faye Granger\nX\nX\nLegislative Affairs\nWHO-White House Operations, POC John Liipfert\nX\nX\nTBA\nOffice of the Vice President, POC Andy Dryden\nX\nX\nMillennium\nWHO-Management and Administration, POC Jason Rodriguez\nX\nX\nCouncil\nOA-Facilities, POC Larry Handeland\nX\nX\n11/04\nOA-Financial Management Division, POC Whitney Harris\nX\nX\nOA-General Services Division, POC Kathleen O'Halloran\nOA- Human Resources Management, POC Diane Smith\nX\nX\nOA- Library & Research Services Division, POC Paula Vincent\nX\nX\nX\nX\nCouncil of Economic Advisors, POC Cathy Fibich\nX\nX\nX\nCouncil on Environmental Quality, POC Carolyn Mosley\nOffice of National Drug Control Policy, POC Tillman Dean\nX\nX\nOffice of Science & Technology Policy, George Cravaritis\nX\nX\nX\nX\nX\nX\nOffice of U.S. Trade Representative, POC Richard Kristobek\nX\nX\nOffice of Management and Budget, POC Paul Tisdale\nLegend: BCCP Stage Completed\nComplete\nComplete\nPost-Exercise\nPending\nAgency\nAnnex\nExercise\nAnnex\nAnnex\nSign-off on\nNote: Cell in which shading first appears shows\nUpdate\nUpdate\nSignoff\nAnnex\nweek action completed.\nX\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\nTHE\nPRESIDENT\nOF #0 OF THE OF OFFICE THE UNITED OFFICE RATTON STATE OF\nEOP - WHO - Office of Records Management\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nAgency/Office Annex\nPrepared By:\nApproved By:\nDate:\nVersion 2.0\n1\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Records Management\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\n9.1 Agency\nWhite House Office - Office of Records Management\n9.1.1 Core Business Process\nProcessing White House documents.\n9.1.1.1 System Dependencies\nVAX cluster, ARMS\n9.1.1.2 Threats\nFailure of either the VAX cluster or the ARMS application would make entry of new\nrecords into the database temporarily impossible.\n9.1.1.3 Notification Process\nAttachment A is a telephone listing of the ORM staff with home cell telephone numbers.\nSupervisors are responsible for contacting subordinates. White Hours Switchboard also\nhas these telephone numbers. This listing also includes archivists from the National\nArchives who are responsible for responding to ORM requests for recall f files in\ncourtesy storage at NARA.\n9.1.1.4 Incident Response - Liaison and Management\nORM staff will contact IS&T's \"help Desk\" and, if provided, specific IS&T staff.\nORM's response time expectations will depend upon each incident and will be no\ndifferent from those currently in place. Copies of this document will be distributed to\neach ORM supervisor.\n9.1.1.5 Mitigation Strategies\n9.1.1.5.1 Processing:\n9.1.1.5.1.1 Outgoing mail Lead ORM staffer: Everett Houser\nBack-up: Phil Droege, Mary Brooke, Terry Good, Lee Johnson, Mike Septoff,\nRussel Loiselle\nQuality control review: a manual task requiring no computers nor electricity.\nSigning: a process utilizing an electrical machine to sign autographs. One machine is\ncomputer dependent. Computer is Y2K.\nPhotocopying: a process utilizing electrical machines that is not computer dependent\n9.1.1.5.1.2 Incoming \"More Important\" mail Lead ORM staffer: Frances Campbell\nBack-up: Crystal Jones, Debra Jones, Mary Brooke, Wandra Simpson, Patricia\nYoung, Russell Loiselle\nVersion 2.0\n2\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Records Management\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\nEvaluation: a manual process requiring no computers nor electricity.\nAssigning ID numbers: numbers are machine generated on labels. Sheets of labels are\ngenerated in advance. A large stock is maintained to last for several weeks.\nEntering abstracts into database: a process that is computer dependent. If computer\nsystem goes down, electrical machines will be used to produce photocopies of the letters.\nCopies will be placed in temporary filing bins by subject and thereunder by ID number.\nAbstracts can be entered later from these photocopies when the system is revived.\nScanning: a computer dependent process. Normally, originals are scanned before being\nforwarded to appropriate offices. However, if computer system goes down, electrical\nmachines will be used to produce photocopies. Copies will be placed in temporary filing\nbins by subject and thereunder by ID number. When system is revived, these\nphotocopies will be scanned. In the meantime, the originals will be forwarded to the\nappropriate offices.\nForwarding to appropriate offices: a manual process of placing the cases in interoffice\nmails pouches and addressing the pouches for subsequent delivery by the messengers.\n9.1.1.5.1.3 Incoming files Lead ORM staffers: Patricia Young and Wandra Simpson\nBack-up: Cindy Shrouds, Tom Taggart, Theodoric James, Myra Freeman,\nMadalene Evans, Russel Loiselle, Terry Good, Lee Johnson\n9.1.1.5.1.3.1 Individual documents\nSorting documents by type and importance: a manual process.\nPreparing selected documents for optical scanning: a manual process of arranging pages\nwithin the document, taping small (sub-letter sized) papers to letter sized sheets,\nremoving staples, and unfolding pages.\nAssigning ID numbers to each document: numbers are machine generated on labels.\nSheets of labels are generated in advance. A large stock is maintained to last for several\nweeks.\nScanning of individual documents: a process that is computer dependent. If the computer\nsystem goes down, the scanning will be postponed. Documents will be held by\nindividual ORM staffers who have prepared the documents for scanning.\nEntering abstracts into database: a process that is computer dependent. If computer\nsystem goes down, this step, which follows the scanning process, will be postponed until\nthe computer system is revived.