Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
472802302
label
Chron File 1/91 [2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
472802302
contentType
document
title
Chron File 1/91 [2]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
05480-002
collections
Records of the White House Office of the Chief of Staff to the President (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Philip D. Brady Chronological Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
472802302
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1991-01-31
month
1
year
1991
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1991-01-01
month
1
year
1991
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
ef0ad67d66799bad
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
1999-0735-F; 2025-0235-S
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Brady, Phillip D., Files
Subseries:
Chronological Files
OA/ID Number:
05480
Folder ID Number:
05480-002
Folder Title:
Chron File 1/91 [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DATE: 01/24/91
NOTE FOR:
EDE HOLIDAY
The President has reviewed the attached, and it is
forwarded to you for your:
Information
Action
XXX
Thank you.
PHILLIP D. BRADY
Assistant to the President
and Staff Secretary
(x2702)
cc:
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 23, 1991
sigmal 91 JAN 23 PM 2:54
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
EDE HOLIDAY as
1-24
SUBJECT:
Domestic Policy Council Decision Memorandum on
Empowerment
A final decision memorandum from the Domestic Policy Council
(DPC) on empowerment is attached. The memorandum seeks your
final confirmation of nine empowerment options.
You will recall that the DPC forwarded an information
memorandum to you on December 27, 1990. You directed that only
those options consistent with the FY92 Budget be maintained in
this package. Accordingly, the attached decision memorandum
includes only those options consistent with the FY92 Budget or
that have no budgetary implications. All of the options are
supported by a consensus of the DPC.
We have not scheduled a meeting with you to discuss this
package, but would be happy to pull together a small group should
you. so desire.
Attachment
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
01. Memo
The Domestic Policy Council to the President
1/22/91
P-5
Re: An Action Plan for Economic Empowerment of People
(11 pp.)
Open on Expiration of PRA
(Document Follows)
By Dr (NLGB) on 6/7/05
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff to the President, Office of the
Series:
Brady, Philip D.
Subseries:
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Chron File 1/91 [2]
Date Closed:
6/8/2000
OA/ID Number:
05480-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1999-0735-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA)
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 22, 1991
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
THE DOMESTIC POLICY COUNCIL
SUBJECT:
An Action Plan for Economic Empowerment of People
BACKGROUND:
The Domestic Policy Council (DPC) met on November 28, 1990,
to consider a series of ideas designed to give people access to
jobs and the power to make choices that will better their own
lives and the lives of their families and communities. An
information memorandum outlining the DPC's empowerment ideas was
forwarded to you on December 27, 1990. This memorandum now
presents for your confirmation only those options consistent with
initiatives to be proposed in the FY92 Budget and reflected in
the FY92 Budget settlements previously presented to you by OMB.
These options outline the beginning of an entrepreneurial,
market-oriented war against poverty. We can expand opportunities
by changing expectations and attitudes about the future. People
with access to property, jobs, and quality education have a stake
in their community, more pride, and greater incentive for
productive social behavior. More important, poor people with new
and abundant economic opportunity have hope for the future -- the
single greatest weapon against poverty and despair. There is
nothing new about free enterprise principles. What is new is a
bold determination to offer solutions, to break down barriers to
opportunity, and to question status quo thinking.
WHAT WE ARE DOING NOW:
1. Evaluations of Existing Demonstration Projects: During the
Reagan Administration, the Low Income Opportunity Board (LIOB)
received requests from 26 States for waivers from current Federal
rules to launch welfare demonstration projects. Of these, 14
State requests were approved and are now under way. There is a
great deal of diversity in the 14 State demonstrations. Alabama,
for example, is testing a major simplification project, in which
the AFDC, Food Stamp, and Low Income Home Energy Assistance
programs are merged into one cash grant with a unified set of
rules. West Virginia is encouraging welfare recipients to start
their own small businesses. Wisconsin requires both teenage
parents receiving AFDC as well as teenagers in families receiving
AFDC benefits to stay in school.
2
2. Recent Administration Accomplishments: The Administration
has already accomplished a great deal in its first two years.
For instance, Congress enacted your child care proposal and HOPE
proposal and expanded Head Start. You have promoted volunteerism
and your advocacy of educational choice has helped to spark a
grassroots movement across the country. The recent budget
agreement also included several initiatives to empower people,
such as the Earned Income Tax Credit expansion ($12 billion over
five years), the Child Health Tax Credit ($5 billion over five
years), and funding for child care vouchers. All are part of the
Administration's effort to protect and enhance individual power.
EMPOWERMENT REGULATORY AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIVITIES THAT CAN BE
IMPLEMENTED UNDER EXISTING AUTHORITY:
The Economic Empowerment Task Force, chaired by Secretary
Kemp, learned that all of the Departments are actively looking
for ways to empower people and make government work better for
people. These activities are primarily administrative or
regulatory in nature. For instance, USDA in concert with other
Cabinet agencies will improve coordination between the Food Stamp
Employment and Training program, the new Job Opportunities and
Basic Skills (JOBS) welfare work program, and possibly Labor's
JTPA program. Education has opened an educational choice center
and clearinghouse. The Department of Housing and Urban
Development has been working with the Chicago Housing Authority
on an "Operation Cleansweep" to rid public housing of gangs and
drug trafficking.
Other issues are being addressed in the FY92 Budget. For
example, funding for the WIC program, which provides supplemental
food for mothers, infants, and children, will be significantly
increased. There will also be a series of voucher and choice
initiatives in Education's budget. An important component of any
empowerment strategy is encouraging parents to make responsible
decisions for their children and to contribute to their
children's development.
OPTIONS REQUIRING PRESIDENTIAL DECISION:
Nine options are presented here for your confirmation.
These include some of the options you have previously seen in the
information memorandum forwarded to you on December 27. Pursuant
to your direction, only those options consistent with initiatives
to be proposed in the FY92 Budget have been maintained here.
We should also note that a vital component of economic
empowerment is the vigorous enforcement of civil rights laws.
Racial, sex, and religious discrimination create insidious
3
barriers to economic opportunity. The Administration will
continue in its commitment to tear down these barriers wherever
they exist. There are other barriers to opportunity that have a
disproportionately adverse impact on minorities and women.
Regulations, like those issued under the Davis-Bacon Act
(discussed below) and local economic licensing laws, can remove
the lowest rungs from the ladder of economic opportunity.
1. Fund HOPE: You signed HOPE (Homeownership and Opportunity
for People Everywhere) legislation in November. HOPE authorized
several important initiatives, such as empowering public housing
residents by encouraging them to own or manage public and
assisted housing, and improving the link between housing and
services for the homeless. HOPE is the most far-reaching housing
legislation since 1974. No funds, however, were appropriated for
important components of HOPE in FY91. According to HUD, funding
HOPE is vital to achieving the Administration's public goal of a
million new low-income homeowners in 1992. OMB has approved
HUD's request to reprogram FY91 funds to fund HOPE immediately.
Pros:
HOPE demonstrates the Administration's commitment to housing
for poor families and children, the homeless, and first-
time home buyers.
O
HOPE is a model empowerment initiative. Funding it now will
demonstrate the Administration's conviction to empower
people and will give impetus to this approach to social
problems.
O
HOPE targets Federally-owned properties currently in FHA or
RTC inventories. Transferring these units to first-time
home buyers will add dollars to the Federal Treasury.
Cons:
O
Funding a new program at the same time that the
Administration proposes a FY92 budget with cuts in
established programs may not be supported by Congress.
It is likely that, in return for fully funding HOPE,
Congressional Democrats will want to fund their new housing
program, HOME, at a potential cost of $1 billion in FY91.
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
2.
Promote Educational Choice: During the last two years,
4
educational choice initiatives have been initiated in more and
more jurisdictions across the country. East Harlem, New York;
Cambridge, Massachusetts; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and Minnesota
have implemented choice programs that permit parents to determine
which schools their children should attend.
The Federal government could encourage restructuring through
choice demonstrations and voucher programs. States could be
awarded grants for demonstration projects in return for a mutual
agreement with the Federal government to waive certain
regulations that impede choice. Projects would provide for, but
not be limited to, educational choice among public schools and
include special awards for excellence to high-performing schools.
In the FY92 Budget, the Administration will propose a new $200
million fund available to schools implementing choice programs.
A portion of Education's new funds would also be targeted to low-
income or high-dropout school districts that employ voucher or
certificate programs. Legislation would be required.
Pros:
Emphasis on urban areas targets Federal resources on highest
concentration of low-income families and at-risk children.
Targeting school districts with high dropout rates provides
an opportunity to help the districts most likely to have
difficulties attaining the National Education Goals.
Provides maximum flexibility for communities and school
districts to select options most appropriate to local
educational problems.
Cons:
O
Legislation may face opposition on the Hill and in the
public education arena.
O
Could face a constitutional challenge if potential choice
options include religiously-affiliated schools.
o
Might be difficult to administer the transfer of funds from
local school districts to other providers.
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
3.
Reintroduce "Charlottesville" Flexibility Legislation: A
proposal supported by the Administration for increased
flexibility in exchange for enhanced accountability failed to
pass Congress last year.
5
Pros:
o
Flexibility would permit the resources from HHS, Labor, and
Education programs to be spent at State and local levels
with fewer regulatory constraints and greater effectiveness.
Flexibility legislation would follow through on a commitment
of the Education Summit.
O
This would enhance services integration efforts by granting
Education, HHS, and Labor coordinated waiver authority
coupled with enhanced accountability.
Cons:
O
The proposal received opposition from both conservative
Republicans and Democrats. Some Members believed that
flexibility would allow services to be shifted away from
traditionally targeted populations, such as the
disadvantaged, now mandated by law.
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
4.
Provide Job Training to Public Housing and Other Low-Income
Residents: The Administration could actively promote an
aggressive services integration initiative now being developed by
HUD, HHS, and Labor. The goal of this initiative is to bring job
training to public housing residents. Recent research by the
Rockefeller Foundation shows that job training programs that
integrate an array of basic education and specific skill
competencies are most effective in making low-income people self-
sufficient. No new FY92 funds are required for this initiative.
Pros:
Targeting job training to residents of public housing, and
combining training with other empowerment initiatives for
public housing residents, should create a highly productive
synergy.
Targeting job training on public housing residents targets
those who need help most because about one-third of all
public housing residents are receiving public assistance.
Cons:
Combining services at public housing sites will increase the
attractiveness of remaining in public housing, which could
6
have the unintended consequence of discouraging people from
moving out of public housing.
o
Neither public housing nor job training are entitlements.
Targeting those who are fortunate enough to receive housing
aid could create the appearance of inequitably helping one
group at the expense of others.
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
5. Create Enterprise Zones: Enterprise zones were removed in
the final stages of the budget agreement last year and could be
proposed again this year. The enterprise zone legislative
proposal would include both employment and investment incentives
and could be tied to Federal, State, and local regulatory relief.
With a slower economy, enterprise zones are needed more than
ever. States have been experimenting with enterprise zones for
several years. Former Governor Kean implemented enterprise zones
with great success in New Jersey.
The proposal included in the FY92 Budget is similar to last
year's proposal: 1) a 5 percent refundable tax credit for the
first $10,500 of wages earned by qualified employees in an
enterprise zone; 2) elimination of capital gains taxes for
tangible property used in a business located in an enterprise
zone for at least two years; and 3) permitting individuals to
expense some of the capital invested in enterprise zone
businesses. Treasury estimated last year that phasing in these
initiatives in 50 zones would reduce tax revenues by $1.9 billion
over five years.
Pros:
O
The enterprise zone concept includes more than tax
incentives; it also requires reduction of Federal, State,
and local regulatory barriers and a comprehensive local
strategy to deal with the most distressed parts of rural and
urban areas.
o
Enterprise zones would concentrate incentives solely in the
most distressed communities, thus targeting tax expenditures
where they are most needed.
Cons:
O
Some think enterprise zones would primarily stimulate the
shifting of assets into the zone from areas surrounding the
zone and not generate sufficient new investment to pay for
the incentives.
7
o
Targeting powerful pro-growth incentives into just a few
areas might unfairly benefit some people. Across the board
incentives might be seen as more equitable.
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
6.
Improve Access of the Poor to More Jobs by Reforming Davis-
Bacon: Davis-Bacon was enacted in the 1930s to require workers
on Federally-financed projects to be paid the "prevailing wage."
Some who supported the measure also sought to bar blacks from
benefiting from the profusion of public works under the New Deal.
Davis-Bacon may increase costs by as much as 25 percent for small
enterprises and it prevents the least skilled people, many of
whom are black, from participating equally in open bidding for
contracts with the Federal government. At the current threshold,
virtually no project is beyond the reach of Davis-Bacon.
A higher minimum threshold for Federal programs could be
established under which prevailing wages would not apply. Both
the FY91 and the FY92 Budgets call for raising the threshold to
$250,000. Legislation would be required.
Pros:
Raising the threshold would generate significant budgetary
savings.
O
Raising the threshold would be easier to pass in Congress
than outright repeal, but it would still be difficult.
Cons:
O
Even if the threshold were raised, Davis-Bacon still imposes
a regulatory burden.
There would be strong labor opposition. The labor community
views Davis-Bacon as necessary to keep wages high.
O
Past efforts to enact such reforms have failed and, if
attempted now, might lead to Congressional reversal of
significant reforms just implemented, such as the Department
of Labor's new "helper" rule (which is expected to save up
to $610 million per year).
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
8
7. Target SBA Programs: The Small Business Administration
(SBA) operates several loan and technical assistance programs
which could be better targeted to promote entrepreneurship among
low-income persons.
--
Cottage Capitalism Initiative: The SBA proposes extending a
joint HUD/SBA experiment in Salt Lake City, Utah, to 10 new
sites by reprogramming FY91 funds. In this experiment, SBA
is teaching public housing residents about basic business
concepts and helping them develop business plans. Local
lenders have made small loans with private funds to provide
the start-up capital needed by graduates of the training
program. SBA will also work with the new Rural Development
Administration to develop similar programs in low-income
rural areas.
--
Entrepreneur Training for Disadvantaged Youth: The SBA has
asked for $425,000 in its FY92 budget submission to launch a
new program for entrepreneurial training materials for low-
income youth, designed to inform and motivate young people
about the opportunity of small business.
Pros:
O
Coordinating SBA activities with other programs creates
synergies and helps leverage private sector involvement.
O
Efforts by several private, nonprofit organizations to lend
small amounts of money to low-income entrepreneurs have
shown promising success rates.
Cons:
o
Entrepreneurial training for low-income clients is regarded
by some experts as the least efficient use of business-
development resources. Because low-income clients may lack
requisite academic skills, or may not be able to obtain
child care and other needed assistance, the business failure
rate could be greater than among other client groups.
O
The increased FY92 spending needed to make these programs
successful will need to be offset by reductions in other
programs. If these funds come from other business-
development programs, we may be replacing more-efficient
services with less-efficient services.
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
9
8.
Revamp the Public Employment Service: The Employment
Service is a State-run, Federally-funded program intended to help
unemployed workers find jobs. It is an important, but not wholly
successful, tool in minimizing the financial hardship and length
of unemployment for workers. Currently, the Employment Service
interprets its mission as finding available jobs and then placing
unemployed workers in those jobs. As a practical matter, the
Service "skims" by placing only the best workers -- so that
employers will continue to work with the Service in the future.
The focus of the Employment Service could be changed. The
Service would focus its resources on job counseling targeted to
low-income people and steering them to available training
opportunities. The Administration could also propose tying
continued Federal funding for each office to placement rates for
both low-income people and the long-term unemployed. This could
be accomplished through regulation; Labor has already invited
public comment on how to restructure the Employment Service.
Pros:
Changing the focus of the Employment Service and instilling
performance standards and incentives would increase the
social benefit of a program that is not currently working
well.
Cons:
If the economy has slipped into a recession, this could be
perceived as the wrong time to be changing the Employment
Service -- a time when more people may be in need of the
types of services provided by the Employment Service.
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
9.
Establish Empowerment Opportunity Areas: This option seeks
a fresh start in programs for poor people by granting waivers
from Federal requirements to localities that develop plans for
new approaches to low-income programs. It would have two forms:
one organized around geographic concentrations of low-income
people; the other defined in terms of a target group such as
unmarried first-time mothers. In each, we would encourage use of
waivers from regular program rules and flexibility in the
administration of Federal, State, and local laws and programs.
Each plan must identify performance criteria before being
approved; any project failing to meet the criteria would be
subject to termination. Legislation would be required to
10
authorize broader waiver authority than currently exists.
Empowerment Opportunity Areas would operate on an experimental
basis, probably for a period of three to five years. There would
be no FY92 Budget impact.
Pros:
O
Shows the Federal government believes in the potential for
developing "bottom up" solutions.
o
Allows an opportunity to see if our rhetoric of community
control meshes with reality.
Cons:
O
There is no guarantee of success. This approach might
merely shift the bureaucratic presence from the Federal
level to the community level.
o
Further State and local experimentation may not be perceived
as an adequate response to the problems that low-income
people face.
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
RECOMMENDATION:
The Domestic Policy Council recommends your approval of each
of the nine options discussed above as an initial package of
Administration empowerment initiatives. Each proposal is
consistent with decisions made for the FY92 Budget.
DECISION (Summary) :
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
Option 1:
Fund HOPE.
Option 2: *
Promote Educational
Choice.
Option 3: *
Repropose Flexibility
Legislation.
11
Option 4:
Job Training in
Public Housing.
Option 5: *
Create Enterprise
Zones.
Option 6: *
Reform Davis-Bacon.
Option 7:
Target SBA Programs.
Option 8:
Revamp the Public
Employment Service.
Option 9: *
Create Empowerment
Opportunity Areas.
* Legislation will be required.
CA7
1-24-91
Chairman Pro Tempore
Wall Dick Thornburgh
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date:
1/24
TO:
BILL SITTMANN
FROM: JOHN S. GARDNER
Special Assistant to the President
and Assistant Staff Secretary
Please have NSC provide a
recommendation as to the
President's doing a video
message for this conference
ASAP.
Thanks.
J.
24/01 ' 91 20:03 FAX 02273431/72
UNOCA AGA KHAN
4 002
Château de Bellerive
1245 Collonge-Bellerive
24 January 1991
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
m. President dear George,
The World Economic Forum which we discussed and which I wrote
you about on 10 October 1990, convenes in Davos, Switzerland,
on February 1st.
I am the Chairman.
President Gorbachev is sending a video message.
This is a valuable forum for a message from the President of
the United states particularly as the Gulf crisis and its
impact on the world economy will be high on the agenda of this
world wide meeting of Heads of State and Governments,
Ministers, Chief Executive Officers, top financial leaders and
some 200 members of the media's best.
The President would be demonstrating that despite his
unusually great burdens he is not loosing sight of the larger
picture and long term objectives in a new world order.
He might for example, sound the call for a successful
conclusion of the Uruguay Round, tying trade not only to
prosperity, but also to peace.
Recent great swings in the stock markets demonstrate the close
ties of the world of business and finance to the perceptions
of America's fortunes and its leadership.
The following are few of the participants:
- Presidents Fujimori, Menem, Ozal, Perez;
- Moubarak announced, confirmation awaited;
- Prime Ministers Bielecki of Poland, Rocard of France and
Vranitzky of Austria:
- Foreign Ministers Genscher, Velayati;
- Raymond Barre, Candessus (IMF), Dunkel (GATT)
24/01 '91 20:04 FAX 0227348072
UNOCA AGA KHAN
003
- Business leaders:
- Keogh, President of Coda Cola;
- Top Keidanren delegation of Japan;
- Morita, (SONY) ;
- Van Wanchem (SHELL) ;
- Sir James Goldsmith;
- Robert Maxwell
May I request that you let us know at the earliest opportunity
if we can look forward to your message. It would be a
tremendously important contribution to our deliberations.
As Chairman, and on behalf of the Forum and its participants,
I thank you in advance.
we need your statement!
with highest consideration and warmest
personal esteem
as always,
sadh
Sadruddin Aga Khan
The Hon. George Bush
President of the United States of America
The White House
Washington D.C. 20500.
USA
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 24, 1991
TO CHIEF OF STAFF
Please find attached certain
remarks by Senator Kerrey
which have been forwarded to
the President pursuant to his
request. Remarks relate to
Secretary Yeutter's alleged
statement "politicizing war".
Thil.
Phillip D. Brady
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
1/24
91 JAN 24 PM 12: 24
TO: THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
FRED MCCLURE
Assistant to the President
for Legislative Affairs
FYI
Comment
Action
As you requested, attached are the remarks
made by Bob Kerrey yesterday. This is the
speech that you and Bob Dole spoke about
before the leadership meeting this morning.
UNITY DESPITE MR. VEUTTER'S
STATEMENT
January 23, 1991
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENA
sciences, and take the electoral conse.
new world order that we will inhabit
Mr. KERREY. Mr. President. yeater-
when this war to over.
day in Lincoln. NE, the man who in a
quenoes. Mr. Yeutler is right that WB will all
1 yield the floor.
matter of days is expected to become
be held accountable for our decisions.