\nFiling of documents: a manual process. If the computer system goes down, this step,\nwhich follows the abstracting process, will be postponed until the computer system is\nrevived.\nVersion 2.0\n3\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Records Management\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\n9.1.1.5.1.3.2 Boxes of documents Lead ORM staffer: Tom Taggart\nAssigning ID numbers to the boxes: numbers are machine generated on labels. Sheets of\nlabels are generated in advance. A large stock is maintained to last for several weeks.\nEntering folder label information into computer data base: Each box comes with an\ninventory of the folder labels within. If the computer system goes down, this process will\nbe postponed until the system is revived.\nScanning of inventories: a process that is computer dependent. If the computer system\ngoes down, this process will be postponed\n9.1.1.5.2 Loss of Application Server\nORM uses the Automated Records Management System (ARMS), which are loaded onto\nthe VAX cluster, a group of DEC VAX computer systems. The ARMS and the VAX\ncluster have gone through independent validation and verification (IV&V) and have been\nfound to be Y2K compliant. However, if the VAX cluster is not available, ORM will\ndelay entry of new records into its database until it is available.\n9.1.1.5.3 Total Network Failure\nIf neither the record tracking applications nor the data files are available, ORM will delay\nentry of new records into its database until the network is revived.\n9.1.1.6 Staff Responsibilities\nParagraph\nTask\nResponsible office\nResponsible\nCompletion\nIndividual\nDate\nProcessing:\nMaintaining log of\nORM\nEach supervisor\nUpon\nunprocessed records\noccassion\n9.1.1.7 Requirements for Office Supplies\nOne stand-alone computer for Data Entry Section\n9.1.2 Core Business Process\nRetrieving White House documents/information in custody of ORM.\n9.1.2.1 System Dependencies\nVAX cluster, ARMS\n9.1.2.2 Threats\nFailure of either the VAX cluster or the ARMS application would make retrieval of\ndocuments through automated means temporarily impossible.\nVersion 2.0\n4\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Records Management\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\n9.1.2.3 Mitigation Strategies\n9.1.2.3.1 Retrieval\n9.1.2.3.1.1 Individual documents\nLead ORM staffer(s): all ORM staff\nBy name of an individual/organization: Cannot be found if computer system is down,\nexcept for those correspondence documents of routine natures, which were, filed in\nORM's alphabetical file during first half of the Administration.\nBy subject: Cannot be found if computer system is down, except to the extent that ORM\nstaff can guess the primary subject of the document requested. A search can then be\nconducted through that particular subject file category.\n9.1.2.3.1.2 Boxes\nLead ORM staffer: Wandra Simpson\nBack-up: Wandra Simpson, Myra Freeman, Willie Howell, Russel Loiselle, Mike\nSeptoff, Howard Westray, Terry Good, Lee Johnson\nCannot easily be found if computer system is down, except through a labor intensive and\nall-but-impossible search through the paper inventories filed in the Subject File category\nFG006-01. While ORM's log books would assist in identifying and locating boxes, the\ninformation is listed in rough chronological order, making any search an equally time\nconsuming task.\n9.1.2.3.1.3 Folders within boxes\nLead ORM staffer: Wandra Simpson\nBack-up: Wandra Simpson, Myra Freeman, Willie Howell, Russel Loiselle, Mike\nSeptoff, Howard Westray, Terry Good, Lee Johnson\nCannot be found if computer system is down, unless sending office is able to inform\nORM of the existence of the folder(s). See above (Boxes) for degree of difficulty in\nlocating box(es) in which folder(s) are filed. In some instances the sending office can\nalso identify the box (es) containing the folders(s).\n9.1.2.3.1.4 Subpoenas\nLead ORM staffer: Tom Taggart\nBack-up: Terry Good, Lee Johnson\nCannot respond to these requests if computer system is down, given the requirement to\ncertify that ORM has conducted a thorough search of all records in its custody.\n9.1.2.3.1.5 Loss of Application Server\nORM uses the Automated Records Management System (ARMS), which are loaded onto\nthe VAX cluster, a group of DEC VAX computer systems. The ARMS and the VAX\ncluster have gone through independent validation and verification (IV&V) and have been\nfound to be Y2K compliant. However, in the event of a failure of the VAX cluster, Orm\nwil follow retrieval procedures listed above.\nVersion 2.0\n5\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Records Management\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\n9.1.2.3.2 Total Network Failure\nIn the event of a network failure, ORM will follow retrieval procedures listed abouve..\n9.1.2.4 Staff Responsibilities\nParagraph\nTask\nResponsible\nResponsible\nCompletion\noffice\nIndividual\nDate\nTotal Network\nMajority of documents and\nORM\nAll staff\nUpon\nFailure\ninformation will be\noccassion\nunavailable. ORM has a\nvery limited ability to\nlocate the more important\ndocuments which have\nbeen received individually\nand subsequently file by\nprimary subject\n9.1.2.5 Requirements for Office Supplies\nThe procedures in paragraphs 9.1.2.3.1 will not require extra office supplies.\n9.1.3 Requirements for staffing and equipment\nResource\nHow Many Do\nHow Many Do\nHow Many Do\nYou Need One\nYou Need One\nYou Need Two\nDay Later?\nWeek Later?\nWeeks Later?