Mr. SYMM8. Mr. President, is the
chairman of the Republican National
Committee. the current Secretary of
However, he 18 wrong 10 assume I
Senate in morning business at this
Agriculture. Clayton Yeutter. made
regret my vote because I simply do
hour?
not. It was B difficult vote, and the dif-
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The
what I regard as some very unfortu-
ficulty was born of the caution ac.
senior Senstor from Idaho is recog.
nate and untimely remarks.
quired from my own experiences in
nized. The Benate la in a period for the
He said. during & press conference
following a speech to the Lincoln
the Vietnam war. If there are others
transaction of morning business with
Rotary Club, that he hopes the Ameri-
In my party or in this Senate who
Senators permitted to speak for not to
can public will hold accountable the
regret their vote. I have not heard
exceed 10 minutes each.
Democratic opponents of President
them say so. The fact that Mr. Yeut-
Mr. SYMMS. I thank the distin.
ter thinks Democrate and Reoublicans
guished President pro tempore.
Bush's request for authority to go to
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The
war against Iraq. Ho said that Domo-
made up our minds on the gulf accord-
crats are politically vulnerable because
Ing to some political calculus says
Senator from Idaho is recognized for
more about his approach to foreign
not to exceed 10 minutes.
of those votes.
Secretary reutter said "I would
policy than ours.
Mr. SYMMS. I thank the Chair.
In fact. there has been an unmistak-
(The remarks of Mr. SYMMS periain-
guess 90 percent of them now wish
able and little recognized bipartisan
ing to the submission of Senate Reso.
they had cast their votes the other
support from the beginning for the
lution 17 are located in today's RECORD
way." He said: "They picked the wrong
use of force-to contain Iraqi aggres.
under "Submission of Concurrent and
side. If the conflict goes well that will
sion and to enforce an embargo so
Senate Resolutions.")
work against them." Ho said their op-
thorough that in any other period of
Mr. BYMMS. Mr. President. how
position to the President on this issue
history It would have been considered
much time do 1 have remaining?
could be "a very significant factor" in
an affirmative act of war. The debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
next year's Presidential and congres.
despite the efforts of some to recast It
KERREY). Two minutes. thirty-five sec-
sional elections.
for partisan purposes, has never been
onds.
Mr. President, to me and to me per-
over whether we should use force. It
Mr. SYMMS Mr. President, I ask
sonally, these remarks are deeply trou-
has centered Instead on the appropri-
unanimous consent that 1 might have
bling. They attempt to politicize this
ate level and timing of force. And now
about 2 more minutes in addition to
war and to define victory in terms of
that we have decided as a nation to
that 2 minutes.
electoral gain rather than policy
begin this war, there is again biparti-
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With.
achievements. They trivialize the deep
san support-to see it through to an
out objection. It. is 30 ordered.
misglvings which all Americans have
unknown but successful conclusion.
about sending our sons and daughters
In fact. I am not on the sidelines. In
into combat and fall to acknowledge
spite of carlier dissent and at some
the remarkable-up to now-biparti-
TESK of doing 80. I have been actively
san effort to deline the clcumstances
supporting our President and our mill-
under which force Is to be used to
tary effort now that this war has
defend an American Interest.
begun. 1 have been active because I
I aid not "pick a side" when I voted,
want to help sustain public support in
Mr. President. When voting to ask
B way it was not sustained during the
Americans to risk it all, the least I can
Vietnam war. I find It surprising and
do is risk losing an election by trying
dangerous to the very consensus we
to decide what Y believe is right. If 1
WIII need for success that less than 1
become a candidate for reelection. the
week Into this war, before RC know
voters of Nebraska-Dumocratic and
how long it will last or how difficult it
Republican-will obviously have the
will be. the President would allow
opportunity of deciding whether my
these kind of divisive comments.
vote & mistake for them.
For what we need now is unity, and
They may decide the alternative I
unity is what we have. In spite of Mr.
supported-the use of force to contain
Yeutter's statements. In the interest
Iraql aggression and more Lime for
of that unity, 1 would suggest the
sanctions to work-was wrong. They
President to reconsider Mr. Yeutter's
may decide that my dissent was unac-
appointment as party chair, or ask
ceptable. They may decide my argu-
him to noid nis tongue until our sol-
ments evidenced an unwillineness to
diere are safe again.
defend America's interests.
Mr. President, we are headed Into
The people of Nebraska have a right
uncharted territory In America's for-
to make these judgments. Those No-
eign policy. not just in how President
braskans who actually Ilve and vote in
Bush will succeed In winning this war,
the State hardly need Mr. Yeulter to
as I confident ne will. but also in what
confirm that right. Those of us who
the new world order we are fighting
have actually stood for elective office
for will look like, and how we will
already understand that our job is to
pursue it. America's unity regarding
state our opinions, vote our con-
the war we are now waging flows In
large part from the openness and thor-
oughness of the public debaie that
preceded it.
Our ability to discorn and shape the
new world order will be better served
by that kind of open and thorough ex-
atnination than by a poisoned, polar-
Ized. partisan environment. Those who
invite such an environment not only
undermine the conduct of this war,
but also America's leadership in the
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DATE: 01/23/91
NOTE FOR:
NSC
The President has reviewed the attached, and it is
forwarded to you for your:
Information
X
Action
Thank you.
PHILLIP D. BRADY
Assistant to the President
and Staff Secretary
(x2702)
cc:
THE PRESIDENT
January 23, 1991
Dear Jim,
At I your next meeting, please let the board know
read with keen interest your report of December that 28.
Academy. Thanks and keep up the fine work.
and productive role in the affairs of the Naval
I am so glad the board is taking such an active
Sincerely,
GBl
0331
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
91 JAN 22 PM 3: 48
January 22, 1991
INFORMATION
THE PRESIDENT 1.23 9, HAS SEEN
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
BRENT SCOWCROFT
B
SUBJECT:
Board of Visitors 1990 Report on the U.S. Naval
Academy
Purpose
To forward the annual report of the Naval Academy Board of
Visitors at Tab A.
Background
The Board of Visitors is required to report to you annually on
the state of the Naval Academy. This is the first review in
which your two appointees to the Board, Gerry Bemiss and Jack
Fitch, participated, and their personal efforts to make the Board
more active are highlighted on page 2.
The Board concluded that the Naval Academy is a strong and
justifiably proud national institution that serves a vital role
in America's national defense. They believe that the single
negative finding, a single (and well-publicized) incident of
sexual harassment in 1990, was an isolated event and the Naval
Academy has aggressively taken steps to ensure the environment
which led to the incident has been eliminated.
Attachment
Tab A Report from the U.S. Naval Academy
CC: Vice President
Chief of Staff
Ba
January 23, 1991
Dec. Sumune
Comerapt
se let the board know that
your report of December 28.
+
Close
taking such an active
: affairs of the Naval
up the fine work.
1/23/91
FYI. the augenal NSC memo
l
was returned to NSC with
he owrk,.
acopyoy the Pp vote
S. Wagner/
P Brachpofe
report to you annually
is the first review i
d, Gerry Bemiss and Ja
al efforts to make the
more active are highlighted on page 2.
The Board concluded that the Naval Academy is a strong and
justifiably proud national institution that serves a vital r
in America's national defense. They believe that the single
negative finding, a single (and well-publicized) incident of
sexual harassment in 1990, was an isolated event and the Na
Academy has aggressively taken steps to ensure the environm
which led to the incident has been eliminated.
Attachment
Tab A Report from the U.S. Naval Academy
CC: Vice President
Chief of Staff
THE PRESIDENT
January 23, 1991
Dear Jim,
At I read your next meeting, please let the board
with keen interest your report of December know that 28.
and I am so glad the board is taking such an
Academy. Thanks and keep up the fine work.
productive role in the affairs of the active Naval
Sincerely,
GBl
0331
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
91 JAN 22 PM 3: 48
January 22, 1991
THE PRESIDENT 1.23.91 SEEN
INFORMATION
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
BRENT SCOWCROFT
B
SUBJECT:
Board of Visitors 1990 Report on the U.S. Naval
Academy
Purpose
To forward the annual report of the Naval Academy Board of
Visitors at Tab A.
Background
The Board of Visitors is required to report to you annually on
the state of the Naval Academy. This is the first review in
which your two appointees to the Board, Gerry Bemiss and Jack
Fitch, participated, and their personal efforts to make the Board
more active are highlighted on page 2.
The Board concluded that the Naval Academy is a strong and
justifiably proud national institution that serves a vital role
in America's national defense. They believe that the single
negative finding, a single (and well-publicized) incident of
sexual harassment in 1990, was an isolated event and the Naval
Academy has aggressively taken steps to ensure the environment
which led to the incident has been eliminated.
Attachment
Tab A Report from the U.S. Naval Academy
CC: Vice President
Chief of Staff
Haff plane
0
DEPARTMENT OF DETENSE
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
UNITED STATES NAVAL ACADEMY
DEPARTMENT
AMERICA
ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND 21402-5000
OF
28 December 1990
The President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
Naval required Academy. meet each year and report to you on the Naval state Academy of the is
The to Board of Visitors of the United States
of and the on The Board, October Board 9, met 1990, twice in in Room 1990 EF -- 100 in Annapolis of The on April 23, 1990,
U.S. Code, I respectfully and in accordance submit with this Section report. 6968, Capitol. Title As 10, Chairman of the
Summary
At the the President outset, and on behalf of the Board,
to the qualified performing that be same time to a serve commendable the Academy the know country job is the educating of in United training the Navy States officers and in Naval the it who Marines. is Academy are important highly At is
citizenship, leaders, and to government. assume the highest responsibilities midshipmen, men of and command, women,
privilege had to of serious problem in 1990. sure, and we
There deal are with problems one at the Naval Academy, to be
men, I realized President that in Quayle hand diplomas to exercises; 990 and as I
observed Vice attending the Academy graduation But in May I had the
entire command front of me were 990 young women and
proud. of the United States Navy, and reasons the country that you, can the be
State of the USNA
morale equipment, discipline, and curriculum, the state of
The and charge to this Board is "to inquire into
relating to fiscal the Academy affairs, " academic methods, instruction, and other physical matters
quality; examination. Instruction is, Navy's needs,
but getting warrants curriculum is relevant to the good and
Morale better. is high The among the midshipmen. Discipline is
sound, but some maintenance improvements are in order. The on balance, of high is
suffers because of budget physical restrictions. plant
Conclusion
On behalf of the Board of Visitors, I want to express to you
my gratitude for the support and cooperation we had during 1990
from Secretary Garrett, Admiral Frank Kelso, Rear Admiral Hill, and
from other members of your official family.
We believe that the United States Naval Academy is a strong
and justifiably proud national institution that serves a vital role
in America's national defense.
The Commandant of the Academy, a Navy pilot, and I were
recently reviewing the productive but turbulent year at the Naval
Academy. He spoke of the Board of Visitors in words that a former
Navy pilot may appreciate: "We were grateful that you guys were
up there flying high cover for the midshipmen."
We consider it to be the responsibility of this Board to
support and advance the U.S. Naval Academy and the quality of the
men and women trained in Annapolis as officers.
Respectfully submitted,
James M. Cannon
Chairman, Board of Visitors
Members:
FitzGerald Bemiss
James M. Cannon
Arthur B. Culvahouse
John C. Fitch
L.E. "Tommy" Thomas
John C. Tuck
Senator Mark O. Hatfield
Senator John S. McCain
Senator Barbara Mikulski
Senator Paul S. Sarbanes
Representative Helen D. Bentley
Representative Larry J. Hopkins
Representative C. Thomas McMillen
Representative Joseph R. Skeen
Representative Charles Wilson
CC:
Secretary of Defense
Secretary of the Navy
Chief of Naval Operations
Superintendent, USNA
5
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DATE: 01/23/91
NOTE FOR: WILLIAM SITTMANN
forwarded The President to you has for your: reviewed the attached, and it is
Information
XX
Action
Thank you.
PHILLIP D. BRADY
Assistant to the President
(x2702) and Staff Secretary
cc:
United States Department of State
Washington, D.C. 20520
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
January 11, 1991
Haji Syed A. R. Hussaini
142-41 41st Avenue, Apt. 504
Flushing, Queens, New York.
Dear Mr. Hussaini:
President Bush and Secretary Baker asked that I respond to
your letter of November 29, 1990 in which you offer your
assistance to the United States government regarding the
current crisis in the Gulf. As you know, the United States
very much desires a peaceful resolution of the crisis. With
the firm backing of the international community, as expressed
in the 12 United Nations Security Council resolutions on the
Gulf, and the support of Americans like yourself for the
President's policies, we remain hopeful a peaceful solution can
be achieved.
Sincerely,
Paul R. Sutphin
Country Officer for Pakistan
Office of Pakistan, Afghanistan and
Bangaldesh Affairs
79041
His Uncle did in fact
serve with GB at the UN,
Scotiabank
so an appropriate reply
THE BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA
should be assured.
New York Agency, One Liberty Plaza, New York, N.Y. 10006
Thanks.
04/2/12
PERSONAL. 1
RESPECTED HONORABLE MR JAMES BAKER:
SIR, I HAVE RECEIVED MY U.S. PASSPORT TODAY AND I THANK YOU ALL
FOR YOUR KINDNESS AND NOBILITY.I ALSO OFFER MY SERVICES TO GO
TO SAUDI ARABIA OR ANYWHERE ELSE TO GIVE MY LIFE AND BLOOD FOR
MY COUNTRY THE UNITED STATES. MY RELATIVES FORMER FOREIGN MINISTER
AND AMBASSADOR OF PAKISTAN TO THE UNITED NATIONS AND RED CHINA
(WITH MR BUSH), MR AGHA SHAHI AND FORMER AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED
STATES, MR AGHA HILALY ARE ALSO YOUR ADMIRERS AND ADMIRERS OF MR BUSE
I HAVE M.B.A DEGREE FROM MANHATTAN COLLEGE, NEW YORK AND FROM INDIA
ALSO AND I HAVE FORTY ONE YEARS BANKING EXPERIENCE.
I ASSURE YOU OF MY LOYALTY TILL THE LAST MOMENT OF MY LIFE.
YOUR LOYAL SERVANT
S.A.R. Hussaim 11/29/90
HAJI SYED A.R. HUSSAINI M.B.A
HOME:
NOV 29 1996
142-41-41st avenue, apt 504
FLUSHING, QUEENS, NEW YORK NY 11355
TO HONORABLE MR JAMES BAKER,
SECRETARY OF STATE,
WASHINGTON D.C
MY HOME PHONE: 718-961-0948
BANK: 2-212-225-5419
DATED NOVEMBER 29-90
To, FAX# 202-456-2397
COPY TO HONORABLE MR GEORGE BUSH: TO GIVE ME A CHANCE TO GIVE MY LIFE
FOR MY BELOVED COUNTRY THE UNITED STATES. PRVIOUSLY I HAD OFFERED MY
SERVICES TO GO TO VIETNAM FOR MILITARY BANKING BUT I WAS THEN NOT A
CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES AND COULD NOT GO.YOU MAY REMEMBER MY
UNCLE MR AGHA SHAHI THEN AMBASSADOR OF PAKISTAN TO
THE UNITED NATIONS WHO ADMIRES YOU ALWYS.
YOUR LOYAL CITIZEN
S.A.R. Hussain' ,
PLEASE HELP AND PLEASE REPLY
UNCLASSIFIED
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT
TRANSMITTAL FORM
S/S 9026565
Date January 12, 1991
FOR: Mr. William F. Sittmann
Executive Secretary
National Security Council Staff
The White House
REFERENCE:
To: James Baker
From: Mr. Haji Hussaini
Date: November 29, 1990
Subject: Letter stating that the nephew of a former Pakistani
official offers his services to U.S. Government
WH Referral Dated: December 19, 1990
NSCS ID# (if any):
199041
The attached item was sent directly to the
Department of State.
ACTION TAKEN:
A draft reply is attached.
A draft reply will be forwarded.
A translation is attached.
X
An information copy of a direct reply is attached.
We believe no response is necessary for the reason
cited below.
The Department of State has no objection to the
proposed travel.
Other (see remarks).
REMARKS:
for Sondin
Secretariat Staff
UNCLASSIFIED
THE WHITE HOUSE OFFICE
REFERRAL
9026565
'90 DEC-20 11:26 AM
DECEMBER 19, 1990
TO: DEPARTMENT OF STATE
ACTION REQUESTED:
DIRECT REPLY, FURNISH INFO COPY
DESCRIPTION OF INCOMING:
ID:
199041
MEDIA: LETTER, DATED NOVEMBER 29, 1990
TO:
JAMES BAKER
FROM:
MR. HAJI HUSSAINI
SCOTIABANK
THE BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA
NEW YORK AGENCY
ONE LIBERTY PLAZA
NEW YORK NY 10006
SUBJECT: NEPHEW OF FORMER PAKISTANI OFFICIAL OFFERS
HIS SERVICES TO U.S. GOVERNMENT
PROMPT ACTION IS ESSENTIAL - IF REQUIRED ACTION HAS NOT BEEN
TAKEN WITHIN 9 WORKING DAYS OF RECEIPT, PLEASE TELEPHONE THE
UNDERSIGNED AT 456-7486.
RETURN CORRESPONDENCE, WORKSHEET AND COPY OF RESPONSE
(OR DRAFT) TO:
AGENCY LIAISON, ROOM 91, THE WHITE HOUSE, 20500
SALLY KELLEY
DIRECTOR OF AGENCY LIAISON
PRESIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE
7041
AF
WHITE HOUSE
CORRESPONDENCE TRACKING WORKSHEET
OUTGOING
0-H - INTERNAL
1 INCOMING
Date Correspondence
Received (YY/MM/DD)
901/202
Name of Correspondent: []Mr. []Mrs, [7Miss/7Ms. Haji Hussaini
MI Mall Report
User Codes: (A)
(a)
(c)
Subject: offers nephew his Agnernment official
ROUTE TO:
ACTION
DISPOSITION
Tracking
Type
Completion
Action
Date
Del
Office/Agency
(Staff Name)
Code
YY/MM/DD
Response
Code
YY/MM/DD
Burm
Colleil
ORIGINATOR
9011317 W
230+1
Dox
Referral Note:
R
90120419 LJ
A 9849111
Referral Note:
I
1
/
Referral Note:
/
/
1
/
Referral Note:
/
/
/
/
-
Referral Note:
ACTION 00
DISPOSITION CODES:
A
Action
I . Info Copy Only/No Action Necessary
A Answered
c Completed
c Costs
commendation
A . Direct Reply w/Copy
D - Non-Special Referral
8 Suspended
D Draft
conte
s For Signature
F. Funk Fact Sheet
X . Interim Reply
to be used as Enclosure
FOR OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE:
Type of Response - Initials of Signer
Code - "A"
Completion Date - Date of Outgoing
Comments:
Keep this worksheet attached to the original Incoming letter.
Send all routing undates to./Dantral Reference (Room 75, OEOB).
turn com
pondence record to Central FI
Re q llons about 1 con port ICE tracking syst n to c tral Refer IDS, ext.
EMI
IG 86 pmh :Co Co
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
01/24/91
TO:
THE CHIEF OF STAFF
FROM:
PHILLIP D. BRADY
Assistant to the President and
Staff Secretary
The attached has been forwarded
to the President
THE WHITE HOUSE
91 JAN 23 PM 2: 54
WASHINGTON
January 23, 1991
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
EDE HOLIDAY any
SUBJECT:
Domestic Policy Council Decision Memorandum on
Empowerment
A final decision memorandum from the Domestic Policy Council
(DPC) on empowerment is attached. The memorandum seeks your
final confirmation of nine empowerment options.
You will recall that the DPC forwarded an information
Memorandum to you on December 27, 1990. You directed that only
those options consistent with the FY92 Budget be maintained in
this package. Accordingly, the attached decision memorandum
includes only those options consistent with the FY92 Budget or
that have no budgetary implications. All of the options are
supported by a consensus of the DPC.
We have not scheduled a meeting with you to discuss this
package, but would be happy to pull together a small group should
you so desire.
Attachment
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
02. Memo
The Domestic Policy Council to the President
1/22/91
Re: An Action Plan for Economic Empowerment of People
(11 pp.)
Open on Expiration of PRA
(Document Follows)
By
(NLGB) on 6/7/05
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff to the President, Office of the
Series:
Brady, Philip D.
Subseries:
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Chron File 1/91 [2]
Date Closed:
6/8/2000
OA/ID Number:
05480-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1999-0735-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(I) of the PRAJ
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA)
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 22, 1991
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
THE DOMESTIC POLICY COUNCIL
SUBJECT:
An Action Plan for Economic Empowerment of People
BACKGROUND:
The Domestic Policy Council (DPC) met on November 28, 1990,
to consider a series of ideas designed to give people access to
jobs and the power to make choices that will better their own
lives and the lives of their families and communities. An
information memorandum outlining the DPC's empowerment ideas was
forwarded to you on December 27, 1990. This memorandum now
presents for your confirmation only those options consistent with
initiatives to be proposed in the FY92 Budget and reflected in
the FY92 Budget settlements previously presented to you by OMB.
These options outline the beginning of an entrepreneurial,
market-oriented war against poverty. We can expand opportunities
by changing expectations and attitudes about the future. People
with accèss to property, jobs, and quality education have a stake
in their community, more pride, and greater incentive for
productive social behavior. More important, poor people with new
and abundant economic opportunity have hope for the future -- the
single greatest weapon against poverty and despair. There is
nothing new about free enterprise principles. What is new is a
bold determination to offer solutions, to break down barriers to
opportunity, and to question status quo thinking.
WHAT WE ARE DOING NOW:
1. Evaluations of Existing Demonstration Projects: During the
Reagan Administration, the Low Income Opportunity Board (LIOB)
received requests from 26 States for waivers from current Federal
rules to launch welfare demonstration projects. Of these, 14
State requests were approved and are now under way. There is a
great deal of diversity in the 14 State demonstrations. Alabama,
for example, is testing a major simplification project, in which
the AFDC, Food Stamp, and Low Income Home Energy Assistance
programs are merged into one cash grant with a unified set of
rules. West Virginia is encouraging welfare recipients to start
their own small businesses. Wisconsin requires both teenage
parents receiving AFDC as well as teenagers in families receiving
AFDC benefits to stay in school.
2
2. Recent Administration Accomplishments: The Administration
has already accomplished a great deal in its first two years.
For instance, Congress enacted your child care proposal and HOPE
proposal and expanded Head Start. You have promoted volunteerism
and your advocacy of educational choice has helped to spark a
grassroots movement across the country. The recent budget
agreement also included several initiatives to empower people,
such as the Earned Income Tax Credit expansion ($12 billion over
five years), the Child Health Tax Credit ($5 billion over five
years), and funding for child care vouchers. All are part of the
Administration's effort to protect and enhance individual power.
EMPOWERMENT REGULATORY AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIVITIES THAT CAN BE
IMPLEMENTED UNDER EXISTING AUTHORITY:
The Economic Empowerment Task Force, chaired by Secretary
Kemp, learned that all of the Departments are actively looking
for ways to empower people and make government work better for
people. These activities are primarily administrative or
regulatory in nature. For instance, USDA in concert with other
Cabinet agencies will improve coordination between the Food Stamp
Employment and Training program, the new Job Opportunities and
Basic Skills (JOBS) welfare work program, and possibly Labor's
JTPA program. Education has opened an educational choice center
and clearinghouse. The Department of Housing and Urban
Development has been working with the Chicago Housing Authority
on an "Operation Cleansweep" to rid public housing of gangs and
drug trafficking.
Other issues are being addressed in the FY92 Budget. For
example, funding for the WIC program, which provides supplemental
food for mothers, infants, and children, will be significantly
increased. There will also be a series of voucher and choice
initiatives in Education's budget. An important component of any
empowerment strategy is encouraging parents to make responsible
decisions for their children and to contribute to their
children's development.
OPTIONS REQUIRING PRESIDENTIAL DECISION:
Nine options are presented here for your confirmation.
These include some of the options you have previously seen in the
information memorandum forwarded to you on December 27. Pursuant
to your direction, only those options consistent with initiatives
to be proposed in the FY92 Budget have been maintained here.
We should also note that a vital component of economic
empowerment is the vigorous enforcement of civil rights laws.
Racial, sex, and religious discrimination create insidious
3
barriers to economic opportunity. The Administration will
continue in its commitment to tear down these barriers wherever
they exist. There are other barriers to opportunity that have a
disproportionately adverse impact on minorities and women.
Regulations, like those issued under the Davis-Bacon Act
(discussed below) and local economic licensing laws, can remove
the lowest rungs from the ladder of economic opportunity.
1. Fund HOPE: You signed HOPE (Homeownership and Opportunity
for People Everywhere) legislation in November. HOPE authorized
several important initiatives, such as empowering public housing
residents by encouraging them to own or manage public and
assisted housing, and improving the link between housing and
services for the homeless. HOPE is the most far-reaching housing
legislation since 1974. No funds, however, were appropriated for
important components of HOPE in FY91. According to HUD, funding
HOPE is vital to achieving the Administration's public goal of a
million new low-income homeowners in 1992. OMB has approved
HUD's request to reprogram FY91 funds to fund HOPE immediately.
Pros:
o
HOPE demonstrates the Administration's commitment to housing
for poor families and children, the homeless, and first-
time home buyers.
HOPE is a model empowerment initiative. Funding it now will
demonstrate the Administration's conviction to empower
people and will give impetus to this approach to social
problems.
HOPE targets Federally-owned properties currently in FHA or
RTC inventories. Transferring these units to first-time
home buyers will add dollars to the Federal Treasury.
Cons:
Funding a new program at the same time that the
Administration proposes a FY92 budget with cuts in
established programs may not be supported by Congress.
It is likely that, in return for fully funding HOPE,
Congressional Democrats will want to fund their new housing
program, HOME, at a potential cost of $1 billion in FY91.
Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
2.
Promote Educational Choice: During the last two years,
4
educational choice initiatives have been initiated in more and
more jurisdictions across the country. East Harlem, New York;
Cambridge, Massachusetts; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and Minnesota
have implemented choice programs that permit parents to determine
which schools their children should attend.
The Federal government could encourage restructuring through
choice demonstrations and voucher programs. States could be
awarded grants for demonstration projects in return for a mutual
agreement with the Federal government to waive certain
regulations that impede choice. Projects would provide for, but
not be limited to, educational choice among public schools and
include special awards for excellence to high-performing schools.
In the FY92 Budget, the Administration will propose a new $200
million fund available to schools implementing choice programs.
A portion of Education's new funds would also be targeted to low-
income or high-dropout school districts that employ voucher or
certificate programs. Legislation would be required.
Pros:
Emphasis on urban areas targets Federal resources on highest
concentration of low-income families and at-risk children.
Targeting school districts with high dropout rates provides
an opportunity to help the districts most likely to have.
difficulties attaining the National Education Goals.
Provides maximum flexibility for communities and school
districts to select options most appropriate to local
educational problems.
Cons:
Legislation may face opposition on the Hill and in the
public education arena.
Could face a constitutional challenge if potential choice
options include religiously-affiliated schools.
O
Might be difficult to administer the transfer of funds from
local school districts to other providers.
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
3.
Reintroduce "Charlottesville" Flexibility Legislation: A
proposal supported by the Administration for increased
flexibility in exchange for enhanced accountability failed to
pass Congress last year.
5
Pros:
o
Flexibility would permit the resources from HHS, Labor, and
Education programs to be spent at State and local levels
with fewer regulatory constraints and greater effectiveness.
Flexibility legislation would follow through on a commitment
of the Education Summit.
This would enhance services integration efforts by granting
Education, HHS, and Labor coordinated waiver authority
coupled with enhanced accountability.
Cons:
The proposal received opposition from both conservative
Republicans and Democrats. Some Members believed that
flexibility would allow services to be shifted away from
traditionally targeted populations, such as the
disadvantaged, now mandated by law.
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
4.
Provide Job Training to Public Housing and Other Low-Income
Residents: The Administration could actively promote an
aggressive services integration initiative now being developed by
HUD, HHS, and Labor. The goal of this initiative is to bring job
training to public housing residents. Recent research by the
Rockefeller Foundation shows that job training programs that
integrate an array of basic education and specific skill
competencies are most effective in making low-income people self-
sufficient. No new FY92 funds are required for this initiative.
Pros:
Targeting job training to residents of public housing, and
combining training with other empowerment initiatives for
public housing residents, should create a highly productive
synergy.
O
Targeting job training on public housing residents targets
those who need help most because about one-third of all
public housing residents are receiving public assistance.
Cons:
O
Combining services at public housing sites will increase the
attractiveness of remaining in public housing, which could
6
have the unintended consequence of discouraging people from
moving out of public housing.
o
Neither public housing nor job training are entitlements.
Targeting those who are fortunate enough to receive housing
aid could create the appearance of inequitably helping one
group at the expense of others.
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
5. Create Enterprise Zones: Enterprise zones were removed in
the final stages of the budget agreement last year and could be
proposed again this year. The enterprise zone legislative
proposal would include both employment and investment incentives
and could be tied to Federal, State, and local regulatory relief.
With a slower economy, enterprise zones are needed more than
ever. States have been experimenting with enterprise zones for
several years. Former Governor Kean implemented enterprise zones
with great success in New Jersey.
The proposal included in the FY92 Budget is similar to last
year's proposal: 1) a 5 percent refundable tax credit for the
first $10,500 of wages earned by qualified employees in an
enterprise zone; 2) elimination of capital gains taxes for
tangible property used in a business located in an enterprise
zone for at least two years; and 3) permitting individuals to
expense some of the capital invested in enterprise zone
businesses. Treasury estimated last year that phasing in these
initiatives in 50 zones would reduce tax revenues by $1.9 billion
over five years.
Pros:
O
The enterprise zone concept includes more than tax
incentives; it also requires reduction of Federal, State,
and local regulatory barriers and a comprehensive local
strategy to deal with the most distressed parts of rural and
urban areas.
o
Enterprise zones would concentrate incentives solely in the
most distressed communities, thus targeting tax expenditures
where they are most needed.
Cons:
Some think enterprise zones would primarily stimulate the
shifting of assets into the zone from areas surrounding the
zone and not generate sufficient new investment to pay for
the incentives.
7
Targeting powerful pro-growth incentives into just a few
areas might unfairly benefit some people. Across the board
incentives might be seen as more equitable.
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
6.
Improve Access of the Poor to More Jobs by Reforming Davis-
Bacon: Davis-Bacon was enacted in the 1930s to require workers
on Federally-financed projects to be paid the "prevailing wage."
Some who supported the measure also sought to bar blacks from
benefiting from the profusion of public works under the New Deal.
Davis-Bacon may increase costs by as much as 25 percent for small
enterprises and it prevents the least skilled people, many of
whom are black, from participating equally in open bidding for
contracts with the Federal government. At the current threshold,
virtually no project is beyond the reach of Davis-Bacon.
A higher minimum threshold for Federal programs could be
established under which prevailing wages would not apply. Both
the FY91 and the FY92 Budgets call for raising the threshold to
$250,000. Legislation would be required.
Pros:
Raising the threshold would generate significant budgetary
savings.
Raising the threshold would be easier to pass in Congress
than outright repeal, but it would still be difficult.
Cons:
o
Even if the threshold were raised, Davis-Bacon still imposes
a regulatory burden.
O
There would be strong labor opposition. The labor community
views Davis-Bacon as necessary to keep wages high.
Past efforts to enact such reforms have failed and, if
attempted now, might lead to Congressional reversal of
significant reforms just implemented, such as the Department
of Labor's new "helper" rule (which is expected to save up
to $610 million per year).
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
8
7. Target SBA Programs: The Small Business Administration
(SBA) operates several loan and technical assistance programs
which could be better targeted to promote entrepreneurship among
low-income persons.
--
Cottage Capitalism Initiative: The SBA proposes extending a
joint HUD/SBA experiment in Salt Lake City, Utah, to 10 new
sites by reprogramming FY91 funds. In this experiment, SBA
is teaching public housing residents about basic business
concepts and helping them develop business plans. Local
lenders have made small loans with private funds to provide
the start-up capital needed by graduates of the training
program. SBA will also work with the new Rural Development
Administration to develop similar programs in low-income
rural areas.
--
Entrepreneur Training for Disadvantaged Youth: The SBA has
asked for $425,000 in its FY92 budget submission to launch a
new program for entrepreneurial training materials for low-
income youth, designed to inform and motivate young people
about the opportunity of small business.
Pros:
O
Coordinating SBA activities with other programs creates
synergies and helps leverage private sector involvement.
O
Efforts by several private, nonprofit organizations to lend
small amounts of money to low-income entrepreneurs have
shown promising success rates.
Cons:
O
Entrepreneurial training for low-income clients is regarded
by some experts as the least efficient use of business-
development resources. Because low-income clients may lack
requisite academic skills, or may not be able to obtain
child care and other needed assistance, the business failure
rate could be greater than among other client groups.
The increased FY92 spending needed to make these programs
successful will need to be offset by reductions in other
programs. If these funds come from other business-
development programs, we may be replacing more-efficient
services with less-efficient services.
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
9
8.
Revamp the Public Employment Service: The Employment
Service is a State-run, Federally-funded program intended to help
unemployed workers find jobs. It is an important, but not wholly
successful, tool in minimizing the financial hardship and length
of unemployment for workers. Currently, the Employment Service
interprets its mission as finding available jobs and then placing
unemployed workers in those jobs. As a practical matter, the
Service "skims" by placing only the best workers -- so that
employers will continue to work with the Service in the future.
The focus of the Employment Service could be changed. The
Service would focus its resources on job counseling targeted to
low-income people and steering them to available training
opportunities. The Administration could also propose tying
continued Federal funding for each office to placement rates for
both low-income people and the long-term unemployed. This could
be accomplished through regulation; Labor has already invited
public comment on how to restructure the Employment Service.
Pros:
o
Changing the focus of the Employment Service and instilling
performance standards and incentives would increase the
social benefit of a program that is not currently working
well.
Cons:
If the economy has slipped into a recession, this could be
perceived as the wrong time to be changing the Employment
Service -- a time when more people may be in need of the
types of services provided by the Employment Service.
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
9.
Establish Empowerment Opportunity Areas: This option seeks
a fresh start in programs for poor people by granting waivers
from Federal requirements to localities that develop plans for
new approaches to low-income programs. It would have two forms:
one organized around geographic concentrations of low-income
people; the other defined in terms of a target group such as
unmarried first-time mothers. In each, we would encourage use of
waivers from regular program rules and flexibility in the
administration of Federal, State, and local laws and programs.
Each plan must identify performance criteria before being
approved; any project failing to meet the criteria would be
subject to termination. Legislation would be required to
10
authorize broader waiver authority than currently exists.
Empowerment Opportunity Areas would operate on an experimental
basis, probably for a period of three to five years. There would
be no FY92 Budget impact.
Pros:
o
Shows the Federal government believes in the potential for
developing "bottom up" solutions.
o
Allows an opportunity to see if our rhetoric of community
control meshes with reality.
Cons:
o
There is no guarantee of success. This approach might
merely shift the bureaucratic presence from the Federal
level to the community level.
O
Further State and local experimentation may not be perceived
as an adequate response to the problems that low-income
people face.
-- Decision:
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
RECOMMENDATION:
The Domestic Policy Council recommends your approval of each
of the nine options discussed above as an initial package of
Administration empowerment initiatives. Each proposal is
consistent with decisions made for the FY92 Budget.
DECISION (Summary) :
Approve
Disapprove
Modify
Option 1:
Fund HOPE.
Option 2: *
Promote Educational
Choice.
Option 3: *
Repropose Flexibility
Legislation.
11
Option 4:
Job Training in
Public Housing.
Option 5: *
Create Enterprise
Zones.
Option 6: *
Reform Davis-Bacon.
Option 7:
Target SBA Programs.
Option 8:
Revamp the Public
Employment Service.
Option 9: *
Create Empowerment
Opportunity Areas.
* Legislation will be required.
Will
Chairman Pro Tempore
DB CCCS
I Bayden
PB PM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
01/24/91
TO:
THE CHIEF OF STAFF
FROM: PHILLIP D. BRADY
Assistant to the President and
Staff Secretary
The attached has been forwarded
THE WHITE HOUSE
to the President
WASHINGTON
01/24/91
BOYDEN GRAY
M:
PHILLIP D. BRADY
Assistant to the President and
Staff Secretary
The attached has been forwarded
to the President
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
91 JAN 23 PM 2:22
January 23, 1991
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
FRED McCLURE
SUBJECT:
Resolution of Impeachment by Congressman Henry B.
Gonzalez (D-TX)
Attached are highlighted copies of the Gonzalez resolution,
his statement in the January 16, 1991 Congressional Record, a
wire service story on the resolution, and excerpts from a press
conference Congressman Gonzalez held with former Attorney General
Ramsey Clark on January 15.
The introduction of this resolution is not a first for
Chairman Gonzalez. He introduced a resolution to impeach
President Reagan and supported another (following Grenada and
regarding Nicaragua).
This latest effort has no apparent support in the House and
is not taken seriously by his colleagues.
Attachments
RCV BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 1-22-91 ; 1:34PM ;
5122296199-
2024566221:# 2
102nd Congress
H.Res.34
1st Session
Impeaching George Herbert Walker Bush, President of the United States, of high
crimes and misdemeanors.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 16, 1991
Mr. GONZALEZ submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the
Committee on Judiciary.
A RESOLUTION
Impeaching George Herbert Walker Bush, President of the United States, of high
crimes and misdemeanors.
1
Impeaching George Herbert Walker Bush, President of the United States, of
2
high crimes and misdemeanors.
3
Resolved, That George Herbert Walker Bush, President of the United
4
States is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the
5
following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the Senate:
RCV BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 1-22-91 ; 1:35PM ;
5122296199-
2024568221:# 3
1
Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives
2
of the United states of America in the name of itself and of all of
3
the people of the United States of America, against George Herbert Walker
4
Bush, President of the United States of America, in maintenance and
5
support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.
6
ARTICLE I
7
In the conduct of the office of President of the United States,
8
George herbert Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath
9
faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and,
10
to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the constitu-
11
tion of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to
12
take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has violated the equal
13
protection clause of the Constitution. U.S. soldiers in the Middle East
14 are overwhelmingly poor white, black, and Mexican-American, and their
15
military service is based on the coercion of an system that has denied
16 viable economic opportunities to these classes of citizens. Under the
17
Constitution, all classes of citizens are guaranteed equal protection,
18
and calling on the poor and minorities to fight a war for oil to preserve
19
the lifestyles of the wealthy is a denial of the rights of these
20
soldiers. In all of this George Herbert Walker Bush has acted in a
21
manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of
22
constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and
23
justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
24
Wherefore George Herbert Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants
25
impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
RCV BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 1-22-91 ; 1:36PM ;
5122296199-
2024566221:# 4
1
ARTICLE II
2
In the conduct of the office of President of the United States,
3
George Herbert Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath
4
faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States
5
and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the
6
Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his
7
constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully
8
executed, has violated the U.S. Constitution, federal law and the United
9
Nations Charter by bribing, intimidating and threatening others,
10
including the members of the United Nations Security Council, to support
11
belligerent acts against Iraq. In all of this George Herbert Walker Bush
12
has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive
13
of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law
14
and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United
15 States.
16
Wherefore George Herbert Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants
17
impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
18
ARTICLE III
19
In the conduct of the office of President of the United States,
20
George Herbert Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath
21
faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and,
22
to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitu-
23
tion of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to
24
take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has prepared, planned,
25
and conspired to engage in a massive war against Iraq employing methods
RCV BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 1-22-91 ; 1:36PM ;
5122296199-
2024568221:# 5
1
of mass destruction that will result in the killing of tens of thousands
2
of civilians, many of whom will be children. This planning includes the
3
placement and potential use of nuclear weapons, and the use of such
4
indiscriminate weapons and massive killings by serial bombardment, or
5
otherwise, of civilians violates the Hague Conventions of 1907 and 1923,
6
the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Protocol I thereto, the Nuremberg
7
Charter, the Genocide Convention and the United Nations Declaration of
8
Human Rights. In all of this George Herbert Walker Bush has acted in a
9
manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of
10
constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and
11
justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
12
Wherefore George Herbert Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants
13
impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
ARTICLE IV
14
15
In the conduct of the office of President of the United States,
16
George Herbert Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath
17
faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States
18
and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the
19
Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his
20
constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully
21
executed, has committed the United States to acts of war without
22
congressional consent and contrary to the United Nations Charter and
23
international law. From August, 1990, through January, 1991, the
24
President embarked on a course of action that systematically eliminated
25
every option for peaceful resolution of the Persian Gulf crisis. Once
RCV BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 1-22-91 : 1:37PM ;
5122296199-
2024566221;# 6
1
the President approached Congress for a declaration of war, 500,000
2
American soldiers' lives were in jeopardy - rendering any substantive
3
debate by Congress meaningless. The President has not received a
4
declaration of war by Congress, and in contravention of the written word,
5
the spirit, and the intent of the U.S. Constitution has declared that he
6
will go to war regardless of the views of Congress and the American
7
people. In failing to seek a declaration of war, and in declaring his
8
intent to violate the Constitution in disregarding the acts of Congress -
9
including the War Powers Resolution - George Herbert Walker Bush has
10
acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of
11
constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and
12
justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
13
Wherefore George Herbert Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants
14
impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
15
ARTICLE V
16
In the conduct of the office of President of the United states,
17
George Herbert Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath
18
faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States
19
and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the
20
Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his
21
constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully
22
executed, has planned, prepared, and conspired to commit crimes against
23
the peace by leading the United States into aggressive war against Iraq
24
in violation of Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, the Nuremberg
25
Charter, other international instruments and treaties, and the Constitu-
26
tion of the United States. In all of this George Herbert Walker Bush has
RCV BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 1-22-91 ; 1:38PM ;
5122296199-
2024566221:# 7
1
acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of
2
constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and
3
justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
4
Wherefore George Herbert Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants
5
impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
Press Transcripts to Find 1
Limited to transcript 671131
Copyright (C) 1991 by Federal Information Systems Corporation
- Tuesday, January 15, 1991
Press Conference: Ramsey Clark, Fmr US Attorney and Rep. Henry
Gonzalez - Impeachment of President Bush
Transcript ID: 671131
(862 lines)
PRESS CONFERENCE
WITH FORMER US ATTORNEY RAMSEY CLARK
AND REP. HENRY GONZALEZ (D-TX)
MODERATOR: MS. SAHU BARRON,
ORGANIZER FOR NATIONAL COALITION TO STOP
US INTERVENTION IN THE MIDDLE EAST
SUBJECT: CALL FOR IMPEACHMENT OF
PRESIDENT BUSH AND VICE PRESIDENT QUAYLE
TUESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1991
MS. BARRON: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Every day
this week, scores of protesters will be gathering at the White House
to protest the impending war by the United States against the Arab
people. Today, the Howard students, as well as students from the
University of the District of Columbia, will be assembling at
Metropolitan AME Church for a rally, and will then proceed to the
White House for a press conference and a late afternoon vigil.