\nAdministrative staff\nN/A\nN/A\nN/A\nOther staff\n24/4\n24/4\n24/4\nPersonal PCs\n6\n6\n6\nSecure PCs\nN/A\nN/A\nN/A\nPrinters\n5\n5\n5\nTelephone lines\n12\n122\n122\nSecure telephone lines\nN/A\nN/A\nN/A\nCopy machines\n5\n5\n5\nFaxes\n1\n1\n1\nPagers/cell phones\n1\n1\n1\nVersion 2.0\n6\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Records Management\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\nTHE\nPRESIDENT\nOFFICE OF THE OFFICE OF SERVICE OR THE UNITED\nTHE\nEOP - WHO - Office of Executive Clerk\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nAgency/Office Annex\nPrepared By:\nApproved By:\nDate:\nVersion 2.0\n1\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Executive Clerk\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\n1.1 Agency\nWhite House Office - Office of the Executive Clerk\n1.1.1 Core Business Process\nCreates and maintains the official permanent White House record of Presidential actions. (See\nalso paragraphs 1.1.2, 1.1.3, 1.1.3.5, and 1.1.4.5.)\n1.1.1.1 System Dependency\nThe EOP Network.\n1.1.1.2 Threat\nY2K problems could cause network to be unavailable.\n1.1.1.3 Mitigation Strategies\n1.1.1.3.1 High Criticality Quick Response\nNot applicable.\n1.1.1.3.2 Loss of Internet Access\nNot applicable.\n1.1.1.3.3 Partial Network Failure\n1.1.1.3.3.1 Loss of Application Server\nNot applicable. For this core business process, the Office of the Executive Clerk uses Microsoft\nOffice 97 and Lotus Notes, which are part of the EOP Standard Load installed on individual\nworkstations; Corel WordPerfect (received Waiver for use of this software package); and\nAdvanced Revelation (AREV).\n1.1.1.3.3.2 Loss of Local Hard Drive\nNot applicable. Office uses only network drives.\n1.1.1.3.3.3 Loss of File Server\nIf the Microsoft Office 97 and Lotus Notes applications are available but user-generated files are\nnot, the Office of the Executive Clerk will ask IS&T to copy backed up files onto an alternate file\nserver. The Office could also ask IS&T to copy the files onto a network drive or local hard drive.\nAs an alternative, it would be possible for the Office of the Executive Clerk to develop\ndocuments on stand-alone computers or typewriter and deliver the documents by hand or by fax.\n1.1.1.3.4 Total Network Failure\nIf neither the Microsoft Office application nor the data files are available, the Office of the\nExecutive Clerk will develop documents on a stand-alone computer and modem. The Executive\nVersion 2.0\n2\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Executive Clerk\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\nClerk's Office will determine how many additional typists would be required to fulfill their\nfunctions. The office staff will also use memory typewriters to support loss of automation.\nLedgers maintained by the Executive Clerk's Office would be used in recording Presidential\nactions. Deliveries will be by hand or by fax.\n1.1.1.4 Staff Responsibilities\nParagraph\nTask\nResponsible\nResponsible\nDate\noffice\nPerson\n1.1.1.3.2\nCollect and organize current\nExecutive\ntelephone and fax numbers,\nClerk's Office\nprint out copies, and make\nthem available\n1.1.1.3.3.2,\nCopying files to removable\nIS&T\n1.1.1.3.3.3\nmedia and CD-ROMS\nIdentifying alternative\nExecutive\nworkstation\nClerk's Office\nCopying backed up files\nIS&T\nonto alternative workstation\n1.1.1.3.3.3\nIdentifying stand-alone\nExecutive\nworkstation\nClerk's Office\nConfiguring and loading\nIS&T\nsoftware onto stand-alone\ncomputers\nCompletion of support\nExecutive\ndocuments\nClerk's Office\nIdentify clerk typists\nExecutive\nClerk's Office\n1.1.1.5 Requirements for Office Supplies\nNot Applicable.\n1.1.2 Core Business Process\nIdentification, preparation, processing, and recording of all Presidential appointments. The office\nprepares (or directs the preparation) of each Presidential nomination to the Senate and\ncommission of appointment. The office provides technical advice on a daily basis to the Office of\nPresidential Personnel concerning current and future appointments. These documents include but\nare not limited to the President's civilian and military nominations to the Senate, commissions of\nappointment, Executive orders, proclamations, pardons, letters accepting resignations, special\nmessages to the Congress, veto messages, messages transmitting reports to the Congress (and\ntreaties to the Senate), decisions and determinations, memoranda from the President to units of\nVersion 2.0\n3\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Executive Clerk\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\nthe executive branch, and certificates and citations that accompany Presidential awards and\nmedals. . (See also paragraphs 1.1.1, 1.1.3, 1.1.3.5, and 1.1.4.5.)\n1.1.2.1 System Dependency\nAdvanced Revelation Software, Network\n1.1.2.2 Threat\nY2K problems could cause software to be unavailable.\n1.1.2.3 Mitigation Strategies\n1.1.2.3.1 High Criticality Quick Response\nNot applicable.\n1.1.2.3.2 Loss of Internet Access\nNot applicable.\n1.1.2.3.3 Partial Network Failure\n1.1.2.3.3.1 Loss of Application Server\nThe Office of the Executive Clerk uses Advanced Revelation software (AREV) application for\nidentification, preparation, processing, and recording of all Presidential appointments. If the\nprimary application server is unavailable, a copy of the application will be loaded onto another\nserver by IS&T. New desktop shortcuts will be created in Windows NT by IS&T for the Office\nof the Executive Clerk to use temporarily to open the application.\n1.1.2.3.3.2 Loss of Local Hard Drive\nNot applicable.\n1.1.2.3.3.3 Loss of File Server\nIf the A-Rev application is available but user-generated files are not, the Office of the Executive\nClerk will ask IS&T to copy backed up files onto an alternate file server. The Office could also\nask IS&T to copy the files onto a network drive or local hard drive. As an alternative, it would be\npossible for The Office of the Executive Clerk to develop documents on stand-alone computers\nor typewriters and deliver the documents by hand or by fax.