Tomorrow through Friday there will be similar activities at the
White House. All these actions will culminate in the first national
march to stop the US war in the Persian Gulf, Saturday January 19th,
beginning at 11:00 a.m. at Lafayette Park, across the street from
the White House.
These actions will be a response, especially to the fact that
today the people of this country, the people of the world stand on
the very precipice of a US war in the Persian Gulf, which will
inevitably lead to the deaths of tens of thousands of Arab peoples,
and Americans -- lives we are convinced will be sacrificed only for
the greater profit of the big oil companies.
We stand firm in our conviction that the full responsibility
for this war rests on the shoulders of President George Bush, and
unfortunately
on a Congress which has endorsed blatant, naked US aggression
against the Arab people. In Newsweek of January 14th, it was
reported that at least a hundred more nuclear armed Pershing
missiles have been shipped to the Persian Gulf and that General
Schwarzkopf has asked permission to explode one of these bombs
over Iraq. Clearly, this administration deserves to be indicted
and George Bush deserves to be impeached for the blatant
illegalities and abridgement of domestic as well as
international law for these unprecedented actions.
The congressional vote this week has made it absolutely
clear that only the people organized and active and vigilant can
and will stop this war. Already we have seen that across this
country and around the world, hundreds of thousands have taken
to the streets to demand, Stop the US war in the Middle East,
because clearly so many people understand that it is the United
States that is the chief perpetrator and would be the chief
benefactor in such a war.
On Saturday, we expect a massive turnout of protestors from
over 90 cities and 25 states to converge here in Washington on
the White House and to come together in San Francisco, in
Houston, in Honolulu, in Sydney, Australia, and elsewhere.
Unanimously the world over the demand will be on January 19th,
bring all the troops home now unconditionally.
This is the only solution to the crisis. This is the only,
way to end the war.
Working people, youth and students, the poor, peoples of color,
women, they all know that the real fight must be against poverty,
joblessness, hunger, racism, sexism, anti-gay and lesbian bigotry
here at home; that they will benefit if that $100 million a day that
is being spent in this military war buildup is brought back and
placed at the disposal of the communities. They know that they will
not benefit, not in terms of the quality of their lives or in their
living, for those who are there in Saudi Arabia, in a war for the
big oil companies in the Persian Gulf.
We will now hear from Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney General.
(Applause.)
MR. CLARK: Good morning. We meet in Washington, D.C., on the
morning of January the 15th, 1991, in what may seem to be a quiet
moment, but it's the quiet that is the eye of the storm. The wild
turbulence surrounding this place, this whole nation and nations
across the world, ought to be pretty evident to everyone by now.
The candlelight ceremonies of hundreds of thousands of religious
across this country and across the planet, the constant
demonstrations at the UN and the White House, staggering crowds in
West Europe, where we're told our allies support us, 100,000 people
in Rome protesting the peril of war, over 200,000 in the cities of
Germany, 40,000 in London at Trafalgar Square and Hyde Park, 40,000
in Paris, 40,000 in Ankara.
The people of the planet do not want this war, and the people of the
United States overwhelmingly do not want this war, and they have
been given no reason for it.
But we're not here to discuss all of that; we're here for a
more somber purpose. Those who believe in Constitutional government
have to address the question of whether President Bush and Vice
President Quayle and Secretary Baker and others have committed and
are threatening to commit additional high crimes and misdemeanors
that call for their impeachment.
This is not a subject you take too lightly. Over the years,
even my many years, I've been called on only a few times to be
involved in it. I was a lead counsel for Justice William O.
Douglas in what was an assault on the independence of our judiciary
in the early '70s. I was involved in perhaps maybe one of the
powerfully prevail. But here, we've been able to bottle up opinion
so that only one view dominates.
And we've seen now, finally, among the many lessons from
Vietnam, that there will be so severe a censorship that Ernie Pyle
and heros from other times must be turning over in their graves as
we go toward war, if we do, in the Persian Gulf.
We see the use of experimental medical injection
without the informed consent, without the knowledge at all of
military personnel -- a violation of not just human rights, but of
the Nuremberg Charter itself or the Nuremberg code anyway. We see
that as history has told us, war will justify any crime, but we
believe we have a Constitution, and we believe that the Constitution
makes it a high crime for any of our officials to engage in such
conduct, to authorize, permit or condone it. And they must be
impeached if they plan, prepare and act to do it.
It's not as if this hadn't happened before during the Bush
administration. The invasion of Panama was absolutely as lawless as
the invasion of Kuwait. The president had no authority.
We've never been told what it was all about. Sometimes it's a
drug bust. A drug bust with stealth bombers? Is it really
conceivable that you could have spared the civilian population?
Have we seen El Chorrillo, where 30,000 people were left homeless
from artillery and helicopter gunfire? And hundreds killed? Even
by the Pentagon's statistics -- which are false -- there were three
Panamanian civilians killed for every Panamanian military person
killed, and that is a crime.
It wasn't necessary. We were bombing and strafing from Colon
to Panama City, San Miguelito, every military and police
installation -- why? By what right? And without the authority of
the Congress? And we killed hundreds and hundreds of Panamanians.
And the President of the United States ordered it, and that too is a
high crime and misdemeanor.
I'm a private citizen, and like nearly everyone in this country
have the power of my voice, the power of my persuasion. I can
propose. I've spoken before of a friend of many years, an American
of enormous courage because as a long-time member of the United
States House of Representatives, as a chairman, as a person who has
always put constitutional principle and human rights first, he has
the power to dispose.
We'll now hear from Congressman Henry Gonzalez of Texas.
(Weak applause.)
REP. GONZALEZ: Thank you very much, Mr. General. It's a
privilege to share this table with you. Ramsey Clark is a name that
I have long admired and cherished. His father, Justice Clark, was
a great friend and also a great justice, a great Texan. And so it's
an honor to be here.
I said on December the 31st in my hometown of San Antonio,
where I had a local press conference, that in answer to a question:
"Would I introduce a resolution of impeachment?" -- my answer was
that it would depend on some study, as I always have, when I've
entered into that kind of activity, and also the future actions of
the President.
I have introduced a total of three impeachment resolutions
during my service in the House of Representatives. Each one of
them was after months of preparation. It wasn't something just
concocted and put together, willy-nilly.
In the case of President Reagan, the first resolution I joined
my colleague, Ted Wise, and ultimately, five others who first signed
and then one withdrew after the pressure hit. In the case of
Reagan's invasion of Grenada, Mr. Wise did an excellent job of
preparing the specificities of that resolution. And I joined him.
I then on March the 5th, 1987, introduced an impeachment
resolution, again directed to President Reagan, because of the
preparations then
being made for a planned invasion of Nicaragua, and I felt that
his actions up to then were in systematic defiance of the
Constitution.
The only thing now is just a question of evaluating. I
think our own Ramsey Clark in his expertise has prepared a very
good outline. I intend to take it, evaluate it, and based on
some preparation already underway by a member of my staff, it
will be my intention to introduce a resolution of impeachment.
Dem.
The only thing is that I'm very much tempted to extend it
to include some of the congressional leaders, because frankly,
leadership
they have been in rather craven abdication of the solemn and the
all-inclusive constitutional responsibility to stand up for the
independence, co-equality and separation of this most important
branch of our government.
Yes, it is true, we have a Constitution, but not in force.
It is being honored more in the breach than in its terms. Do we
have a president? No. Not as intended in Article 2 by the men
who wrote the Constitution and debated that very much and this
specific issue at great length.
What do we have? I sincerely believe we have modern day
Caesars, not presidents, or maybe monarchs,
except monarch implies something else. But Caesars would be the
best comparison, modern day 20th century Caesars.
We don't read history much in our country but Caesars aren't --
in history and in reading the details of the evolution of the Roman
Republic and the development of Caesarism, the Caesars were not
dictators a la Hitler. They were men that wanted to be loved by the
people, like our presidents. They had the equivalent of what we
call polls today. And -- but they exercised and they argued for and
justified the amassing of tremendous power by necessity.
I don't know who it was, I think it was Pitt in England who
said that necessity was the argument of tyrants and the creed of
slaves. Corrupted free men and women are the worst of slaves. We
have departed from the Constitution. We do not have a president as
viewed and called for in the Constitution. We have now two
administrations, the Reagan-Bush and now the Bush administration
that have warred against the poor. And now, to add insult to
injury, it's the poor who will be fighting this war in the sands of
Arabia.
[An] Overwhelming proportion of our armed services personnel
come from the poor sections of our society. So it's ironic that
they'll have to fight it, and at the same time even diminish the
meagerly few programs that still exist, housing,
education and the like, that some of our congresses had intended in
order to redress the economic imbalance and injustice in our
society. It's ironic that with very little discussion -- what
passed or was called debate last week would hardly fit that
description -- the issue was never addressed. The issue boiled down
as once before in 1982 when we had the Bolden amendment and
subsequent to that. The issue was are you loyal to the President or
are you going to be disloyal to the President, not is the Congress
going to exercise and honor its own laws, like the War Powers
Limitation Act?
This situation is worse because we have allowed the imbalance
to set in in what from time immemorial in the beginning of our
nation we desperately were seeking to have, a countervailing of
powers, where you would have the co-equality, the independence and
the separation of the three basic organs of government. We don't
have, and we haven't had for some time.
When the President gets up and tells the American people that
he's the commander-in-chief of the people, then we know we're in
trouble. He's the commander-in-chief of the armed forces but not of
the United States. And beginning with that, the fact remains that
even though there are those that, as in the previous cases, would
say, well, these are acts of futility, if anything, don't you think
that it would be receiving ridicule, well, the truth stands the
test of time.
And regardless of the mood and the controlling factors at this
moment and so-called public opinion that the President bases his
assumption of these powers -- illegally, unconstitutionally --
notwithstanding that, time will tell whether, in effect, this is to
be ridiculed and was a futile effort or not.
It certainly in 1957 in the State Senate of Texas was
considered futile, ridiculous to stand up and argue against a
(massive hit ?) of resistance that had passed every one of the ten
other Confederate states, in some cases in 15 minutes, and yet by
taking hold and making use of the available traditions of the Texas
Senate of unlimited debate, it was only in the Texas Senate that
there was resistance, and of the 14 total bills, only 12 -- only two
were enacted, and subsequent to that, those two were declared
unconstitutional, even by Texas tribunals, not even US tribunals.
So I can tell you from experience that the people -- and it was
considered suicidal politically -- the people are there. Our
leaders aren't, and haven't been. The people don't want war. Mr.
Clark is absolutely correct. I can assure you of that. Since
August, I have been imploring the congressional leadership, "Call
back the Congress in August, not in November, not in December; in
August." When we came back after the Labor Day, I introduced a
resolution, and the resolution invoked the war powers resolution. I
would have been satisfied with a hearing.
Now, the fact that the Congress does not respect its own laws
is a reason why the courts are not going to go against their own
precedents. And this is a reason I did not join Mr. Dellums in his
lawsuit. And I told Mr. Dellums why I wasn't.
I said, this is going to be considered a political difference
between the two organs of government, the executive and the
legislative. The court will not immerse itself in that kind of a
political difference. The court will point out that the
non-delegable power to declare war resides inherently in the
Congress.
But, the court will also tell you that rather than going to it,
to let the court do what the Congress ought to be doing, the
Congress has not exhausted its resources, to wit, its own laws, and
in turn, by definition, the 1973-74 War Powers Limitation Act.
So, I introduced that resolution. That resolution would have
mandated the President to get all those men out by October the 15th.
And that's the only thing that should be done. That was the only
thing that should have been debated in the Congress -- not the
folderol of saying, "Well, are you going to be supporting the
President against this nasty villain? Why, certainly you're not
going to abandon our President." That's not at all the issue.
The issue is, and I think Mr. Clark has very well outlined it
-- no use my repeating it -- whether or not we in our day and time,
and ironically, right about the turn of the 200th anniversary of
this form of government, this Constitution -- whether we in our day
will uphold and reaffirm that basic -- that basic, fundamental law
of the land. That has been the issue for some time here.
During the Vietnam era, we all agonized -- I think I
particularly because the President was a friend,
a neighbor, 50 miles away from my birthplace -- magnificent man,
when it came to the domestic needs that some of us had long hungered
and fought for. But when it came to the war in Southeast Asia, the
impressing and conscripting of unwilling Americans, I knew that was
a violation of the terms of the very first draft act, and I spoke
out on the House floor. Sure that was futile. And sure, now and
then the President would send one of his aids to tell me that his
feelings were hurt. What did I mean, was I going to then join the
demonstrators and double my fists, and I said no, I don't believe in
that. But I do know and I said this long before I thought I'd be in
the Congress, and beginning with the Korean conflict, that a
president -- if a president has a right to conscript an American and
send him outside of continental United States in an undeclared war,
we did not have a Constitution, we did not have a president, we had
gone back to that which the founding fathers who wrote the
Constitution feared the most, and that was king made wars. And
that's where we are now.
And we even have the despicable scene of a president of the
United States lowering himself in a personal, personal, name calling
with the very man that he considers inferior in every respect -- put
himself on the same level, shamed, I think, the office of the
presidency. And I certainly do intend to prepare a resolution of
impeachment. And with the help here of this big man and great man
and counsel, and the staff, we should be able to come up with
something pretty soon. Thank you very much
obviously we think we can do, then what kind of a balance
remains in the Middle East? Are we going to occupy, reinstall
the emirates in Kuwait?
Hey, you know, look at Panama. We're still occupying
Panama. Our military are governing Panama. We dare not move
those better than 10,000 troops, because there won't be one
American life safe in Panama. Even in the smallest country, El
Salvador, after $6 billion and 10 years, we're no closer to
anything called -- any satisfactory solution than we were in
1980, 1981, when Haig drew the line, so-called. So I think the
General here is absolutely correct. There has been no thought
given as to what will Bush call victory? What will be victory?
that Q the President wants this war. He must want something other
So what you're saying, you and Mr. Clark are saying
than dead Americans. What is it that you believe he wants?
REP. GONZALEZ: Well, I can't answer that. The President
should and he hasn't. What I'm saying is he hasn't answered
that very, very pertinent question. Is it -- is it what he said
at first, to protect the oil lines and supplies to the United
States that are vital? If that's the case, let me tell you what
the Saudi kings have done already. They have mined every inch
of that pipeline, because they have said, if they go under and
they're not too sure they wouldn't, they're taking the pipeline
with them. So where is victory there? Is it to protect Saudi
Arabia. Is it to roll back -- that's what I'm asking you. We
can't answer that question. All we can say is, obviously the
President has gone
lusting after that false god of war.
isn't Q it a fact that -- it suggests an impeachment resolution
(Name inaudible.) In this memorandum that we've got,
against President Bush, the Vice President and Secretary of State
Baker and other -- (inaudible.) Would your own resolution include
all those people?
REP. GONZALEZ: I would think SO.
Q
All right.
REP. GONZALES: And there is not, as I sense, a sense of I
think the congressional leaders have been derelict in upholding the
prerogatives and immunities and the powers of the Congress under the
Constitution.
Q
Who are the other officials, Mr. Clark?
MS. BARRON: Excuse me, excuse me.
Q
Mr. Clark, who are the other officials?
MS. BARRON: This is the way we'll proceed. One question at a
time, and please let us recognize and ask permission to a follow-up
question please. All right? All right.
Q
And who are the other officials, Mr. Clark.
MR. CLARK: Well, unlike Gerald Ford when he introduced his
Remarks by GONZALEZ (D-TX) on H.Res. 34
RESOLUTION OF IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH
[CR page H-520, 132 lines]
Attributed to GONZALEZ (D-TX)
RESOLUTION OF IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH
[
Intervening text
]
Mr. GONZALEZ. Madam Speaker, it is with great sadness, and
yet with equally great, if not greater, conviction, that I
introduce today a resolution of impeachment of President Bush. It
is known as House Resolution 34, and I will provide this
resolution as introduced to be appended at the end of my remarks
today.
At a time when our Nation is deeply divided over the question
of war, we find ourselves on the brink of a world war of such
magnitude that our minds cannot fully comprehend the destruction
that is about to be leveled. The position we are in is a direct
result of the actions of one man and the reactions of another.
The Iraqi people are as opposed to war as are the American
people. The difference is that the Iraqi people have no choice
but to support their country's leader, but the American people
not only have the right to oppose and speak out in disagreement
with the President, but they have the responsibility to do so if
our democracy is to be preserved. Today I exercise this
constitutional right and responsibility to speak out in
opposition to war in the Middle East and in support of removal of
our Nation's Chief Executive.
When I took the oath of office earlier this month, as I had
numerous times before, I swore to uphold the Constitution. The
President's oath was the same, to uphold the Constitution of the
United States. We did not pledge an oath of allegiance to the
President but to the Constitution, which is the highest law of
the land. The Constitution provides for removal of the President
when he has committed high crimes and misdemeanors, including
violations of the principles of the Constitution. President Bush
has violated these principles.
My resolution has five articles of impeachment. First, the
President has violated the equal protection clause of the
Constitution. Our soldiers in the Middle East are overwhelmingly
poor white, black, and Mexican-American or Hispanic-American.
They may be volunteers technically, but their voluntarism is
based on the coercion of a system that has denied viable
opportunities to these classes of our citizens. Under the
Constitution, all classes of citizens are guaranteed equal
-2-
protection, and calling on the poor and the minorities to fight a
war for oil to preserve the lifestyles of the wealthy is a denial
of the rights of these soldiers.
Let me add that since 1981 we have suffered the Reagan-Bush
and now the Bush war against the poor, and to add insult to
injury, we now are asking the poor to fight while here, as a
result of this fight, even the meager programs that the Congress
had seen fit to preserve as a national policy will suffer because
the money for those programs will be diverted to the cause of
this unnecessary war.
Article II of this resolution states that the President has
violated the Constitution, Federal law, and the U.N. Charter by
bribing, intimidating, and threatening others, including the
members of the U.N. Security Council, to support belligerent acts
against Iraq. It is clear that the President paid off members of
the U.N. Security Council in return for their votes in support
of war against Iraq or to abstain from voting contrariwise. The
debt of Egypt was, for example, forgiven--$7 billion, without
congressional approval. That, I think, casts doubtful validity on
that Presidential action. The reason for the cancellation of that
debt is so that we can then provide an equally enormous amount of
armament for Egypt which it cannot obtain because of the debt
outstanding. A $140 million loan to China was agreed to. The
Soviet Union was promised over $7 billion in aid. This is a sum
totally unreported in our country but very well discussed in
foreign country presses such as Germany and others. Colombia was
promised assistance to its armed forces. Zaire was promised
military assistance and partial forgiveness of its debt. Saudi
Arabia was promised $12 billion in arms, and more than that.
Actually in October, the President let them have $2.2 billion,
and there was a commitment for $21 billion more, but because of
the outcry in Congress and the Israeli opposition, that is being
postponed. But there is still a commitment for $22 billion. I am
sure this month will see the initial efforts to bring about
compliance with that commitment.
Yemen was threatened with the termination of support, and the
United States finally paid off $187 million of its debt to the
United Nations after the vote President Bush sought was made.
This is all so ironic. When our President ran for the U.S.
Senate in the 1960's, he told the people of Texas that if he
would be elected to the Senate, he would lead the fight to remove
the United States from the United Nations if what he called Red
China at that time was admitted. Fate and power almighty have a
very, very mysterious way of working together. Who was to believe
-3-
during that year in that race in Texas that years later this same
man, now the President, would be the man the President would
appoint to represent us in the United Nations and welcome Red
China as a member of the United Nations.
The vote was bought, and it will be paid for with the lives
of our poor elements who are going to shoulder the fight.
Article III states that the President has conspired to engage
in a massive war against Iraq, employing methods of mass
destruction that will result in the killing of tens of thousands
of civilians, many of whom will be children. No civilian lives
have yet been lost that we know of, but when we start using the
weapons of massive destruction that are in place for this war,
there is no doubt that thousands of innocent civilians will lose
their lives. As killings occur, the principles laid down in the
Nuremberg trials will be applicable. Their deaths will not only
be a moral outrage, they will constitute violations of
international law.
Article IV states that the President has committed the United
States to acts of war without congressional consent and contrary
to the U.N. Charter and international law. From August 1990
through January 1991 the President embarked on a course of action
that systematically eliminated every option for peaceful
resolution of the Persian Gulf crisis. Once the President
approached Congress for a declaration of war, 500,000 American
soldiers lives were in jeopardy, rendering any substantive debate
by Congress meaningless.
It is also ironic that what we have ended up with now is
that the President has exchanged about 200 to 250 so-called
hostages, Americans, all of them employees of oil companies in
Kuwait or Iraq, and in exchange we now have close to 500,000
American soldiers as hostages. Hostages to the whims, the
caprices, and the decisions and judgments made by other leaders,
over which this President and our country has no control, all
the way from Shamir of Israel to the immigrants in the Saudi
sands.
Article 5 states that the President has conspired to commit
crimes against the peace by leading the United States into
aggressive war against Iraq, in violation of article 24 of the
U.N. Charter, the Nuremberg Charter, other international
instruments and treaties, and the Constitution of the United
States.
Again, there is a violation of law by a President, who,
believing and acting as if he is king, decides for the country,
unilaterally, that war is the answer.
-4-
Madam Speaker, it is a sad day for our country, and it will
be an even sadder day once the fighting starts. President Bush
must be stopped. A divided Congress reflecting the divided
country is no way to conduct a war.
The preservation of lives is at stake, and the preservation
of our country, indeed, our democracy, is at stake as well.
I urge my colleagues to support this resolution. All I ask is
a hearing, as I have before, before the proper committee of
proper jurisdiction, and that is it. I will argue the case there.
The rest is up to the Members' judgment.
Madam Speaker, I urge interest and support of this
resolution, and to stand up to the President on behalf of the
soldiers who will die, the civilians who will be massacred, and
the Constitution that will be destroyed if this country goes to
war in the Middle East.
-
Wednesday, January 16, 1991, filed at 4:10pm
Copyright (c) 1990 LEGI-SLATE, Inc.
Article ID: 1608
(35 lines)
Rep. Gonzalez Calls for Bush Impeachment
WASHINGTON, Jan. 16 -- Rep. Henry B. Gonzalez, D-Texas, Wednesday
introduced an impeachment measure against President Bush in a
desperate attempt to stop a U.S. war with Iraq.
"It is a sad day for the country," Gonzalez said. "President Bush
has to be stopped.'
Gonzalez accused Bush of "high crimes and misdemeanors" relating
to his conduct during Operation Desert Shield. Bush, he charged,
was guilty of violating the equal protection clause of the U.S.
Constitution by using armed forces which were predominately poor
and minorities to defend the wealth of the moneyed class.
In addition, Gonzalez said Bush had violated the Constitution and
federal law by bribing, threatening and intimidating United
Nations members to win approval of the resolution authorizing
force to evict Iraq from Kuwait. The U.S. government has forgiven
loans to Egypt and China, the Soviet Union and Zaire, he charged.
Saudi Arabia has been given $12 billion in arms, Gonzalez said.
A war against Iraq, the Texan said, would result in tens of
thousands of civilians being killed, which would be a "moral
outrage" in violation of international law.
Gonzalez argued that the congressional authorization to use force
approved on Saturday did not constitute congressional consent
because Bush engaged in "a course of action which systematically
eliminated every option" for peaceful resolution of the crisis.
Previously Gonzalez introduced an impeachment measure against
President Reagan and supported another.
DB CC: Fitzuate 6
P/B they Depth
TO:
THE CHIEF OF STAFF
FROM: PHILLIP D. BRADY
Assistant to the President and
Staff Secretary
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
The attached has been forwarded
01/24/91
to the President
TO:
MARLIN FITZWATER
FROM:
PHILLIP D. BRADY
Assistant to the President and
Staff Secretary
The attached has been forwarded
to the President
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date: January 23, 1991
91 JAN 23 AMTI: 39
THE PRESIDENT
FOR:
FROM: ED ROGERS
Action
Your Comment
Let's Talk
XXX FYI
BUSH
IN
AT
MIDPOINT
THE PUBLIC
A POPULAR
PRESIDENT
MISUNDERSTOOD
EYE
FOR MORE THAN THREE YEARS NOW,
in second place. Nonetheless, analysts
tion against Democratic nominee
as he campaigned for the presidency and
kept prophesying that Bush could soon
Michael Dukakis. While trial heats taken
has served in that office, George Bush
go under. During the first half of 1987,
in July, just before and after the Demo-
has repeatedly been seen as vulnerable
it was the tarnishing of the Reagan
cratic convention, did show Dukakis
electorally. But in fact. his public stand-
administration in the Iran-Contra affair
ahead. it should have been evident that
ing throughout this span has been gener-
that would doom his candidacy. Then
the lead was exceedingly soft and prob-
ally secure and often very strong indeed.
the "wimp factor" came into vogue: that
ably not a lead at all. This was borne
Other presidents may have been more
Bush lacked the forceful. independent
out in August: when it was his turn to
misunderstood in the areas of policy or
personality that voters look for in presi-
get a boost from his party's convention,
their approach to managing the office,
dential candidates. When he finished
Bush overtook Dukakis in the polls.
but probably no modern president has
20.000 votes behind Dole in Iowa's
Elected by an 8-percentage-point
been so misjudged as to popular backing.
caucuses and behind Pat Robertson as
margin. Bush soon began getting good
well. many commentators were sure he
marks from the public for his handling
Little Support, Soft Support?
was through. According to a favored
of the presidency. In early March. for
metaphor. Bush was a "political hemo-
example, Gallup found 63 percent ap-
In hundreds of surveys taken from late
philiac"-once wounded in electoral
proving his handling of the job. only 13
1986 through early 1988. the race for the
combat, he would bleed to death politi-
percent disapproving. From June 1989
Republican presidential nomination was
cally. It was thought at the time that
until last October. his approval ratings
shown to be basically a two-person
Iowa had inflicted that wound. Of
remained continuously above the 60-
contest: Bush was the evident frontrun-
course. only one month after Iowa, Bush
percent level-sometimes rising far
ner, Senator Robert Dole well behind
looked remarkably healthy, having de-
above it. as they did following the U.S.
feated Dole by a combined margin of
intervention in Panama and again after
Everett Carll Ladd is director of the
56-24 percent in the southern primaries.
the president's vigorous response to
Roper Center for Public Opinion Re-
with Robertson further back at 14 per-
Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. Despite such
search at the University of Connecticut
cent and Jack Kemp at just 5 percent.
robust poll readings, however, the judg-
and a senior editor of The American
Then in the summer of 1988. the
ment in the press and throughout the
Enterprise. He is also coeditor of this
nomination contests settled. the story
Washington political community was
magazine's Public Opinion Report.
shifted to Bush's supposedly weak posi-
often that Bush's support was shallow-
BY EVERETT CARLL LADD
ILLUSTRATION BY TIM GABOR
JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1991 55
"a mile wide and an inch deep." Analysts
RONALD REAGAN IS RIGHTLY
won the public's confidence. and then
kept expecting it to blow away.
retained it throughout two full terms,
October 1990 was obviously the
SEEN AS A POPULAR PRESIDENT,
Bush faced a daunting task in establish-
president's toughest month of his first
ing his own political identity. He came
two years in office. Our economy had
BUT BUSH'S APPROVAL
to office after his party had held the
slowed and prices had soared at the gas
White House for eight years. a tenure
pumps: news coverage became a "reces-
LEVEL EXCEEDED REAGAN'S
that is bound to spur some restiveness
sion watch." With the United States in
-the feeling that "it's time for a
the midst of a tax revolt. Bush went on
AT ALMOST EVERY POINT
change." Though he won their support
television October 2 and completed his
in 1988, Bush never entirely dispelled
FROM THEIR RESPECTIVE
reversal on "no new taxes" by insisting
the suspicion of many conservative activ-
that tax hikes were needed as part of a
ists. Reagan's core supporters. that his
INAUGURATIONS THROUGH
budget deal. The administration's focus
heart wasn't really with them. The strains
shifted from whether taxes really had to
THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS.
in the Republican coalition increased—
be raised to who should pay for the
as they would almost inevitably in any
hike-and the president came out seem-
big. diverse party after it had held power
ing to be more upset at raising levies on
for an extended span.
the rich than anything else.
Having been mauled politically
Against this backdrop: the prevail-
throughout Reagan's first six years, the
ing interpretation-which all along had
Democrats had become more confident
minimized Bush's electoral strength or
and aggressive in the last two-after
emphasized his weaknesses-quickly be-
Iran-Contra and after regaining a Senate
came one that saw his presidency in "free
majority. This renewed assertiveness was
fall." The Washington Post's Paul Taylor
bound to continue under Reagan's
wrote on October 26. "Bush's polls are
successor. Bush had to operate from day
in a tailspin." Analyst William Schneider
one of his presidency with the Democrats
argued in the Baltimore Sun the same
in charge of both houses of Congress.
day that the president's plunge "could
In addition. Bush faced in 1990 a slowing
be politically fatal" and compared his
economy and a rising budget deficit.
image to Jimmy Carter's-the highest
TABLE 1
form of political disparagement. Pundit
BUSH AND REAGAN:THEIR FIRST TWO YEARS
A Popular President
IN OFFICE
Kevin Phillips opined in the Los Angeles
(Percent Approve)
Times October 28 that "some congres-
Bush took office with a number of
Bush
Reagan
sional Republicans are already describ-
distinct assets bequeathed him as well.
2/89
61%
ing Bush as 'dead meat' in 1992" and
of course. including his party's having
3/89'
61
that "Washington's vultures are begin-
4/89
61
4/81
67%
been established in the public's thinking
ning to think about what could be
5/89
61
as best in managing the economy. and
another political death watch." Such
6/892
61
6/81
59
the optimism generated by communism's
7/89
67
7/81
59
coverage came in a steady drumbeat on
9/89
collapse in the Soviet Union and Eastern
television and in the print media
(early)
70
Europe. But surely nothing in the overall
throughout the last three weeks of the
(late)
69
9/81
53
mix of conditions ordained the high
11/89
63
month. Actually, as we will see. Bush's
1/90
76
1/82
49
levels of public approval that Bush and
standing. while diminished somewhat.
3/90
72
3/82
43
his administration have experienced over
was holding up remarkably well.
5/90
69
5/82
43
their first two years.
6/90
69
Ronald Reagan is rightly seen as a
8/90
Not the Strongest Hand
(7-8')
66
popular president. but Bush's approval
(9-102)
72
level exceeded Reagan's at almost every
The story journalists might have written,
(8-16)
76
9/82
42
point from their respective inaugurations
10/90
but did not. is that Bush sustained
(early)
60
through the midterm elections. Table 1
generally high approval despite having
(late)
52
10/824
48
shows this, using CBS/New York Times
a number of factors working against
11/903
59
11/82
48
polls. Surveys by other organizations
him. This is in fact what has happened.
show the same thing. Whatever judg-
Coming after Ronald Reagan. a leader
Notes: '-CBS only; =NYTonly: 3-Exit poll; -Registered votes.,
ment one makes about the caliber of his
Source: Survey by CBS News/New York Times, latest that of
who shifted the course of public policy.
November 6, 1990.
leadership compared to Reagan's or any
56 T-E AMERICAN ENTERPRISE
predecessor's, the fact is that George
Other poll data confirm this picture
Bush has-thus far maintained high
of underlying strength rather than ex-
measure public confidence.
treme electoral vulnerability. The track-
ing poll of KRC Communications
The October "Plunge"
Research. for example. showed the
proportion viewing Bush favorably
Commentary on Bush's standing in
"plunging" from a high of 82 percent
October. and November 1990 centered
September 23-25 to 65 percent October
on his steep decline in public approba-
28-30. Those viewing him unfavorably
tion-from job-approval ratings in the
"soared" from 13 to 26 percent.
TABLE 2
70-80-percent range in August and Sep-
The NBC News/Wall Street Journal
REAGAN APPROVAL NOVEMBER 1986, AND
tember to between the high 40s and high
BUSH APPROVAL NOVEMBER 1990
survey of October 19-21 found Bush
50s. Averaged out for all the polls. the
Question: Do you approve or disapprove of the way
preferred in a trial heat with Mario
drop from the post-Iraq high was about
(Ronald Reagan/George Bush) is handling his job as
Cuomo by 52-35 percent. Similarly. the
20 percentage points.
president?
ABC News November 6 voter poll saw
Given the long-prevailing tendency
Reagan
Bush
Bush preferred over all mentioned
to stress Bush's electoral weakness. it is
1986 Exit Poll
1990 Exit Poll
Democratic rivals: 53-33 percent over
(CBS/NYT)
(VRS)
not surprising that the other half of the
Lloyd Bentsen: 53-34 over Bill Bradley:
story told by the October-November
Approve
Disapprove
Approve
Disapprove
51-35 over Richard Gephardt: and 63-26
polls was largely ignored: that the presi-
National
60%
35%
59%
36%
over Jesse Jackson. This doesn't mean
dent's standing. while diminished, re-
AL
63
30
57
38
that Bush would beat all comers: it does
AZ
-
1
59
37
mained quite high. For example. the ABC
indicate that the president's effective
AR
-
-
52
44
News "voter poll"-taken by telephone
CA
58
36
54
42
standing had declined only moderately.
on November 6 of persons who said they
CO
56
39
61
35
Describing his popularity as in "free fall"
had voted or were going to vote-found
CT
63
33
58
38
is nothing short of absurd. Proof that
DE
-
-
54
41
57 percent approving Bush's handling
FL
67
28
57
41
Bush's October drop in popular standing
of his job as president. 40 percent
GA
59
32
54
41
was modest rather than presidency-
disapproving. The exit poll taken by
HI
-
-
55
41
threatening came quickly in November
ID
60
34
55
39
VRS. the four-network consortium. of
and early December. As the president
IL
61
34
52
45
persons who had just cast ballots got
IN
-
-
59
38
got beyond his October trouble. his
similar results: 59 percent approving. 36
IA
46
48
56
40
standing rebounded. Thus Gallup. which
percent disapproving. The Gallup poll
KS
1
-
57
39
had found just 48 percent approving.
KY
-
-
49
46
of November 15-16 recorded 58 percent
ME
57
39
Bush's handling of the presidency Octo-
-
-
endorsing Bush's job performance. just
MD
-
-
54
43
her 25-26. recorded his approval at 58
33 percent disapproving. Surely it is at
MA
-
-
63
34
percent November 15-16 and at 63
MI
-
-
58
39
least arguable that such figures. achieved
percent December 6 and 7. There were
MN
-
-
63
35
after a month of a severe battering from
MT
-
-
45
51
plenty of stories on the "20-point
the left and right alike, from members
NE
-
-
65
32
plunge" in October. but where were the
of his own party as well as from the
NV
64
31
56
41
stories on the "15-point surge" in
NH
67
30
62
34
Democrats, indicate that the president's
Z
-
-
64
32
November and early December?
popular standing is pretty durable.
NM
-
-
52
44
What really counts in a presidency.
Even if his position among those
NY
58
37
54
42
of course. isn't the job-approval ratings
NC
61
35
61
37
going to the polls November 6 is com-
55
but the quality of leadership. As long as
OH
-
-
42
pared to Reagan's on election day 1986
OK
-
-
55
41
the poll numbers are going to be invoked
when the latter's popularity was near its
OR
53
41
53
41
so earnestly. though. we should try to
peak (rather than to Reagan's on elec-
PA
55
42
51
44
get their meaning straight. The "votes"
RI
-
-
49
47
tion day 1982 when recession domi-
SC
-
-
58
39
on George Bush have been tallied
nated). Bush's support is nearly equal
SD
-
-
48
49
through year two in office. They show a
to his predecessor's (see Table 2). The
TN
-
-
54
40
generally popular president who has
TX
61
33
61
34
1986 CBS/New York Times exit poll put
VT
56
38
51
45
maintained a solid base even through a
Reagan's approval/disapproval propor-
WV
-
-
49
45
period of political adversity.
tion at 60-35 nationally. while the 1990
WI
-
1
45
53
VRS election-day survey found Bush's a
Source: CBS News/New York Times Exit Poll, November 1986;
virtually identical 59-36.
VRS. a consortium, Exit Poll, November 1990.
ANJARY/FEBRUARY QC' 57
INTHE
BUSH
AT
MIDPOINT
MEDIA
BAD
PRESS BY
DEFAULT
SPOTLIGHT
A DECADE AGO, political scientist
domestic agenda. To accomplish these
Analyzing Network News
Robert Entman created a brief stir in
goals. he and his advisers proved willing
Washington political and media circles
to outflank. manipulate. and generally
Until recently, this approach worked
with his advice on how the new
infuriate the White House press corps.
surprisingly well, but its limitations are
president should deal with the media:
The "imperial media" were soon re-
becoming increasingly apparent. These
don't. if you can avoid, it. Mindful of
duced to carping about the Teflon
and other conclusions about Bush's
Jimmy Carter's disastrous experience
President as the balance of power
media profile come from an ongoing
with the press. Entman counseled Car-
between press and presidency shifted
study of the presidency and the media
ter's successor to avoid media events,
back to the White House.
by the Center for Media and Public
stay off television. dampen public
A decade later. however. the Ent-
Affairs. The Center has analyzed all
expectations. and minimize conflicts
man doctrine has found a disciple in
stories on the Bush administration that
with Congress. When you must use the
George Bush. He has inverted Reagan's
have appeared on the ABC. CBS. and
airwaves. he continued. concentrate
approach to the media by lowering his
NBC evening network newscasts. Each
your efforts on foreign policy initiatives.
own visibility and increasing his access
sound bite is scrutinized for its topic.
which tend to attract less criticism. To
to reporters. Reagan had used television
source. and any positive or negative
do otherwise would only give the
to polarize the political debate and
evaluations of the president. his policies.
"imperial media" (Entman's phrase)
appeal to the public over the heads of
and his administration. This is more than
opportunities to drown the presidency
official Washington and the press. Bush
simply counting reports of good or bad
in a tide of bad press.
tries to deal with the adversarial media
news: what matters are the media-borne
Ronald Reagan did not follow this
the same way he deals with a hostile
evaluations of the president's conduct.
advice. to put it mildly. He sought to
Congress: by sidestepping public conflict
Figure 1 (page 51) shows just how
dominate the airwaves. polarize the
while winning over his opponents with
low Bush's TV profile has been. During
political process. and redirect the
personal contact behind the scenes. This
his first 22 months in office. through
nondirective media-management style
October 1990. he was the focus of 1.487
S. Robert Lichter is codirector of the
seems suited to a not-ready-for-prime-
news stories. averaging fewer than one
Center for Media and Public Affairs.
time presidency. Its goal is to minimize
story per network per night. During
Richard E. Noves directs the Center's
the extent of media criticism and. when
Bush's first year in office, he attracted
White House News Project.
it can't be avoided. to soften its impact.
only a third as much coverage as Reagan
BY S. ROBERT LICHTER AND
RICHARD E. NOYES
ILLUSTRATION BY TIM GABOR
JANUARY/FEBRUARY
49
had in 1981 (642 stories versus 1,782).
TABLE 1
Even excluding the surge of coverage
MEDIA EVALUATIONS AND STORIES ON
fied with his performance by a three-to-
GEORGE BUSH
one margin.
after Reagan was shot in April 1981,
Bush made less than half as much news
Good Press All Stories
Even Bush's 44 percent good per-
sonal press rating is deceptive. He re-
as his predecessor. By contrast, he has
George Bush
44%
695*
ceived four brief but concentrated bursts
already held 76 press conferences, com-
Total Administration
39
2,818
Policy Issues
35
1,237
of good press: during the traditional
pared to Reagan's 48 during eight years
Foreign (all)
44
582
"honeymoon" following his inaugura-
in office. During the first half of 1990,
Arms control
59
49
tion in January 1989, during his trium-
the three networks' White House corre-
Nicaragua
55
29
Panama
52
phant visits to Europe in May and July
spondents were on the air less fre-
107
Persian Gulf
47
96
1989, after the Panama invasion in
quently than their Moscow correspon-
China
36
73
December 1989, and after he dispatched
dents. As CBS's Lesley Stahl remarked
USSR
27
35
troops to the Persian Gulf in August
incredulously, "This White House
Domestic (all)
27
655
doesn't care if the president gets on the
Drugs
40
78
1990. Each time. his approval ratings
Taxes
29
59
rose. (The monthly totals in Figure 2
evening news or not."
S&Ls
25
58
mask a spurt from only 20 percent to 69
Yet, buoyed by continuing eco-
Environment
25
77
nomic growth and the worldwide col-
Budget
19
105
percent positive evaluations during his
trip to West Europe in late May.) Nearly
lapse of communism, Bush racked up
higher approval ratings in the polls than
Note:* - number of positive or negative evaluations on ABC,
40 percent of Bush's positive evaluations
CBS. and NBC evening news, 1/20/89-10/31/90.
since his inauguration came during these
any president since John Kennedy.
Source: Center for Media and Public Affairs.
months. During the other 18 months of
Meanwhile, the media's sour aftertaste
his presidency, his press was 64 percent
from the 1988 campaign seemed to
marks, drawing 64 percent positive com-
negative. But he was also far less visible
dissipate, leading critics to complain that
ments for his leadership at that time).
during these more-"typical" months (see
Bush was killing them with kindness.
So the networks have acted as a
Figure 2).