\n1.1.2.3.4 Total Network Failure\nIf neither the A-Rev application nor the data files are available, The Office of the Executive\nClerk will develop documents on a stand-alone computer or typewriter. The Office of the\nExecutive Clerk will determine how many additional typists would be required to fulfill their\nVersion 2.0\n4\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Executive Clerk\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\nfunctions. Ledgers maintained by the Executive Clerk's Office would be used in recording\nPresidential actions. Deliveries will be via hand or by fax.\n1.1.2.4 Staff Responsibilities\nParagraph\nTask\nResponsible office\nResponsible\nDate\nPerson\n1.1.2.3.2\nCollect and organize\nExecutive Clerk's\ncurrent telephone\nOffice\nand fax numbers,\nprint out copies, and\nmake them available\n1.1.2.3.3.2,\nCopying files to\nIS&T\n1.1.2.3.3.3\nremovable media\nand CD-ROMS\nIdentifying\nExecutive Clerk's\nalternative\nOffice\nworkstation\nCopying backed up\nIS&T\nfiles onto alternative\nworkstation\n1.1.2.3.4\nIdentifying stand-\nExecutive Clerk's\nalone workstation\nOffice\nConfiguring and\nIS&T\nloading software\nonto stand-alone\ncomputers\nCompletion of\nExecutive Clerk's\nsupport documents\nOffice\nIdentify clerk typists\nExecutive Clerk's\nOffice\n1.1.2.5 Requirement for Office Supplies\nThe procedures in paragraph 1.1.2.3.4 would require ledgers for hand-entry of pending actions.\n1.1.3 Core Business Process\nIdentification, preparation, processing, and recording of all Presidential appointments. The office\nprepares (or directs the preparation) of each Presidential nomination to the Senate and\ncommission of appointment. The office provides technical advice on a daily basis to the Office of\nPresidential Personnel concerning current and future appointments. These documents include but\nare not limited to the President's civilian and military nominations to the Senate, commissions of\nappointment, Executive orders, proclamations, pardons, letters accepting resignations, special\nmessages to the Congress, veto messages, messages transmitting reports to the Congress (and\nVersion 2.0\n5\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Executive Clerk\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\ntreaties to the Senate), decisions and determinations, memoranda from the President to units of\nthe executive branch, and certificates and citations that accompany Presidential awards and\nmedals. (See also paragraphs 1.1.1 1.1.2, 1.1.3.5, and 1.1.4.5.)\n1.1.3.1 System Dependency\nNetwork.\n1.1.3.2 Threat\nY2K problems could cause network to be unavailable.\n1.1.3.3 Mitigation Strategies\n1.1.3.3.1 High Criticality Quick Response\nNot applicable.\n1.1.3.3.2 Loss of Internet Access\nNot applicable.\n1.1.3.3.3 Partial Network Failure\n1.1.3.3.3.1 Loss of Application Server\nNot applicable. The Office of the Executive Clerk uses Lotus Notes and Microsoft Office 97;\nCorel WordPerfect (received Waiver for use of this software package); and Advanced Revelation\n(AREV) for communications and transmission of documents in support of identification,\npreparation, processing, and recording of all Presidential appointments.\n1.1.3.3.3.2 Loss of Local Hard Drive\nNot applicable.\n1.1.3.3.3.3 Loss of File Server\nIf the Microsoft Office 97 and Lotus Notes applications are available but user-generated files are\nnot, the Office of the Executive Clerk will ask IS&T to copy backed up files onto an alternate file\nserver. The Office could also ask IS&T to copy the files onto a network drive or local hard drive.\nAs an alternative, it would be possible for The Office of the Executive Clerk to develop\ndocuments on stand-alone computers or typewriters and deliver the documents by hand or by fax.\n1.1.3.3.4 Total Network Failure\nIf neither the Microsoft Office 97 application nor the data files are available, the Office of the\nExecutive Clerk will develop documents on a stand-alone computer and modem or memory\ntypewriters to support loss of automation. The Office of the Executive Clerk will determine how\nmany additional typists would be required to fulfill their functions.\nVersion 2.0\n6\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Executive Clerk\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\n1.1.3.4 Staff Responsibilities\nParagraph\nTask\nResponsible\nResponsible\nDate\noffice\nPerson\n1.1.3.3.3.2,\nMaking backup\nExecutive\n1.1.3.3.3.3\ncopies of user-\nClerk's Office\ngenerated files\nIdentifying\nExecutive\nalternative\nClerk's Office\nworkstation\nCopying backed up\nIS&T\nfiles onto alternative\nworkstation\n1.1.3.3.4\nIdentifying stand-\nExecutive\nalone workstation\nClerk's Office\nCompletion of\nExecutive\nsupport documents\nClerk's Office\nIdentify clerk typists\nExecutive\nClerk's Office\n1.1.3.5 Requirements for Office Supplies\nNot Applicable.\n1.1.4 Core Business Process\nReceives all formal documents from the Congress commencing the ten-day constitutional period\nfor Presidential review. (See also paragraphs 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3, and 1.1.4.5.)\n1.1.4.1 System Dependency\nNetwork.\n1.1.4.2 Threat\nY2K problems could cause network to be unavailable.\n1.1.4.3 Mitigation Strategies\n1.1.4.3.1 High Criticality Quick Response\nNot applicable.\n1.1.4.3.2 Loss of Internet Access\nNot applicable.\n1.1.4.3.3 Partial Network Failure\nVersion 2.0\n7\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Executive Clerk\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\n1.1.4.3.3.1 Loss of Application Server\nNot applicable. The Office of the Executive Clerk uses AREV for logging and tracking all formal\ndocuments from the Congress commencing the ten-day constitutional period for Presidential\nreview. This application is installed on each individual workstation.\n1.1.4.3.3.2 Loss of Local Hard Drive\nNot applicable.\n1.1.4.3.3.3 Loss of File Server\nIf the Microsoft Office 97 and Lotus Notes applications are available but user-generated files are\nnot, the Office of the Executive Clerk will ask IS&T to copy backed up files onto an alternate file\nserver. The Office could also ask IS&T to copy the files onto a network drive or local hard drive.\nAs an alternative, it would be possible for the Office of the Executive Clerk to develop\ndocuments on stand-alone computers or typewriters.\n1.1.4.3.4 Total Network Failure\nIf neither the Microsoft Office 97 application nor the data files are available, The Office of the\nExecutive Clerk will log receipt of documents on a stand-alone computer, typewriters, or ledgers\nmaintained by the Executive Clerk's Office would be used in recording receipt of formal\ndocuments from the Congress.. The Office of the Executive Clerk will determine how many\nadditional typists would be required to fulfill their functions.\n1.1.4.4 Staff Responsibilities\nParagraph\nTask\nResponsible\nResponsible\nDate\noffice\nPerson\n1.1.4.3.3.2,\nMaking backup copies of\nExecutive Clerk's\n1.1.4.3.3.3\nuser-generated files\nOffice\nIdentifying alternative\nExecutive Clerk's\nworkstation\nOffice\nCopying backed up files\nIS&T\nonto alternative\nworkstation\n1.1.4.3.4\nIdentifying stand-alone\nExecutive Clerk's\nworkstation\nOffice\nCompletion of support\nExecutive Clerk's\ndocuments\nOffice\nIdentify clerk typists\nExecutive Clerk's\nOffice\nVersion 2.0\n8\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Executive Clerk\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\n1.1.4.5 Requirements for Office Supplies\nNot Applicable.\n1.1.5 Core Business Process\nReview, processing, final preparation, and disposition of official documents signed by the\nPresident. These documents include but are not limited to the President's civilian and military\nnominations to the Senate, commissions of appointment, Executive orders, proclamations,\npardons, letters accepting resignations, special messages to the Congress, veto messages,\nmessages transmitting reports to the Congress (and treaties to the Senate), decisions and\ndeterminations, memoranda from the President to units of the executive branch, and certificates\nand medals. (See also paragraphs 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3, and 1.1.3.5.)\n1.1.5.1 System Dependency\nNetwork.\n1.1.5.2 Threat\nY2K problems could cause network to be unavailable.\n1.1.5.3 Mitigation Strategies\n1.1.5.3.1 High Criticality Quick Response\nNot applicable.\n1.1.5.3.2 Loss of Internet Access\nNot applicable.\n1.1.5.3.3 Partial Network Failure\n1.1.5.3.3.1 Loss of Application Server\nThe Office of the Executive Clerk uses AREV, Corel WordPerfect, and Microsoft Office 97\napplication for review, processing, final preparation, and disposition of official documents signed\nby the President. If the primary application server is unavailable, a copy of the application will be\nloaded onto another server. New desktop shortcuts will be created in Windows NT for the Office\nof the Executive Clerk by IS&T to use temporarily to open the applications.\n1.1.5.3.3.2 Loss of Local Hard Drive\nNot applicable.\n1.1.5.3.3.3 Loss of File Server\nIf the Microsoft Office 97 and Lotus Notes applications are available but user-generated files are\nnot, the Office of the Executive Clerk will ask IS&T to copy backed up files onto an alternate file\nserver. The Office could also ask IS&T to copy the files onto a network drive or local hard drive.\nVersion 2.0\n9\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Executive Clerk\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\nAs an alternative, it would be possible for The Office of the Executive Clerk to develop\ndocuments on stand-alone computers or typewriters.\n1.1.5.3.4 Total Network Failure\nIf neither the Microsoft Office 97 application nor the data files are available, the Office of the\nExecutive Clerk will accomplish these functions on a stand-alone computer and modem or\ntypewriter. The Office of the Executive Clerk will determine how many additional typists would\nbe required to fulfill their functions. Ledgers maintained by the Executive Clerk's Office would\nalso be used in recording Presidential actions. Deliveries will be via hand or by fax.\n1.1.5.4 Staff Responsibilities\nParagraph\nTask\nResponsible\nResponsible Person\nDate\noffice\n1.1.5.3.2,,\nMaking backup\nExecutive\n1.1.5.3.3.3\ncopies of user-\nClerk's Office\ngenerated files\nIdentifying\nExecutive\nalternative\nClerk's Office\nworkstation\nCopying backed up\nIS&T\nfiles onto alternative\nworkstation\n1.1.5.3.4\nIdentifying stand-\nExecutive\nalone workstation\nClerk's Office\nCompletion of\nExecutive\nsupport\nClerk's Office\nDocuments\nIdentify clerk typists\nExecutive\nClerk's Office\n1.1.5.5 Requirements for Office Supplies\nNot Applicable.\n1.1.6 Core Business Process\nServes as the official \"Secretary to the President\" when carrying the President's communications\n(all nominations, special messages and reports, and vetoes) onto the floors of the Senate and the\nHouse of Representatives.\n1.1.6.1 System Dependency\nNone\nVersion 2.0\n10\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Executive Clerk\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nFor Official Use Only\n1.1.6.2 Threat\nY2K problems should not impact the courier service aspect of delivering Presidential\ncommunications onto the floors of the Senate and House of Representatives.