Writing in Esquire last October, Andrew
kind of permanent opposition toward
This points to the secret of Bush's
Sullivan called the White House press
the Bush administration's policies, in
success in getting the most mileage from
corps "the monarch's obsequious court."
contrast to their balanced coverage of
his limited media coverage. TV news
He charged that "Bush may go down in
the president himself. These cumulative
evaluations of the president show a clear
history as the guy who called for a kinder,
totals in Table 1 do not include the
trend over time. Bush has gotten his
gentler nation. But the only people
increasingly critical commentary on Bush
best press during periods of high visibil-
who've taken him up on it so far have
policy in the Gulf after the November
ity. For the most part, as the overall
been the press." The implication of such
elections. but they do include the up-
number of his evaluations rose and fell.
criticism is that the press must not be
surge in on-air criticism stimulated by
so did the proportion of good press (that
doing its job if the president remains
the budget battle in October 1990. A
is. positive evaluations). With these
popular. But the Center's systematic
sample comment in early November.
figures for comparison. there is a second
study shows that the watchdogs really
from NBC's Jim Miklaszewski. indicates
clear trend: Bush's public-approval rat-
haven't lost their bite.
the tenor of this coverage: "After two
ings climbed during his periods of good
Table 1 shows that the network news
days of flopping. flipping. and flailing
press but dropped only slightly or not
departments have been neither kind nor
around the budget and taxes. President
at all whenever his media coverage
gentle in covering the White House. In
Bush told reporters he would make it all
turned negative.
just over 21 months. they aired 2,818
perfectly clear. But it only got worse."
These two trends may be linked in
evaluations of the Bush administration.
Critics of the allegedly pliant press
ways that illustrate the strengths and
About three out of five were negative,
corps like Sullivan forget that Lesley
weaknesses of Bush's media strategy.
giving the administration a good press
Stahl did her first "failed presidency"
His poll ratings rose when he com-
score of only 39 percent. The president
piece in March 1989, only ten weeks into
manded center stage and attracted a
himself fared better, receiving mildly
the new administration: "More and more
chorus of public praise. Since his January
negative coverage (44 percent positive).
observers are giving [Bush] failing
1989 "honeymoon," this has happened
But assessments of Bush policies were
grades
for policy drift and slowness
only when international crises cast Bush
negative by a nearly two-to-one margin
too much emphasis on style. not
in the role of world leader. dispatching
(65 to 35 percent). Even during the
enough on developing a coherent policy
troops abroad or taking a victory lap
rally-round-the-flag period in August.
an administration floundering." At
around Europe to celebrate the end of
criticism of U.S. policies toward Iraq
the time, Gallup polls showed that
the Cold War. Each time, the coverage
outweighed praise by 58 to 42 percent
Bush's supporters in the general public
soon returned to domestic affairs. with
(although Bush personally got better
outnumbered those who were dissatis-
an accompanying upsurge of criticism.
50 THE AMERICAN ENTERPRISE
Comments on Bush's domestic policy
BUSH HAS GOTTEN HIS BEST
of momentous events, Bush's bad press
have been substantially more negative
usually failed to penetrate the public
than those on foreign policy-73 percent
PRESS DURING PERIODS OF
consciousness. Only after the Panama
negative overall and worse on such key
invasion did TV's cheers turn into jeers
issues as the federal budget, the savings-
HIGH VISIBILITY. FOR THE MOST
at the same volume, and his sky-high
and-loan bailout. and the environment.
poll ratings soon fell back to earth. This
For nearly two years. however, Bush
PART, AS THE OVERALL NUMBER
pattern suggests that a slow and steady
managed to reduce his own visibility
trickle of media-borne criticism may not
OF HIS EVALUATIONS ROSE AND
each time the coverage turned sour.
reach the threshold of public attention
When the press bouquets over news from
necessary to harm this president's image.
abroad turned to brickbats on the home
FELL, so DID THE PROPORTION
As long as most Americans feel no
front. he retreated from center stage to
OF GOOD PRESS.
immediate threat to their personal secu-
the sidelines. Given the public's lack of
rity or economic well-being. the Wash-
attentiveness to politics in the absence
ington policy debate on TV news is just
a passing show for them.
FIGURE 1
A Minimalist Strategy
VISIBILITY: BUSH VERSUS REAGAN*
Bush's minimalist media strategy proved
350
successful because it corresponded to his
vision of the presidency-build your
300
reputation on foreign policy successes
while downplaying the more partisan
250
Reagan, 1981
and acrimonious domestic debate. But
200
the strategy broke down in October 1990.
The budget debate trained the media
150
spotlight on him. and he wilted under its
constant glare. For the first time in
100
almost two years. he was exposed to a
heavy onslaught of bad press. Note the
50
sudden change in Figure 2 during Octo-
Bush, 1989-1990
ber 1990. When both his visibility and
0
bad press increased, Bush's approval
1/89
3/89
6/89
9/89
12/89
3/90
6/90
9/90
ratings dropped sharply for the first time.
1st mo.
3rd mo.
6th mo.
9th mo.
12th mo.
15th mo.
18th mo.
21st mo.
Thus. the president's public image
Note: "Number of TV news stories focusing on the president.
has been affected by the tone of his
Source: Center for Medio and Public Affairs
television coverage. But it took a concen-
trated dose of either good or bad press
FIGURE 2
to alter his approval ratings. It is impor-
POLL RATINGS AND TV NEWS RATINGS OF BUSH
tant to remember that good and bad
press are defined in terms of the evalu-
100
ations aired rather than events reported.
This helps eliminate other interpreta-
Europe Trip
80
"Honeymoon"
APPROVAL
Panama
tions of the relationship between Bush's
Persian Gulf
media ratings and his poll ratings. For
example. one might argue that the tone
60
GOOD PRESS
of media coverage followed from the
poll results rather than vice versa. which
40
would mean that the media coverage
20
represented the new "reality" of chang-
NUMBER OF TV EVALUATIONS
Budget debate
ing public opinion. But this logic quickly
breaks down. It might explain the peaks
0
1/89
3/89
6/89
9/89
12/89
1/90
3/90
6/90
9/90
12/90
in Bush's coverage but not the valleys.
Sources: Center for Media and Public Affairs: Gallup polls.
because negative coverage has been the
ANUARY/FEBRUARY 199" 51
norm even in times'of high public
WHEN POLITICAL CONFLICT
setting the public agenda belongs to
approval. Alternatively. both media cov-
those who are more adept at using the
erage and poll ratings might change in
BREAKS OUT, BUSH'S ATTEMPTS
media for that purpose.
response to real-world events. This
Thus. George Bush's television
interpretation also treats media coverage
TO AVOID CRITICISM LET THE
news image helps account for several
as a proxy for political reality. Once
trends in his public-approval ratings in
again. however. this would not account
INITIATIVE PASS TO HIS OPPO-
the same way other recent occupants of
for the frequent periods when TV news
the White House experienced-the brief
evaluations and public approval have
NENTS. THE WHITE HOUSE BE-
initial "honeymoon." the rally-round-
diverged.
COMES MIRED IN A PERMANENT
the-flag effect in moments of inter-
It is more likely that public percep-
national crisis, the difference between a
tions of real-world events drive poll
POSTURE OF DAMAGE CONTROL.
president's personal popularity and that
responses. These perceptions are partly
of his policies. and the president's greater
shaped by the media's presentation of
latitude in pursuing foreign rather than
the events. which is the only way the
domestic initiatives. On all these fronts.
public encounters reality beyond their
public opinion follows media images.
personal realm of experience. But it
takes an intense or prolonged surge of
Friendly Persuasion
media coverage to pass the threshold of
public interest that produces effects on
In sharp contrast to his predecessor.
opinion. in either a positive or negative
Bush has tried to win journalists over to
direction. Absent such a surge. presiden-
his point of view. He has replaced
tial approval depends far more on eco-
acrimony with access, establishing per-
nomic conditions than media images.
sonal relationships and a friendlier at-
Of course. national media coverage
mosphere. Reporters who had spent
also reflects journalists' own perceptions
years trying to shout over the din of
of the popular mood as evidenced by
Reagan's waiting helicopter suddenly
their readings of the polls. But journalists
found themselves having dinner with the
are more attuned to mood shifts among
president or playing horseshoes with him.
political elites than among the mass
The assumption for this maneuver
public. The adversarial character of
was that friendly relations would pro-
White House reporting comes from the
duce friendlier coverage than Bush had
media's tendency to dramatize and mag-
received during his election campaign.
nify conflicts that arise among advisers
Unfortunately for him. journalists have
and policymakers and to demystify a
substantial professional disincentives to
president's authority by treating him as
play along with this game. A critical. if
a partisan politician rather than a na-
not adversarial. stance enhances their
tional leader.
professional status. while perceived
This accounts for the president's
"softness" brings derision from their
advantage in foreign affairs. He repre-
peers. Few reporters will risk their
sents the nation on the world stage.
reputations for a game of horseshoes
making it more difficult for domestic
with the president. They may toss shoes.
elites and the media alike to attack him.
but they won't jump through hoops.
But all presidents must eventually come
In addition. the standard operating
home to face the less-palatable prospect
procedures of network journalism pre-
of partisan conflict over domestic policy.
clude frequent personal interventions
This has proven especially difficult for
by reporters into their own stories. Few
Bush. because il exposes the Achilles'
of the TV news evaluations we have
heel of his media strategy. When political
noted were made by reporters them-
conflict breaks out. Bush's attempts to
selves. Instead. reporters rely on mem-
avoid criticism let the initiative pass to
hers of Congress. think-tank experts. and
his opponents. The White House be-
others in the Washington community for
comes mired in a permanent posture of
evaluations of the president and his staff.
damage control. and the initiative in
The White House counters by providing
52 AMERICAN ENCERPRISE
a steady stream of positive evaluations
WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF
over the policy agenda. During the
of its own achievements. The result is a
campaign. the Republicans were able to
balanced story. Yet Bush and his team
JOHN SUNUNU DEFENDS HIS
inject their own issues and their own
seem to delight not in promoting their
agenda into the news by stubbornly
work. but in neutrally analyzing policies
BOSS'S LOW MEDIA PROFILE BY
sticking to their prearranged message
and problems in language devoid of
and predesigned sound bite of the day.
enthusiasm or vivid imagery. The fre-
NOTING, "GEORGE BUSH'S
Thus. four of the five issues that were
quent result is a story defined and
mentioned most frequently favored the
dominated by their critics.
FEELING IS THAT ACHIEVEMENTS
Republicans-crime. defense. economic
It should surprise no one that Bush's
growth. and taxes. The only Democratic
best press comes in times of national
WILL COUNT, NOT SOUND
issue to make the top five was unemploy-
celebration and military conflict: what is
BITES." BUT AN ADMINISTRA-
ment. Ironically, Bush now finds himself
surprising is that these have been Bush's
increasingly in Michael Dukakis's shoes.
only periods of good press since his brief
TION'S ACHIEVEMENTS ARE
countering critics rather than charting
inaugural honeymoon. It is instructive
the course.
to compare this media treatment to that
RARELY SELF-EVIDENT.
White House Chief of Staff John
of candidate Bush during 1988. Through-
Sununu defends his boss's low media
out the fall campaign. Bush faced a
profile by noting. "George Bush's feeling
hostile press that was angry over his
is that achievements will count, not
negative advertising and manipulative
sound bites." But an administration's
techniques. In this atmosphere. our con-
achievements are rarely self-evident.
tent analysis found that Bush received
Like it not. they are defined daily for
only 34 percent positive evaluations on
the American people in the morning
network evening news shows-a two-to-
headlines and the evening newscasts.
one margin of bad press over good press.
Someone has to portray the presidency
Yet his opponent Michael Dukakis re-
to the public. and when the president
ceived precisely the same proportions
steps aside. the press will turn elsewhere
of good and bad press. This suggests
to fill in the blanks. By disdaining sound
that Bush's negative coverage stemmed
bites. an administration hands over the
more from general media negativity than
agenda-setting machinery to its critics.
from personal ill will. Moreover, that
For all its excesses. the Reagan
two-to-one negative ratio is not much
White House understood that presiden-
worse than Bush receives now in a
tial leadership requires the willingness
"typical" month when he doesn't benefit
and ability to communicate with the
from a foreign crisis.
public through the media marketplace.
Finally. Bush's treatment by CBS can
The press may have felt used and abused
be viewed as a test case of his efforts to
by Reagan's media skills. but they were
win friends and influence journalists. His
always able to get out the other side of
relations with CBS have been sour ever
the story. The electorate could hear the
since his televised set-to with Dan Rather
president's message as well as those of
in January 1988. and that network gave
his critics and choose between them.
Bush his worst press during both the
Reagan's genius lay in structuring both
primaries and the general election. For
his own position and the entire debate
all his fence-mending efforts. this pattern
in ways that polarized the audience to
has not changed since inauguration day.
his advantage. By contrast. Bush's nondi-
Through October 1990 CBS broadcast
rective media style appears better suited
only 39 percent favorable evaluations of
to a president who makes way than to
Bush as president. compared to 44
one who makes waves.
percent broadcast by NBC and 52 percent
by ABC. The same pattern holds for the
networks' evaluations of the administra-
tion and its policy initiatives.
The real change in coverage since
the 1988 election is Bush's loss of control
A...A.
53
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 23, 1991
NOTE FOR ANDY CARD:
I'm not sure this is worth
the President's time, but
I thought you would want to
see it given your liaison
responsibilities with former
Presidents.
Thanks.
Phil.
Phillip D. Brady
THE RICHARD NIXON
LIBRARY & BIRTHPLACE
A Periodic Report on President Nixon's
Addresses and Statements
Bulletin 1
January 18, 1991
In view of recent events in the Persian Gulf and in Lithuania, I thought you might be interested in
seeing the full text of an address President Nixon gave to the Republican Congressional Committee
in New York City on December 7, 1990.
John H. Taylor, Director
A WAR ABOUT PEACE
by Richard Nixon
In his book Great Contemporaries,
divide us and when we will compete
Winston Churchill described Lord Rosebery,
economically rather than militarily and when
a 19th century British Prime Minister, as one
we can direct our attention to the
who had the misfortune of living in a time of
environment, global warming, world poverty,
great men and small events. Our leaders
and other issues where we have common
today do not have that problem. There is no
interests.
question but that we live in a time of great
We are told that we can rely on the
events.
United Nations to deal with aggressive
Nineteen eighty-nine, even more than
nations.
1945, which marked the end of World War
We see an unholy alliance developing
II, will be remembered as the year of the
between isolationists on the right and the left,
century for the forces of freedom in the
who for different reasons say that the United
world. Nineteen forty-five marked the defeat
States should withdraw its forces from
of fascism. Nineteen eighty-nine marked the
Europe and Asia and concentrate on solving
defeat of communism, an even greater threat
our problems at home.
to peace and freedom.
Conventional wisdom in the
As a result of what happened in this
Washington Beltway the modern version of
historic year, we hear today:
Plato's Cave -- is that we are on the brink of
The Cold War is over.
forging a new world order in which all
The United States and the Soviet
nations will be dedicated to justice and
Union are no longer adversaries but allies, as
international law.
we were in World War II.
Before going that far, let us see what
We are witnessing the end of history --
has changed, why changes have occurred,
a time when great strategic issues no longer
what has not changed, and what America's
role should be on the world stage now that
the Cold War seems to be over.
He replied, "If he doesn't, the Soviet Union
The changes in 1989 have been
will disappear as a great power in the twenty-
first century." He was right and Gorbachev
breathtaking. The Berlin Wall came down.
knew it.
Germany was united. Communist
Look at what he confronted when he
governments were driven from power in all of
came to power six years ago. Everywhere he
the countries in Eastern Europe and except
looked, communism was suffering from
in Romania, this was accomplished
terminal illness.
peacefully.
His Third World communist colonies
The frosting on the cake occurred in
were all liabilities costing huge subsidies
our own hemisphere early this year when
from Moscow and in Afghanistan costing
Violetta Chamorro defeated Daniel Ortega
lives as well as money.
in a free election, the first time this has
In Eastern Europe, forces of
happened to a communist leader in seventy
revolution against Soviet-supported rulers
years.
were ready to explode.
The most significant changes have
At home, the Soviet economy was a
occurred in the Soviet Union symbolized by
basketcase plagued with corruption,
the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to
alcoholism, and inefficiency.
Mikhail Gorbachev. Consider what he has
Abroad, he saw that his major
done:
adversary -- the United States, under the
He withdrew the Red Army from
leadership of President Reagan, had
Afghanistan.
recovered from the malaise of the late
He did not use the Red Army to keep
seventies, was restoring its military strength,
communist clients in power in Eastern
and was embarking on a new weapons system
Europe as did Krushchev in 1956 in Hungary
-- SDI -- which the Soviet Union lacked the
and Brezhnev in Czechoslovakia in 1968.
resources to match.
He has allowed West Germany to
Gorbachev had no choice. He had to
unite with East Germany.
retrench abroad and reform. at home. His
He has negotiated arms control
first priority, then and now, was to restore the
agreements.
health of the Soviet economy. This was the
He has adopted political and
most revolutionary decision of a Soviet
economic reforms which are so revolutionary
leader since the Russian Revolution which
that some observers have speculated, that
brought the communists to power in 1917.
rather than being a dedicated communist and
For seventy years, Soviet economic policy
a Russian nationalist, he may be a closet
had served Soviet foreign policy. Now Soviet
democrat and a closet capitalist at home and
foreign policy had to serve Soviet economic
a sincere partisan of peace and freedom
policy.
abroad.
This explains his actions:
Before reaching those conclusions, let
He withdrew the Red Army from
us see why he acted as he did. In 1985,
Afghanistan not only because it was costing
shortly after Gorbachev came to power in the
men as well as money, but primarily because
Soviet Union, I asked Hu Yaobang, the
it helped create a peaceful image for
Secretary General of the Chinese Communist
Gorbachev which opened the door for good
Party, if he thought Gorbachev would adopt
relations with the West and economic
economic reforms in the Soviet Union like
assistance he needed for his desperately sick
those Deng Xiaoping had adopted in China.
economy.
2
He had to choose between using force
capita income has doubled in the past ten
to keep his puppets in power in Eastern
years, Soviet per capita income under
Europe and economic aid from Western
Gorbachev has gone down. Bread lines have
Europe. Not surprisingly, he chose Western
replaced vodka lines. To get through the
Europe.
winter, Gorbachev has had to go hat-in-hand
He let East Germany go because he
to get assistance from his new friends in the
needed financial aid from West Germany.
West. The shopping list he gave Prime
In the Gulf, he had to choose between
Minister Mulroney indicates the depth of his
his ally Iraq and financial aid from the
problem. It included pork, beef, flour,
nations allied against Iraq. Again, not
powdered milk, and peanut oil.
surprisingly, he chose the allies. It has
The results of Gorbachev's policies in
already begun to pay off. Just last week he
the Soviet Union are now clear for everyone
negotiated a loan of $3 billion from Saudi
to see. Tolput it bluntly, the Soviet economy
Arabia, a country which before Iraq invaded
is collapsing and the Soviet empire is
Kuwait, had not even recognized the
disintegrating. Fourteen of the fifteen Soviet
communist government of the Soviet Union.
republics have declared independence from
Whatever the reason, we welcome
Moscow. The communist idea -- the glue
what he did. He is, without question, very
that held the Soviet empire together has
different from the Soviet leaders of the past.
lost its potency. Of all the changes in 1989,
He has changed since the time he totally
the most significant is that communism has
supported Brezhnev's aggressive policies in
lost the ideological battle. In the Third
his relentless climb to power. But it is a
World, in Eastern Europe, and most
change of the head, not the heart. At a time
significantly in the Soviet Union, people
he is using his head, we should not lose ours.
know that communist socialism doesn't work.
Let us take a hard look at the Soviet
The most dramatic proof of this is that while
Union after six years of Gorbachev's
Gorbachev is enormously popular in the
leadership.
United States and in other non-communist
His political reforms have been
countries, he is supported by less than twenty-
revolutionary. Where there was no freedom
five percent of the Soviet people. As has
of the press, there is now some. Where there
been the case in Eastern Europe, instead of a
was no freedom to criticize Soviet leaders,
reforming communist as their leader, the
there is now some. Where there were no free
people of the Soviet Union want reforms
elections, there are now some. But we must
without communism.
bear in mind that while Gorbachev deserves
This raises the key question. Because
great credit for these reforms, he has also put
of his more benign foreign policy, should we
through legislation which makes him the
help Gorbachev with his problems at home?
most powerful Soviet leader since Stalin. All
The answer is that except for humanitarian
of the evidence points to the conclusion that
aid we should help him only if it serves our
his goal is not to abandon communism but to
interests as well as his.
save it, not to dismantle the Soviet Union but
His economic reforms do not meet
to preserve it peacefully if possible, but
that test. It is now obvious that they do not
using force is necessary.
serve his interests. He is trying to combine a
While he deserves credit for his bold
command economy with a free market
political reforms, we must face up to the fact
economy. It won't work. There is no halfway
that his economic reforms have been a total
house between communism and capitalism.
failure. For example, while China's per
As Andre Sakharov observed shortly before
3
his death, "In the absence of radical reforms,
The Cold War may be over in Eastern
to provide aid and technological assistance to
Europe. It is time for Gorbachev to end the
the Soviet Union only serves to prop up a
Cold War in the Third World.
failed system and to delay the advent of
What will happen to Gorbachev?
democracy."