\n1.1.6.3 Mitigation Strategies\nNot Applicable.\n1.1.6.4 Requirements for Office Supplies\nNot Applicable.\n1.1.7 Requirements for staffing and equipment\nAdditional Resources Necessary\nHow Many Do\nHow Many Do\nHow Many Do\nYou Need One\nYou Need One\nYou Need Two\nDay Later?\nWeek Later?\nWeeks Later?\nAdministrative staff\n--\n1\n2\nOther staff\nIS&T support,\nIS&T support,\nIS&T support,\nas required\nas required\nas required\nPersonal PCs\n3\n4\n5\nSecure PCs\n--\n--\n--\nPrinters\n--\n--\n--\nTelephone lines\n--\n--\n--\nSecure telephone lines\n--\n--\n--\nCopy machines\n--\n--\n--\nFaxes\n--\n--\n--\nCell phones\n--\n1\n2\nVersion 2.0\n11\nDated 11/04/99\nOffice of Executive Clerk\n11/5/19991:12 PM\nEXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT\nBUSINESS CONTINUITY AND CONTINGENCY PLANNING\nSTATUS OF AGENCY ANNEXES\nToday\nAGENCY\nJuly\nAugust\nSeptember\nOctober\nNovember\nDecember\nWHO-Office of Press Secretary, POC Jenni Engebretsen\nRed- Denotes offices contacted, no\nWHO-Millennium Council, POC Josefina Velasco\nplan produced.\nWHO-Office of Cabinet Affairs, POC Anne Bovaird\nX\nYellow- Denotes plan received,\nWHO- Office of Legislative Affairs, POC Michael Williams\nawaiting Exercise.\nWHO- Office of Correspondence, Christina Stacey\nGreen- Denotes plan Exercised\nWHO-Counsel to the President, POC William Winkler\nX\nLight-blue- Denotes post -\nWHO-Office of Records Management, POC Terry Good\nExercise annex update.\nWHO-Chief of Staff, POC Carolyn Wu\nDark blue- Denotes pending sign\nWHO-Office of Communications, POC Shawn Johnson\noff by POC and Senior office\nWHO-Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, POC Adreinne Elrod\nX\nX\npersonnel.\nWHO-Office of Policy Development, POC Courtland Willman\nX- Denotes plan signed off on\nWHO-Office of Presidential Advance, POC Denise Diorio\nby POC and Senior office\nWHO-Office of Presidential Scheduling, POC Anne Whitworth\nX\nX\npersonnel.\nWHO-Office of Public Liaison, POC Kendee Yamaguchi\nX\nX\nWHO-Office of the Executive Clerk, POC Timothy Saunders\nWHO-Office of the First Lady, POC Eric Woodard\nX\nX\nUpcoming\nExercises:\nWHO-Oval Office, POC Betty Currie\nX\nX\nOffice of\nWHO-Travel Office, POC Faye Granger\nX\nX\nLegislative Affairs\nWHO-White House Operations, POC John Liipfert\nX\nX\nTBA\nOffice of the Vice President, POC Andy Dryden\nX\nX\nMillennium\nWHO-Management and Administration, POC Jason Rodriguez\nX\nX\nCouncil\nOA-Facilities, POC Larry Handeland\nX\nX\n11/04\nOA-Financial Management Division, POC Whitney Harris\nX\nX\nOA-General Services Division, POC Kathleen O'Halloran\nOA- Human Resources Management, POC Diane Smith\nX\nX\nOA- Library & Research Services Division, POC Paula Vincent\nX\nX\nX\nX\nCouncil of Economic Advisors, POC Cathy Fibich\nX\nX\nX\nCouncil on Environmental Quality, POC Carolyn Mosley\nOffice of National Drug Control Policy, POC Tillman Dean\nX\nX\nOffice of Science & Technology Policy, George Cravaritis\nX\nX\nX\nX\nX\nX\nOffice of U.S. Trade Representative, POC Richard Kristobek\nX\nX\nOffice of Management and Budget, POC Paul Tisdale\nLegend: BCCP Stage Completed\nComplete\nComplete\nPost-Exercise\nPending\nAgency\nAnnex\nExercise\nAnnex\nAnnex\nSign-off on\nNote: Cell in which shading first appears shows\nUpdate\nUpdate\nSignoff\nAnnex\nweek action completed.\nX\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nChristian 11/4 - Great work. Thank\nto you and everyone on staff who\ncompried this\nIt seems to me that someone in\nOA should be signing off on\nthis for compliance. If I\nhm to sign off on this, I\nwill repect a similar\nverification from OA or the/\nany other rasponsible Thanks unit.\nDm\nExecutive Office of the President\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nTHE\nPRESIDENT\nOF THE OFFICE THE UNITED NOTIVESTATES OFFICE OF STATES\nWHO - Staff Secretary's Office\nWH Correspondence\nBusiness Continuity and Contingency Plan\nAgency/Office Annex\nPrepared By: Christina Stacey\nApproved By:\nDate:\n1 Agency Annexes\n1.1 Agency\nWhite House Office - Department of Correspondence\n1.1.1 Core Business Process\nCoordinate, develop, and document all incoming and outgoing Presidential\ncorrespondence, including messages and proclamations.\n1.1.1.1 System Dependency\nEOP Network, MS Office, Word Perfect, Intranet Quorum, Lotus Notes\n1.1.1.2 Threats\nThe network could be unavailable.\nThe Department of Correspondence could lose its connection to the Internet in a number\nof different ways. The Internet is a complex system, and there is little authoritative\ninformation about the Y2K compliance of routers and other critical components. Since\nthe Y2K issue has generated intense public interest, traffic on the Internet could multiply\nbeyond the capacity of its pipelines. In addition, any one of a number of failures within\nthe EOP network could prevent its users from connecting to the Internet.\n1.1.1.3 Notification Process\nIf any failures occur, staff should notify their office's point of contact (See Attachment\nA), who should then notify Steve Horn (x66557/WH Signal (pager number 4027)). If\nSteve Horn is unavailable, please contact Christina Stacey (x65456). DO NOT CALL\nTHE HELP DESK. To contact other Correspondence Staff, please consult the\nCorrespondence Staff Telephone Listing (Attachment B).\n1.1.1.4 Mitigation Strategies\nFor office-specific instructions, please consult the Y2K Guidance Sheet (Attachment C)\nfor your office.\n1.1.1.4.1 High Criticality Quick Response\nIn order to fulfill its core functions, the Department would need an additional 21\ntypewriters and ribbons, 15 ledgers, 10 laptops, and messengers for the delivery of\ndocuments. These resources will be obtained through White House Operations.\n1.1.1.4.2 Loss of Internet Access\nThe Department of Correspondence relies on the Internet for e-mail communication\noutside of the White House Complex and also for news and research. For rapid\ncommunication, alternatives are telephones and fax machines. The Department of\nCorrespondence will ask regular e-mail correspondents to supply current telephone and\nfax numbers. Each user will be responsible for collecting this information, printing out\ncopies, and having them available by December 10, 1999.\nFor research and monitoring news, alternatives include radio and television broadcasts,\nprint media, libraries, and telephone contact with news and information sources.\n1.1.1.4.3 Partial Network Failure\n1.1.1.4.3.1 Loss of Application Server\nNot applicable. The Department relies most heavily on Microsoft Office and Lotus\nNotes, which are part of the EOP standard load and are installed on the local hard drives\nof its workstations.\n1.1.1.4.3.2 Loss of Local Hard Drive\nIf a local hard drive fails and access to data files is lost as a result, the Department will\nfirst identify another workstation from which these applications can be run and load the\ndata files onto the hard drive on that workstation. To facilitate the recovery of these files,\nthe Department will copy them to network file servers and removable storage media or\nCD-ROM discs.\n1.1.1.4.3.3 Loss of File Server\nThe Department of Correspondence uses Quorum software. The Department uses four\nCompaq 5500 Proliant servers for all critical files, each with four processors, two gig\nmemory, running Oracle, and Internet Information Server. To guard against the\npossibility of a failure of the network server on which user-created files are stored, the\nDepartment will copy these files to local hard drives and removable media on the last\nbusiness day of December. If there is a failure of the network file server, the Department\nwill request IS&T to activate the maintenance contract to repair or replace it. The\nDepartment will then restore files to the file server or to local drives as needed.\n1.1.1.4.4 Total Network Failure\nIf neither the applications nor the data files are available, the Department will follow the\nprocedures in paragraph 1.1.1.4.3.3 above. In addition, the Department will use internal\nfax machines to fax correspondence.\n1.1.1.5 Staff Responsibilities\nTask\nResponsible Office\nTarget\nDate\nIdentifying alternative workstations\nDept. of Correspondence\n10/30/99\n(Attachment D)\nChristina Stacey\nIdentifying stand-alone workstations\nDept. of Correspondence\n10/30/99\n(Attachment E)\nChristina Stacey\nDepartment-wide education on BCCP\nDept. of Correspondence\n11/1/99-\nplan\nC. Stacey/Office Contacts\n12/30/99\nOrdering supplies and securing\nDept. of Correspondence\n11/10/99\nnecessary equipment\nChristina Stacey\nSupply current telephone and fax\nDept. of Correspondence\n12/10/99\nnumbers for contacts\nOffice Contacts\nBacking up important files onto disk\nDept. of Correspondence\n12/10/99-\n(Attachment F)\nAll Users\n12/30/99\nSupply updated Y2K\nDept. of Correspondence\n12/27/99\nGuidance/Contact Sheets\nChristina Stacey\nLoading backed up files onto\nDept. of Correspondence\n12/27/99-\nalternative workstations\nSteve Horn/Christina Stacey\n12/30/99\nBacking up Quorum files\nDept. of Correspondence\n12/31/99\nSteve Horn/Quorum\nSpecialists\nMaking request to IS&T (or IRT) for\nDept. of Correspondence\n1/1/2000\nreinstallation of MS Office\nSteve Horn\nLoading applications onto backup\nIS&T\n1/1/2000\nserver\nLoading backed up files onto stand-\nIS&T\nEvent\nalone workstations\ntrigger +36\nhours\n1.1.2 Requirements for staffing and equipment\nResource\nHow Many Do\nHow Many Do\nHow Many Do\nYou Need One\nYou Need One\nYou Need Two\nDay Later?\nWeek Later?\nWeeks Later?\nAdministrative staff\n98\n98\n98\nOther staff\n796\n796\n796\nPersonal PCs\n34\n148\n148\nSecure PCs\n0\n0\n0\nPrinters\n27\n65\n65\nCopy machines\n6\n12\n12\nPagers/cell phones\n7\n7\n7\nAttachment A\nDepartment of Correspondence\nOffice Contacts\nDebra Alexander\nPLM\nOEOB 96\nx66018\nBryan Day\nStudent Correspondence\nOEOB 597\nx65127\nHelen Castleman\nAgency Liaison\nOEOB 6\nx65485\nSteve Horn\nE-Mail\nOEOB 412\nx66557\nRobert Houser\nMail Analysis\nOEOB 58\nx65901\nCyril Jones\nSpecial Projects\nOEOB 60\nx65930\nEileen McCaughey\nMessages\nOEOB 91\nx65494\nJim Reagan\nMail Section\nOEOB 49\nx65970\nWendy Showers\nSupport\nOEOB 62\nx65945\nChristina Stacey\nDirector's Office\nOEOB 94\nx65456\nKelley Van Auken\nComment Line/Greetings/\nOEOB 22/39\nx65479/x65442\nVolunteer Program\nBob Zanlungo\nGift Office\nOEOB 457\nx65527\nAttachment B -FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY\nCORRESPONDENCE DEPARTMENT\nTELEPHONE LISTING\nOCTOBER 1999\nDIRECTOR'S OFFICE\nOld Executive Office Building Rm. 94\nCorrespondence Department Phone 6-7610\nIntern Phone 6-5465\nFax 6-2993\nDan Burkhardt\nDeputy Assistant to the\n6-5460\nPresident/Director of Corr.\nand Presidential Messages\nDelia Cohen\nDeputy Director (90)\n6-5462\nJan Vranich\nSpecial Asst. to Dir.\n6-5914\nDebbie Bird\nOffice Manager\n6-1910\nChristina Stacey\nAdmin. Asst./Photos\n6-5456\nAGENCY LIAISON\n(Case Work for the President)\nOld Executive Office Building Rm. 6\nMain Office Phone 6-7486\nIntern Phone 6-5917\nFax 6-2992\nHelen Castleman\nDirector\n6-5485\nAmi Lynch\nDeputy Director and\n6-5920\nCorrespondence Department\nIntern Coordinator\nMarji Hankins\nSpec. Asst. to the Dir. &\n6-5483\nSenior Caseworker\nLana Dickey\nSenior Caseworker & Office\n6-5504\nAdministrator\nMike Cherba\nStaff Assistant/Caseworker\n6-5466\nEmily Gibbons\nStaff Assistant/Caseworker\n6-5480\n1\nPRESIDENTIAL LETTERS AND MESSAGES\n(Drafts Letters/Messages for Individuals & Groups)\nOld Executive Office Building Rm. 96/97\nMain Office Phone 6-5511\nIntern Phone 6-5513\nRm. 96 Fax 6-2993/Rm. 97 Fax 6-5426\nDebi Alexander\nDirector (Rm. 96)\n6-6018\nMaureen Hudson\nDeputy Director (Rm. 96)\n6-5902\nShannon Hinderliter\nSenior Editor (Rm. 96)\n6-5526\nSarah Knight\nSenior Editor\n6-5514\nTracy Sisser\nSenior Writer\n6-5516\nJohn Corcoran\nWriter\n6-5515\nJeffrey Oakman\nWriter\n6-5517\nRenee Sagiv\nWriter\n6-5519\nChris Scully\nWriter\n6-5512\nJohn Wertman\nAsst. Editor & Office Admin. 