Some of the experts give him only a fifty
Even if his economic reforms go far
percent chance of staying in power over the
enough to work, it does not serve our interest
next year. I believe the odds are considerably
to provide aid to Gorbachev unless he adopts
better than that. There are three possible
a less threatening defense and foreign policy.
scenarios. He could adopt bolder, free
While he has announced cuts in his- defense
market reforms which might have a chance to
budget, his Foreign Minister has stated that
rescue the Soviet economy from its enormous
the Soviet Union is still spending twenty-five
crisis. I do not think-this is likely because I
percent of its GNP on defense. In contrast,
believe Gorbachev will not be able to bring
the United States is spending six percent of
himself to cut the umbilical cord which unites
its GNP on defense. Even with his cuts in his
him with his life-long Marxist ideology. A
Soviet military forces, as a result of
second possibility is that he could be
modernization, they will be leaner but
replaced. This is not likely because there is
stronger than when Gorbachev came to
no one currently on the scene, including
power six years ago. After the projected cuts
Boris Yeltsin, who has the support in the
in long range nuclear weapons in the START
armed forces, the KGB, and the Soviet
agreement, Gorbachev will still have thirty
bureaucracy necessary to bring about a
thousand nuclear weapons, the largest
successful coup. The third scenario, and the
conventional army in the world, and a
most likely one, is that Gorbachev, the tough-
modern blue-water navy.
minded pragmatic politician that he is, will
There are some who say that if the
use the extraordinary new powers he has
United States makes further cuts in its
acquired for himself as President of the
defense budget, Gorbachev will follow suit.
Soviet Union to crack down on dissident
They are wrong. There is no question but
groups using military force if necessary
that Gorbachev is a refreshing new kind of
and will stay in power by revoking some of
Soviet leader. But he is not a philanthropist.
the progressive political reforms he has
We should reduce our nuclear forces and our
previously initiated. This will cost him some
SDI program only if he agrees to reduce his.
support in the West. But unless he resumes
In foreign policy, we should applaud
an aggressive foreign policy abroad, most
his withdrawing the Red Army from
Western political leaders will conveniently
Afghanistan. But except for Nicaragua where
ignore the repressive measures he adopts at
the people voted out their communist leader,
home to stay in power. As far as the United
every one of Gorbachev's communists clients
States is concerned, we should base our
in the Third World is still in power subsidized
defense and foreign policy vis-a-vis the Soviet
by as much as $15 billion a year by the Soviet
Union, not on speculations about
Union.
Gorbachev's intent but on the reality of
Before we consider helping
Soviet capabilities as a nuclear and
Gorbachev, he should help himself by
conventional superpower.
drastically cutting his huge military budget
Let us now turn to Europe. We are
and by cutting off aid and arms sales to
witnessing the unusual phenomenon of
Castro and other anti-U.S. communist
isolationists on the right and left urging that
dictators.
since the cold War is over, we should
Rn
withdraw all of our forces from Europe,
You have the Soviet Union, a nuclear
particularly since the nations of Europe have
superpower which while reducing its forces in
recovered from the devastation of world War
Europe has strengthened its naval and
II and should be able to provide for their own
nuclear forces in Asia.
defense.
You have China which will be a
But what would Europe be without an
nuclear superpower within ten to twenty
American military presence? Great Britain
years.
and France are minor nuclear powers.
You have Japan, an economic
Germany is an economic superpower without
superpower without nuclear weapons and
nuclear weapons. The Soviet Union, even
without a U.S. defense guarantee. Japan
without Eastern Europe, will still be a
would have no choice but to go nuclear or to
nuclear superpower with the world's largest
make a deal with the strongest of its
conventional army. No one can seriously
neighbors, the Soviet Union. Japan can
suggest that the British and French would use
afford to massively increase its defense
their nuclear forces to deter a Soviet attack
forces. But even more than is the case with
on Germany. With United States forces gone
Germany's neighbors in Europe, the
from Europe and NATO dissolved,
Japanese in Asia are feared by the Koreans,
Germany would have the option of going
the Chinese, the Philippinos, the Taiwanese,
nuclear or neutral and would be strongly
the Malaysians, and the Indonesians, all of
tempted to become a political and economic
whom suffered under Japanese occupation in
ally of the Soviet Union. Either of these
World War II. A U.S. military presence in
options is bad for Europe, bad for Germany,
Japan and Korea is indispensable if we are to
and bad for the United States.
preserve peace in the Pacific.
We can and should cut our NATO
Let us now look at China. We should
forces substantially because of the dissolution
continue to deplore the tragedy of
of the Warsaw Pact. But a significant
Tiananmen Square eighteen months ago.
conventional and nuclear U.S. presence in
But the Bush Administration is right to
Europe is necessary as insurance against a
restore diplomatic and economic cooperation
possible renewal of the Soviet threat and as
with the P.R.C. This is in our interest and in
reassurance for those who fear a resurgent
the interest of the Chinese people. It is in
German threat. I do not share the concern
our interest because China has a veto in the
that a united Germany would again become
U.N. Security Council and plays an
an aggressive military power. But despite
indispensable role in trying to resolve the
their public statements, many leaders have
continuing conflicts in Southeast Asia. And
that concern.
in the non-military area, how can we possibly
Let us now look at Asia. Conservative
have a coordinated international initiative on
and liberal isolationists say that because
problems of the environment with one-fifth
there is no longer a Soviet threat, we should
of the world's people not cooperating?
bring our forces home from Japan and Korea
The restoration of a cooperative
particularly since they are now rich enough to
relationship between China and the United
defend themselves. They are wrong.
States is without question in the interest of
Keeping an American military presence in
human rights for the Chinese people. China
Europe is important. Keeping one in Asia is
is not a democracy and will not become one
indispensable if we are to have peace in the
in the foreseeable future. But as we saw in
Pacific. Let us look at Asia without the
Korea and in Taiwan, economic progress
United States.
inevitably leads to political progress.
5
Economic cooperation, tourism and Chinese
that bad is irrelevant. He is bad enough. His
students studying in the United States will
army rapes, loots, and murders the
strengthen the prospects for political reform.
defenseless people of Kuwait. He has held
That is why Secretary Baker was following
thousands of hostages as human shields. To
the right course in meeting with the Chinese
praise him for releasing hostages he should
Foreign Minister and why the Administration
not have taken in the first place is ludicrous.
was justified in supporting the resumption of
He has violated international law by using
World Bank loans to China. For the United
chemical weapons in his war against Iran and
States to continue to isolate China
even against his own people. If our aim in
economically and diplomatically only
the Gulf were to punish cruel leaders, we
strengthens the hardliners in China. The only
would not be allied with Syria's Hafez Assad
hope for political reform is to re-establish the
who ordered the massacre of 20,000 innocent
cooperative relationship we had with China
men, women, and children in the city of
before the tragic events at Tiananmen some
Hama in his own country, who has supported
eighteen months ago.
international terrorism and possibly the
Let us now look at the crisis in the
bombing of civilian aircraft, and whose troops
Persian Gulf. It is time for some straight talk
have committed brutal atrocities in his
as to why 400,000 young Americans are
campaign to dominate Lebanon.
spending Christmas in the deserts of Saudi
We are in the Gulf for two major
Arabia.
reasons.
Some liberal pundits and politicians
Sadam Hussein has unlimited
have criticized Bob Dole for saying that we
ambitions to dominate one of the most
are there for oil and Jim Baker for saying
important strategic areas in the world.
that we are there for jobs. There are more
Because he has oil, he has the means to
important reasons, but let us not be so
acquire the weapons he needs for aggression
hypocritical as to say that preventing an
against his neighbors, including at some
international outlaw from controlling forty
future time, a nuclear arsenal. If he succeeds
percent of the world's oil reserves was not of
in Kuwait, he will attack others and will use
critical interest to the United States and a
whatever weapons he has, including chemical
justifiable reason for sending forces to the
and nuclear to achieve his goals. If we don't
Gulf. Let us suppose that instead of Kuwait
stop him now we will have to stop him later
this was Nepal, or Upper Volta, or Paraguay
when the cost in the lives of young Americans
being gobbled up by a neighboring state.
will be infinitely greater. If the Baker
Does anyone seriously suggest that we would
diplomatic initiative fails to get him out of
be sending in the Marines to liberate them?
Kuwait and if it becomes apparent that
It is equally hypocritical to contend
sanctions won't work, we must use force as
that we are there in support of democracy.
approved by the United Nations resolution.
None of our Arab allies are democracies and
If it comes to that, our diplomats should
putting the Emir of Kuwait back in power is
always remember that where an insatiable
not gong to bring democracy to the Kuwaiti
aggressor is involved, while war is bad, a bad
people.
peace is worse because it can lead to a bigger
And this is not enough to justify our
war.
sending armed forces to the Gulf because
There is an even more important long-
Saddam Hussein happened to be a cruel
term reason for turning back his aggression.
leader. President Bush has been criticized
The whole world is heaving a collective sigh
for equating him with Hitler. Whether he is
of relief as the Cold War appears to be
Rn
coming to an end. Many believe that we are
Fulton, Missouri, Winstorn Churchill said,
entering a new era where armed aggression
"The United States stands at the pinnacle of
will no longer be an instrument of national
world power. This is a solemn moment for
policy. We can't be sure that their hopes will
the American democracy. For with primacy
be justified. But we can be sure that if
in power is joined an awe inspiring
Saddam Hussein gains from his aggression
accountability for the future."
against Kuwait there are other potential
Those words are as true today as they
aggressors in the world who will be tempted
were then. The Soviet threat has declined,
to wage war against their neighbors. If we
but as the crisis in the Gulf demonstrates, the
fail to roll back his aggression peacefully if
world is still a dangerous place and the
possible, by force if necessary no potential
United States must continue to play the
aggressor in the future will be deterred by
leading role on the world's stage not as a
warnings from the United States or by U.N.
world's policeman, but in conflicts like the
resolutions. If we succeed in getting him out
Gulf where our vital interests are involved.
of Kuwait and in eliminating his capacity to
We have to play that role because there is no
wage aggressive war elsewhere without
one else to take our place not the British,
sending in American armed forces, potential
not the French, not the Russians, not the
aggressors will know that when the United
Japanese, and despite some woolly-headed
States warns against aggression we have the
dreaming to the contrary, not the United
means and the will to back up our warnings.
Nations.
We all hope that Saddam Hussein will
Some question whether we are able to
wake up out of his dream world and get out
play that role. It is fashionable in some
of Kuwait. Some of the Administration's
academic circles to say that the United
critics sincerely believe that diplomacy and
States, like the Soviet Union, is in decline
sanctions will eventually convince Saddam
and no longer has the means to play a leading
Hussein that he should get out of Kuwait.
role on the world's stage.
We cannot be sure that they are right, but we
Don't you believe it. We have some
can be sure that diplomacy and sanctions will
awesome problems - drugs, crime, the urban
have no chance whatever of succeeding,
underclass, the deficit. But before World
unless Saddam Hussein knows that if he
War II, the United States produced twenty-
doesn't get out of Kuwait peacefully, the
four percent of the world GNP, today we
American people and our allies will be united
produce twenty-six percent and by the end of
in using military force to drive him out. His
the century it will be twenty-eight percent
choice is between peace now or suicide later
two and one-half times as much as Japan and
for his country, and possibly for himself.
five times as much as a united Germany.
If we have to resort to force, it will not
The United States today is the world's
be just a war about oil. It will not be a war
only complete superpower economic,
about hostages. It will not be a war about
military, and political. As Herb Stein has
democracy. It will be a war about peace
pointed out, "The United States is a very rich
not just peace in our time, but peace for our
country not rich enough to do everything,
children and grandchildren for generations to
but rich enough to do everything important."
come. That is why our commitment in the
There is a major new factor however,
Persian Gulf is a highly moral enterprise.
since Churchill spoke those words in 1946.
Now that we have traveled around the
For forty-five years after the end of World
world, let us look at the United States. Forty-
War II the United States has carried the
four years ago in his Iron Curtain speech in
major burden of foreign aid, including aid to
7
Rn
Japan and Germany who are now our major
our economy sound, protective,
economic competitors. It is time for other
compassionate and free, can we provide an
rich countries like Japan and the nations of
example for others to follow.
Western Europe to assume the major portion
It is because I believe our Republican
of that burden since our military power still
candidates support such policies that I am
protects them as well as ourselves. For
here today. And that is why I believe that by
example, Japan gets sixty-percent of its oil
contributing to their campaigns you are
from the Persian Gulf. The United States
contributing to a better future for America
gets ten percent of its oil from the Gulf. At a
and the world.
time when we are doubling our troop
As you know, this is the centennial of
strength in the Gulf, Japan should, at the very
the birth of one of the greatest of our
least, double its economic contribution which
Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower. It is also
now is only $2 billion a year.
the centennial of the birth of another giant of
This brings us to America's major role
the twentieth century - Charles de Gaulle.
in the world today. It is not military or
DeGaulle once said, "France is never her true
economic. It is ideological.
self except when she is engaged in a great
Communism has been rejected
enterprise."
because it didn't work. Freedom is now on
I profoundly believe that is true of
trial: will freedom provide the economic and
America; it is true of individuals; it is true of
political progress the communists promised
every man and woman in this room.
and did not produce? Democracy and
What is our great enterprise? Exactly
freedom do not automatically produce
49 years ago today, the attack on Pearl
progress. Look at the enormous problems in
Harbor plunged the United States into World
the new democracies in Eastern Europe, and
War II. Fifty-six million people lost their
the problems in Brazil and Argentina, which
lives in that war, making the twentieth
are trying to make the painful transition from
century the bloodiest in history. Our
command to free-market economies.
challenge is to make the twenty-first century
The United States is the oldest and
a century of peace and to leave our legacy,
most successful democracy in the world. Our
not just the defeat of communism and
challenge is to provide an example for others
fascism, but the victory of freedom.
to follow.
This is truly a great enterprise worthy
If we are to provide that example, we
of a great people. Only by meeting that
cannot tolerate a permanent underclass. We
challenge can we be true to ourselves.
cannot tolerate second-rate education. We
cannot tolerate poor productivity. We cannot
tolerate political gridlock. There are some
THE RICHARD NIXON
who say that the answer to our problem is to
LIBRARY & BIRTHPLACE
give more power to government. We reject
America's Newest Presidential Museum
that proposition. Our answer is for
government to adopt policies which give
Open Daily 10:00am to 5:00pm
more power to people.
Sundays 11:00am to 5:00pm
America is a great country. We have
become great not because of what
18001 Yorba Linda Boulevard
Yorba Linda, California USA 92686
government has done for people, but because
of what people have done for themselves and
For Reprints Telephone (714) 993-5075
their country. Only by policies which make
RICHARD NIXON
LIBRARY & BIRTHPLACE
YORBA LINDA, CALIFORNIA
MERICA'S NEWEST PRESIDENTIAL MUSEUM
*
*
*
*
*
OPEN DAILY 10:00 AM TO 5:00 PM.
SUNDAYS OPEN 11:00 AM TO 5:00 PM.
Defeat
The House of Representatives
*
The Senate
The Vise Presidency
The White] lonse
*
World Travel
Controversies
Companyns
Summits
*
Debates
*
Leaders
*
*
Now open daily
for public tours.
window on America's system of government, on the
The first Presidential
Museum to be built
Presidency, and on the historic achievements of a senior statesman
and operated
who was integrally involved with the most important issues,
entirely without
events, controversies and personalities of our time. Presented via
federal funds.
film, interactive video displays, exhibits, never-before-displayed
photographs, memorabilia and re-creations illuminating Richard
Nixon's private and public life.
HARD
NIXON:
*
Moment
in History:
Presidents
Reagan, Nixon,
Bush and Ford
gather in the
museum lobby
on Dedication
Day.
tatesmanship * Russut * de Gaulle Adenauer * Churchill Yoshida * Sadas Men * Chou lin-lar Man * Khrushcher Brezbnes Victman Peace E Freedom * China lafe Today.
Victories * Contraversies
*
Compaigns
*
Sammits
*
Debates
*
Leaders
*
Diplomacy
Defeat
The Homse of Representatres
The Senate
*,
The
Vice
Presulency
The
White-House
*
Wonld 1,
DISCOVERY AND REDISCOVERY:
View an inspiring 28-minute movie, "Never Give Up:
Richard Nixon in the Arena." See priceless gifts of state,
stroll among life-sized world leaders, watch the famous
Nixon-Kennedy TV debates, and have a video
"conversation" with Richard Nixon.
The Lincoln
Sitting Room: Visit
Step inside the
Richard Nixon's
world of a 1950's campaign
ROAD TO THE PRESIDENCY
favorite room in the
White House,
complete with an authentic
including original
furniture used by
1949 "Woody" station
Dramatic presentations
the President.
on Richard Nixon's public
wagon; see the pistol presented
life including his service as
Congressman, Senator and
to the President by Elvis
Vice President.
Presley; examine the telephone the
President used to talk to the Apollo 11
astronauts on the moon; and witness state
dinners, holiday celebrations and other
White House events through the eyes of
Pat Nixon.
Experience the controversy of
Watergate, listen to White House tapes
be
and view a montage of the President's last
they
day in the White House.
World Leaders:
Meet the century's
greatest leaders at
an unprecedented
summit-in-statuary.
Victories
*
Controversies
*
Campaigns
*
Summits
*
Debates
*
Leaders
*
Diplomacy
Defeat
*
The House.of Representatives
*
The Senate
*
The Vice Presidency
*
The White House
*
World Treet
orld
Travel
*
Statesmanship
*
Russki
de
Gaulle
*
Adenager
Churchill
Yoshuda
Addit
Mem
Chon
Facta
M.In
*
Brezhner
Victnam
Pane
&
Freedom
*
China
LifeToday
Built at a cost of more
than $21 million, the
Library covers nine
acres and features the
52,000 square-foot main
gallery and archives, a
The House His Father Built:
293-seat motion picture
Hear RN's voice describe life in the
theater, the birthplace
modest farmhouse where be was
home, a 75-seat
Domestic Affairs Gallery,
born in 1913. Still on the same
reminiscent of the Capitol
amphitheater, a 3,000
site, the house has been restored and
rotunda in Washington,
square-foot reflecting
filled with original family furniture,
features RN's achievements
pool and the beautiful
including the piano be learned to
First Lady's Garden.
in Space, Civil Rights, the
play as a boy.
Environment, Energy, Urban
Affairs, Crime, the Economy,
Health and other issues.
Wha
hat you will see here, among other things, is a personal life - the influence of a strong
family, of inspirational ministers, of great teachers. You will see a political life - running for
Congress, running for the Senate, running for governor, running for president three times. And
you will see the life of a great nation - 77 years of it. A period in which we had unprecedented
progress for the United States. And you will see great leaders - leaders who changed the world,
who helped to make the world what we have today."
President Richard Nixon
Dedication Ceremonies, July 19, 1990
forld Travel
Statesmanship
*
Russia
de
Gaulle
Adenauer
Charchill
Yoshida
Sadat
Meir
Chon
En-lai
Mao
Khrushchey
*
Brezhnev
Victnam
Peace
&
Freedom
China
Life
Today.
Photo credits: Karl Schumacher/Jim Mendenhall/Eric Figge/Th White House/Ana Venegas, The Orange County Register.
RICHARD NIXON
LIBRARY & BIRTHPLACE
RICHARD NIXON
IERN CALIFORNIA'S NEWEST FAMILY ATTRACTION
LIBRARY & BIRTHPLACE
YORBA LINDA, CALIFORNIA
EURERAY
/
AN FRANCISCO
YORBA LINDA BL.
134
210
57
90
605
57
5
10
60
THE
110
MICHARD
NIXON
90
LISRARY
CAX
AND
BIRTHPLACE
91
DISNEYLAND
TO RIVERSIDE
55
405
DC
TO SAN DIEGO
Easy to reach from anywhere in Southern California:
S from Orange County Airport.
15 minutes from Disneyland.
from Los Angeles
90 minutes from San Diego.
tional Airport.
40 minutes from Hollywood.
MERICA'S NEWEST PRESIDENTIAL MUSEUM
Los Angeles, go south on Interstate 5 to Highway 91. Exit east
'ay 91 and proceed to Highway 57. Exit north on Highway 57
ed to Yorba Linda Blvd. Exit cast on Yorba Linda Blvd. to
im.
ian Diego, go north on Interstate 5 to Highway 57. Exit north
ay 57 and proceed to Yorba Linda Blvd. Exit east on Yorba
d. to the museum.
Anaheim, take Katella Avenue to Highway 57. Go north on
57 and proceed to Yorba Linda Blvd. Exit east on Yorba Linda
10 museum.
liverside and San Bernardino, take Highway 91 to Imperial
(Highway 90). Exit north on Imperial Highway and proceed to
da Blvd. Turn left and proceed to the museum.
Admission Prices, Including Tax:
Adults, age 12 and above:
$3.95
Children, 11 and under:
Free
Seniors, age 62 and above:
$2.00
MasterCard and Visa accepted.
arking. Special rates for groups of 20 or more with advance
'. No on-site food services available, but restaurants are nearby.
Operating schedule and prices subject to change.
*
For information (714) 993-3393.
*
*
OPEN DAILY 10:00 AM TO 5:00 PM.
THE RICHARD NIXON LIBRARY & BIRTHPLACE
18001 YORBA LINDA BOULEVARD, YORBA LINDA,
SUNDAYS OPEN 11:00 AM TO 5:00 PM.
ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, USA 92686
©1990 The Richard Nixon Library & Birthplace.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 23, 1991
TO MARLIN FITZWATER:
Thought the attached might
be helpful in view of Q&A's
at this morning's briefing.
I would not recommend regular
use of statistics such as
these.
thil.