6-5509\nWoyneab Wondwossen\nWriter\n6-5492\nPRESIDENTIAL SUPPORT\n(Document and Letter Production Support)\nOld Executive Office Building Rm. 62\nMain Office Phone 6-2304\nFax 6-5939\nEileen Upperman\nDirector\n6-5949\nLynn Crable\nAssistant Director\n6-5940\nChris Baer\nSpecial Assistant\n6-5941\nDan DeGuzman\nSpecial Assistant\n6-5943\nEarlene Rick\nSpecial Assistant\n6-5942\nWendy Showers\nSpecial Assistant\n6-5945\nPatty Shumaker\nSpecial Assistant\n6-5948\nBernice Smith\nSpecial Assistant\n6-5944\nPatty Williams\nSpecial Assistant\n6-5946\n2\nPRESIDENTIAL MESSAGES\nPROCLAMATIONS\n(Coordinates Messages/Letters to Individuals,\nGroups, or Events)\n(Proclamations)\nOld Executive Office Building Rm. 91\nMain Office and Intern Phone 6-7487\nFax 6-2806\nCarmen Fowler\nDirector\n6-5505\nEileen McCaughey\nProclamations Coordinator\n6-5494\nVacant\nStaff Assistant\nOFFICE OF WHITE HOUSE COMMENT LINE, GREETINGS\nAND VOLUNTEER PROGRAM\n(Comment Line, Greetings, Volunteers)\nOld Executive Office Building Rm. 39/22\nRoom 39 Main Office Line 6-2724\nRoom 39 Reception Desk 6-5447\nRoom 22 Reception Desk 6-7756\nRoom 39 Fax 5-1232\nRoom 22 Fax 6-5056\nVolunteer Hotline Recording 6-5458\nIntern Hotline Recording 6-5122\nKelley Van Auken\nDirector, WH Comment Line,\n6-5479\nGreetings Office and\nand\nVolunteer Program\n6-5442\nShivaun Cooney\nDep. Dir./Comment Line and\n6-6438\nGreetings (Rm. 39)\nAmanda Lightstone\nDep. Dir./Volunteer Program\n6-5443\n(Rm. 22)\nVacant\nStaff Assistant (Rm. 39)\n3\nMAIL ANALYSIS\n(Read/Code/Input Mail to President or\nPresident and Mrs. Clinton and Data Entry)\nOld Executive Office Building Rm. 56/60\nMain Office Phone 6-6600\nFax 6-9050\nBob Houser\nDirector\n6-5901\nTrudy Roddick\nDeputy Director\n6-5490\nSharon Lewis\nAdministrative Assistant\n6-5903\nDavid Belsky\nCorresp. Analyst &Editorial\n6-5922\nAsst. (Medal of Freedom)\nGeorge Bohrer\nPrinting Supervisor\n6-5928\nBarbara Garner\nSenior Correspondence Analyst 6-5933\nRay Goodwin\nCorrespondence Analyst\n6-5921\nGus Labrador\nSenior Mail Clerk\n6-5926\nSang Won Lee\nCorrespondence Analyst\n6-5919\nJames Mulvehill\nCorrespondence Analyst\n6-5484\nElly Schilling\nData Entry/Quality Control\n6-5918\nAnnie Stewart\nSenior Correspondence Analyst 6-5925\nGregg Trainor\nCorrespondence Analyst\n6-5510\nPhilip Weintraub\nAsst. Mail Clerk\n6-5927\nVacant\nCorrespondence Analyst\n6-5132\nEMAIL\n(Electronic Correspondence sent to President and Vice President)\nOld Executive Office Building Rm. 412\nMain Office and Intern Phone 6-5932\nFax 6-7109\nSteve Horn\nDirector\n6-6557\nMary Binns\nDeputy Director\n6-5923\n4\nGIFT UNIT\n(Processes Gifts to the First Family\nand White House/EOP Staff)\nOld Executive Office Building Rm. 457\nMain Office and Intern Phone 6-7133\nFax 6-7485\nLori Krause\nDirector\n6-5457\nVacant\nDeputy Director\n6-5499\nAmy Kletnick\nGift Analyst/Writer\n6-5532\nMaureen Undlin\nWriter\n6-5529\nBob Zanlungo\nGift Analyst\n6-5527\nPRESIDENTIAL STUDENT CORRESPONDENCE\n(Presidential Mail from age 18 and under)\nOld Executive Office Building Rm. 597\nMain Office Phone 6-7734\nIntern Phone 6-5136\nFax 6-7705\nDebra Wood\nDirector\n6-5131\nCatherine Kitchen\nDeputy Director\n6-5428\nDana Strand\nSpecial Assistant\n6-5133\nBryan Day\nStaff Assistant\n6-5127\nSPECIAL PROJECTS\n(Research/Draft/Examine Mail that\nRequires Special Handling)\nOld Executive Office Building Rm. 60\nMain Office Phone 6-6600\nFax 6-9050\nMichael Sharp\nDirector\n6-5904\nCyril Jones\nSpecial Projects Coordinator 6-5930\n5\nMAIL ROOM\nOld Executive Office Building Rm. 49\nMain Office Phone 6-2541\nFax 6-2461\nTony Mendoza\nSuperintendent\n6-6694\nJim Reagan\nAssistant Superintendent\n6-5970\nJames Clark\nSupervisor/Statistical\n6-5986\nSpecialist (Rm. 61)\nLue Culbreath\nNight Supervisor\n6-5985\nJim Reid\nSupervisor, Mail Reception/\n6-5989\nSecurity Office (Rm. 61)\nAndre Norwood\nSupervisor, Stat. Analysis\n6-5973\nHilliard Daniels\nDays Distribution Clerk\n6-2541\nSam Davis\nDays Distribution Clerk\n6-5985\nBarbara Dickens\nDistribution Clerk\n6-5980\nAnne Dao\nDistribution Clerk\n6-5985\nJoseph Ford\nDistribution Clerk\n6-7126\nMarilyn Herald\nDistribution Clerk\n6-5975\nErnesteen Johnson\nNights Distribution Clerk\n6-2541\nStacy Luong\nNights Distribution Clerk\n6-5985\nCatherine Moye\nDistribution Clerk\n6-5977\nLee Prince\nDistribution Clerk\n6-5983\nEdward Tolbert\nDistribution Clerk\n6-5982\nBeatrice Watts\nDistribution Clerk (Rm. 61)\n6-5988\nVacant\nDistribution Clerk (Rm. 61)\n6-5936\n6\nFIRST LADY'S CORRESPONDENCE\n(First Lady's & Chelsea's Correspondence)\nOld Executive Office Building Rms. 17-19\nMain Office and Intern Phone 6-2941\nFax 6-5199\nAlice Pushkar\nDirector\n6-5955\nKim Henry\nStaff Assistant\n6-5959\nJody Kaplan\nStaff Assistant\n6-5965\nVacant\nStaff Assistant\n6-5966\nQUORUM\n(Assistance with Quorum/Quorum Applications)\nOld Executive Office Building Rm. 60/412\nMain Office Phone 6-5929\nSteve Horn\nSystem Manager (Room 412)\n6-6557\nCandy Booth (Wed & Fri)\nQuorum Specialist (Room 60)\n6-5929\nTodd Cox (Mon)\nQuorum Specialist (Room 60)\n6-5929\nTim Poole (Tues & Thurs) Quorum Specialist (Room 60)\n6-5929\n7"
}