Phillip D. Brady
WHITE HOUSE COMMENT OFFICE TALLIES AND COMMENTS
91 JAN 23 PM 2:54
JANUARY 23, 1991
ISSUE
OPPOSE MEDIA COVERAGE/EXCESSIVE/GIVING THE ENEMY
INFORMATION/BIASED AGAINST POTUS/TOO MUCH COVERAGE
OF PROTESTORS AGAINST THE WAR/CALLERS FEEL THIS IS
PROPAGANDA FOR HUSSEIN/AIDS HUSSEIN IN EXPLOITING
THE POW'S.
TOTALS FROM JANUARY 16TH THROUGH JANUARY 23RD -
OPPOSE COVERAGE BY PRESS
-
1,990
SUPPORT COVERAGE BY PRESS
-
34
a
B
is
Clerk
PB
THE WHITE HOUSE
01/23/91
TO: RON GEISLER
FROM: Staff Assistant PHILLIP Secretary D. BRADY - FYI President and
The to the attached President has been forwarded
0331
THE WHITE HOUSE
washington
91 JAN 22 PM 3: 3:48
January 22, 1991
INFORMATION
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
BRENT SCOWCROFT
B
SUBJECT:
Board of Visitors 1990 Report on the U.S. Naval
Academy
Purpose
To forward the annual report of the Naval Academy Board of
Visitors at Tab A.
Background
The Board of Visitors is required to report to you annually on
the state of the Naval Academy. This is the first review in
which your two appointees to the Board, Gerry Bemiss and Jack
Fitch, participated, and their personal efforts to make the Board
more active are highlighted on page 2.
The Board concluded that the Naval Academy is a strong and
justifiably proud national institution that serves a vital role
in America's national defense. They believe that the single
negative finding, a single (and well-publicized) incident of
sexual harassment in 1990, was an isolated event and the Naval
Academy has aggressively taken steps to ensure the environment
which led to the incident has been eliminated.
Attachment
Tab A Report from the U.S. Naval Academy
cc: Vice President
Chief of Staff
12 Jan 91
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
TO: LGen Scourcent
FROM: CHASE UNTERMEYER
FYI
Action
once responsible for
Academy, If consider
overseeing the Naral
This an excellent
The Board 5F Visi tars
report, showing that
iovsly. Chase
is taking its jos ser-
0331
OF DETERM
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
states
UNITED STATES NAVAL ACADEMY
ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND 21402-5000
DILINIA
STATES OF
AMERICA
01
28 December 1990
The President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
The Board of Visitors of the United States Naval Academy is
required to meet each year and report to you on the state of the
Naval Academy.
The Board met twice in 1990 -- in Annapolis on April 23, 1990,
and on October 9, 1990, in Room EF 100 of The Capitol. As Chairman
of the Board, and in accordance with Section 6968, Title 10, of the
U.S. Code, I respectfully submit this report.
Summary
At the outset, and on behalf of the Board, it is important
that the President know the United States Naval Academy is
performing a commendable job of training officers who are highly
qualified to serve the country in the Navy and in the Marines. At
the same time the Academy is educating midshipmen, men and women,
to be leaders, to assume the highest responsibilities of command,
citizenship, and government.
There are problems at the Naval Academy, to be sure, and we
had to deal with one serious problem in 1990. But in May I had the
privilege of attending the Academy graduation exercises; and as I
observed Vice President Quayle hand diplomas to 990 young women and
men, I realized that in front of me were 990 reasons that you, the
entire command of the United States Navy, and the country can be
proud.
State of the USNA
The charge to this Board is "to inquire into the state of
morale and discipline, and curriculum, instruction, physical
equipment, fiscal affairs, academic methods, and other matters
relating to the Academy
=
Morale is high among the midshipmen. Discipline is good and
getting better. The curriculum is relevant to the Navy's needs,
but warrants examination. Instruction is, on balance, of high
quality; some improvements are in order. The physical plant is
sound, but maintenance suffers because of budget restrictions.
Change in Membership
Our year of 1990 began with sadness at the death of C. Fred
Chambers, who had honored the Board as Chairman since 1987. I know
that Fred was your good friend; he was also a loyal friend and
supporter of the midshipmen and leadership at Annapolis. With
Fred's death the Navy lost a friend, as did each of us who knew
him and served with him.
In January we welcomed your first two appointees to the Board
of Visitors, Gerry Bemiss and Jack Fitch. From the beginning, each
demonstrated a strong interest in the training and education of the
midshipmen, a willingness to devote time and energy and ideas to
Academy affairs. Both know the importance of a strong Naval
Academy to national security, and are committed to make the Academy
better and better.
A More Active Board
Gerry and Jack also made it clear that your intent was to
encourage the Board to become more active, to establish a clear
mission, and to set an agenda to carry it out.
All members of the Board, including the members of the House
and Senate, expressed their enthusiasm for your desire to have a
more active Board.
As a first step, the Board accepted a proposal by Gerry Bemiss
to appoint three standing committees to keep board members.
continuously informed about activities and problems at the Naval
Academy, and to report to the Board members' concerns and
recommendations for action.
Gerry Bemiss will chair a Standing Committee on Academics,
with responsibility for curriculum, instruction and academic
methods. The charter for this committee is what is taught, and
why, and how well. One particular goal is to place even greater
emphasis on ethics, to teach ethics as a concept and to provide
practical training in deciding issues they may face as officers.
Members are Senator Hatfield, Senator Sarbanes, Representative
Charles Wilson and John Tuck.
A. B. Culvahouse, Jr. will chair a Standing Committee on
Midshipmen. The focus of this committee is on the student and how
he learns and develops into an officer and leader. The committee
will be concerned with midshipmen's morale and discipline, the
honor system, proper conduct on and off Academy grounds, ethical
standards, behavior and decorum appropriate to an officer of the
U.S. Navy. Members are Senator McCain, Representative Bentley,
Representative. McMillen and myself.
Jack Fitch will head the Standing Committee on Finance and
Property, with responsibility for fiscal affairs, buildings and
facilities. The priority for this committee will be the condition
2
of the physical plant. As an example, Bancroft Hall, the dormitory
for the entire Brigade of Midshipmen, needs considerable repair.
Federal budget restrictions in recent years required that some
necessary maintenance be deferred. Fitch and his committee are
already at work with Naval Academy officials to maintain and
improve Bancroft Hall and other facilities. Members are Senator
Mikulski, Representative Skeen, Representative Hopkins and Tommy
Thomas.
Our objective is not to intervene in the day-to-day operations
of the Naval Academy, but to support its mission, to cooperate, to
advise, counsel, and provide a civilian perspective.
We hope that each Standing Committee will also find
opportunities to improve public understanding of the Naval Academy
and its important role in national security.
Incident of Sexual Harassment
In 1990 an unfortunate event required the Board to become
deeply involved. On May 13 the Annapolis Evening Capital reported
that Midshipman Gwen Dryer had resigned from the Naval Academy
because she had been handcuffed to a urinal in Bancroft Hall and
humiliated by male midshipmen.
The story quickly gained national attention. It appeared to
be an egregious example of discrimination against women.
To its great credit, the U.S. Navy turned out all hands to get
the facts, find the problem, and repair it. Four related actions
began:
The Superintendent of the Naval Academy, Rear Admiral
Virgil Hill, personally disciplined the offenders and stated
publicly that the incident was "crude and totally
unacceptable." Admiral Hill promptly convened a special group
of faculty and midshipmen to report on the status of the
integration and assimilation of women at the Naval Academy,
and to recommend steps to speed progress toward the Academy's
goal: "Fair and equal treatment of women midshipmen."
Admiral Hill asked me to convene a committee of the Board
of Visitors to review the work of the Academy group. After
discussion with Admiral Hill, Secretary of the Navy Larry
Garrett, and Board members, we broadened our responsibility
to make "an independent appraisal of women's issues" at the
Naval Academy. To be chairman of the committee I appointed
A. B. Culvahouse. His good judgement and judicial temperament
suited the need. To serve with him I selected Senator Barbara
Mikulski, Representative Helen Bentley, Gerry Bemiss, and
myself, ex-officio.
3
Secretary Garrett directed the Naval Inspector General
to conduct an assessment of the equal opportunity and human
relations climate at the Academy.
The Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Frank Kelso,
directed the Chief of Naval Personnel, Vice Admiral J. M.
Boorda, to review the Naval Academy's Honor Concept and
Conduct System.
On October 9, 1990, the Board met to review the reports of all
four groups. In Summary, the Committee on Women's Issues chaired
by A. B. Culvahouse found that the Naval Academy is committed in
principle to the equality of midshipmen, but there is continuing
room for improvement in fully integrating women at the Academy.
The committee made a series of recommendations relating to equality
for women, discipline for sexual harassment, sexual discrimination
and hazing, and reinvigorating the Honor Concept and Conduct
System. (Executive Summary at Tab A.)
Admiral Hill, in reply and comment, reported that of 122
specific recommendations made by the four groups, 94 had been
carried out and the others were under way. Many, he added, were
in progess at the time of the incident and investigation.
Admiral Hill emphasized that the goal of the Naval Academy is
"zero tolerance" for sexual harassment or discrimination, and he
detailed the actions he had already taken and will take to ensure
that the concepts and practice of equality, ethics, honor, and
correct behavior are instilled in the midshipmen.
The Board decided to continue the Committee on Women's Issues
with the responsibility to monitor the progress of integration and
assimilation of women at the Naval Academy.
Press Conference
Because the Dryer incident had prompted such wide and often
inaccurate news stories, Secretary Garrett and I decided to make
all four reports public after the Board meeting. We also held a
press conference to answer any and all questions about the incident
and what was being done to correct the problem. Senator Mikulski
told the press, "This report is neither a whitewash nor a witch
hunt, and I am proud to be part of it." Representative Bentley
emphasized, in endorsing the report, that the Academy "will never
be perfect but must strive to do everything in its power to
eradicate the feeling that many male midshipmen have toward their
female peers."
Admiral Hill responded with directness and in detail to press
questions about how he and his staff and faculty are working with
the midshipmen to move toward the goal of equality for all at the
Naval Academy.
4
Conclusion
On behalf of the Board of Visitors, I want to express to you
my gratitude for the support and cooperation we had during 1990
from Secretary Garrett, Admiral Frank Kelso, Rear Admiral Hill, and
from other members of your official family.
We believe that the United States Naval Academy is a strong
and justifiably proud national institution that serves a vital role
in America's national defense.
The Commandant of the Academy, a Navy pilot, and I were
recently reviewing the productive but turbulent year at the Naval
Academy. He spoke of the Board of Visitors in words that a former
Navy pilot may appreciate: "We were grateful that you guys were
up there flying high cover for the midshipmen."
We consider it to be the responsibility of this Board to
support and advance the U.S. Naval Academy and the quality of the
men and women trained in Annapolis as officers.
Respectfully submitted,
James M. Cannon
Chairman, Board of Visitors
Members:
FitzGerald Bemiss
James M. Cannon
Arthur B. Culvahouse
John C. Fitch
L.E. "Tommy" Thomas
John C. Tuck
Senator Mark O. Hatfield
Senator John S. McCain
Senator Barbara Mikulski
Senator Paul S. Sarbanes
Representative Helen D. Bentley
Representative Larry J. Hopkins
Representative C. Thomas McMillen
Representative Joseph R. Skeen
Representative Charles Wilson
CC:
Secretary of Defense
Secretary of the Navy
Chief of Naval Operations
Superintendent, USNA
5
REPORT
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON WOMEN'S ISSUES
UNITED STATES NAVAL ACADEMY
BOARD OF VISITORS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
OCTOBER 9, 1990
On May 13, 1990, press reports first disclosed an
incident that occurred in December of 1989 when United
States Naval Academy Midshipman Gwen Dreyer was handcuffed
to a urinal in a men's bathroom by two male midshipmen.
Midshipman Dreyer subsequently resigned from the Academy.
This incident, aptly described by the
Superintendent of the Naval Academy, Rear Admiral V.L. Hill,
Jr., as "crude and totally unacceptable," initiated a series
of internal and external reviews focusing on the integration
of women at the Naval Academy. These examinations included:
the Women Midshipmen Study Group, reconvened
by the Superintendent in April of 1990;
the equal opportunity of human relations
climate assessment completed by the Naval
Inspector General, Rear Admiral M.E. Chang,
at the direction of the Secretary of the
Navy;
the Report of the Informal Review Board on
the Naval Academy's Honor Concept and Conduct
System prepared by the Chief of Naval
Personnel, Vice Admiral J.M. Boorda, at the
direction of the Chief of Naval Operations;
the ongoing study by the General Accounting
Office commissioned by certain Members of the
United States Senate;
the review conducted by the Committee on
Women's Issues, comprised of five members of
the Naval Academy Board of Visitors.
The following constitutes the findings and
recommendations of the Report of the Board of Visitors'
Committee on Women's Issues. Just as the incident prompting
this report was regrettable and unacceptable, Ms. Dreyer's
departure from the Academy likewise is regrettable. We hope
and expect that the Naval Academy will learn from this
unfortunate experience and that some good therefore will
come of this sad episode.
If we are to achieve a fair and just society, and
a fair and just Navy, it is essential that the Academy lead
the fleet, not follow the fleet, in eliminating bigotry,
prejudice and sexism.
FINDINGS
Finding No. 1: The Naval Academy is committed in
principle to the equality of women midshipmen, but there is
continuing room for improvement in fully integrating women
at the Academy. (pp. 9-10).
Finding No. 2: There are structural impediments
to successful assimilation of women midshipmen.
(pp. 11-12).
Finding No. 3: The Naval Academy is not immune
from the cultural prejudices confronting both the military
and civilian institutions of higher learning. (pp. 12-13).
Finding No. 4: There is a breakdown in civility
and discipline, which contributes to an environment
conducive to sexual harassment and discrimination.
(pp. 13-14).
Finding No. 5: The Honor Concept and the
Administrative Conduct System lack clarity and consistent
and just application. (pp. 14-15).
Finding No. 6: The } emy's investigation of the
handcuffing of Midshipman Dreye- and its response thereto,
was insufficiently sensitive to sexual harassment issues.
(pp. 15-17).
Finding No. 7; The assimilation of women
midshipmen at the United States Naval Academy lags behind
the assimilation of women officers and enlisted personnel in
the Navy. (pp. 17-18).
Finding No. 8: The United States Naval Academy
Board of Visitors has been insufficiently active in
overseeing the Academy's programs and procedures for
assimilating women midshipmen. (p. 19).
2
RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation No. 1: The recommendations of the
Women Midshipmen Study Group should be adopted by the
Academy. (pp. 19-20).
Recommendation No. 2: Sexual harassment, sexual
discrimination, and hazing must be disciplined very
severely. (p. 21).
Recommendation No. 3: The Honor Concept and
Conduct System should be reinvigorated, simplified and
clarified. (pp. 21-22).
Recommendation No. 4: The Department of the Navy
and the Academy should structure faculty composition,
company officer assignments and administrative staffing to
provide more women officer role models for both male and
female midshipmen at the Academy. (pp. 22-23).
Recommendation No. 5: The Women's Midshipmen
Study Group should continue in existence and should report
to the Board of Visitors, through the Superintendent, on the
status of women's issues and implementation of its
recommendations at each meeting of the Board of Visitors.
(p. 23)
:
Recommendation No. 6: The Board of Visitors
should receive a briefing at each meeting on the status and
disposition of disciplinary cases involving allegations of
sexual, racial or ethnic harassment, discrimination or
hazing. (p. 23).
Recommendation No. 7: The Superintendent of the
Naval Academy should be appointed for a minimum five year
tour of duty. (p. 24).
Recommendation No. 8: The Reevaluation and
Reappointment (R&R) Program should be terminated.
(pp. 24-25).
3
Recommendation No. 9: The Board of Visitors
should more actively pursue its statutory responsibilities.
(p. 25)
Respectfully submitted,
Barbara A. Mikulski,
United States Senator
Helen D. Bentley
Member of Congress
FitzGerald Bemiss
James M. Cannon
Arthur B. Culvahouse, Jr.
Chairperson
4
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
01/22/91
NOTE TO RECORDS MANAGEMENT
The 'original' Boyden Gray memo to
the President is being kept in
Phil Brady's (tickler file) office
for response from Boyden Gray on
the President's question.
Sharon Wagner
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
03a. Note
The President to Boyden/John Sununu
1/22/91
P-S
Re: Amendment Options (1 pp.)
Open on Expiration of PRA
(Document Follows)
By (NLGB) on 4/7/05
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff to the President, Office of the
Series:
Brady, Philip D.
Subseries:
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Chron File 1/91 [2]
Date Closed:
6/8/2000
OA/ID Number:
05480-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1999-0735-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA)
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM Removed as a personal record misfile.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DATE:
1-22-91
FROM THE PRESIDENT
To:
Boyden/ John Sununu
I checked three of hte four options.
I would like advice on (2). I am
inclined ot feel that if one sits
out a hwile, he should be allowed
to run again.
But, is there a a way to do this
whole limitation question
by encouraging the states ot take actic
or do we have to sponsor a
Constiutional; Amendment.
I worry abotu trying to amend
for so mmany different causes,
(Balanced budget, flag, etc etc.)
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
03b. Memo
C. Boyden Gray to the President
1/18/91
P/S
Re: Options for a Constitutional Amendment Limiting
Congressional Terms (4 pp.)
Open on Expiration of PRA
(Document Follows)
By
(NLGB) on615/05
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff to the President, Office of the
Series:
Brady, Philip D.
Subseries:
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Chron File 1/91 [2]
Date Closed:
6/8/2000
OA/ID Number:
05480-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1999-0735-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM Removed as a personal record misfile.
THE WHITE HOUSE
washington
91 JAN 18 PM 6: 35
January 18, 1991
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
1-22-91
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
C. BOYDEN GRAY cmh
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Options for a Constitutional Amendment Limiting
Congressional Terms
We are currently preparing a draft constitutional amendment to
limit the term of service of U.S. Senators and Representatives.
Before we can draft such an amendment, we need your guidance on
several key provisions. This memorandum explains briefly the
various state provisions recently enacted and sets forth the
options available to us.
BACKGROUND
Three states, California, Colorado, and Oklahoma, have recently
adopted some form of term limitation for their state legislators.
One state, Colorado, has also amended its Constitution to limit
the terms of its U.S. Senators and Representatives as well. Each
of these proposals differs slightly from the other two in regards
to the term of service permitted, whether the limitation applies
to total service or merely prohibits serving consecutive terms,
and whether the limitation covers service in both houses of the
legislature.
California. California's constitutional amendment finds that the
"increased concentration of political power in the hands of
incumbent representatives has made our electoral system less
free, less competitive, and less representative,' resulting in "a
class of career politicians," who have "become representatives of
the bureaucracy, rather than of the people whom they are elected
to represent." The amendment limits the terms of state senators
to two four-year terms and state representatives to three two-
year terms.
Colorado. The Colorado amendment limits the terms of U.S.
Senators to two consecutive six-year terms and the terms of U.S.
Representative to six consecutive two-year terms. State senators
are limited to two consecutive four-year terms; and state
representatives to four consecutive two-year terms. Terms are
considered consecutive unless they are at least four years apart.
Oklahoma. The Oklahoma amendment provides that no one shall be
eligible to serve more than 12 years in the Oklahoma State
Legislature. The amendment specifically provides that years in
the legislature need not be consecutive and that years of service
in both the Senate and the House of Representatives shall be
included in determining eligibility.
OPTIONS IN DRAFTING A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
As the various proposals of California, Colorado, and Oklahoma
demonstrate, there are a number of ways of approaching term
limitations. We need your guidance on three interrelated
questions: (1) How long shall U.S. Senators and Representatives
be allowed to serve? (2) Shall the limitation apply to total
terms or only to consecutive terms? (3) Shall the limitation
apply to service in both houses? Each of these options are
discussed briefly below.
(1). Limit on Term of Service, Fundamental to any term
limitation proposal is the limit on the number of years or the
number of terms that a senator or representative may serve. The
term of service limit most frequently mentioned is 12 years for
Senators and Representatives, although Colorado and California
permit state senators to serve longer than state representatives.
A further option as to whether the time limitation applies to
consecutive terms only or to total years of service is addressed
below.
(a) Term Limits for U.S. Senators. Anything less than two
terms (12 years) would seem unreasonably short;
anything more than 12 years would seem to defeat the
purpose for the amendment. The 12 year limit is
reasonable and finds support in the press and in the
three states that have enacted term limitations.
DECISION: The term limit amendment shall provide that
no U.S. Senator shall serve more than two
terms.
Approve
Approve as modified
Disapprove
(b) Term Limits for U.S. Representatives. There is no
compelling argument for limiting Representatives to a
different term of service than Senators, and different
term limits would undoubtedly deflect debate from the
principle of term limits to the nuances.
2
DECISION: The term limit amendment shall provide that
no U.S. Representative shall serve more than
six terms.
Approve
Approve as modified
Disapprove
(2). Limiting Total Terms or Consecutive Terms. There are two
basic options here. One option (followed by California and
Oklahoma) limits the total number of terms or years that state
senators and representatives may serve without regard to whether
the terms were served consecutively. This option reflects a
philosophy that the legislature should be representative of the
public, and that that can best be accomplished by rotating public
office. This proposal gives finality to public service in the
legislature. On the other hand, this option would prevent the
electorate from selecting citizens with prior legislative
experience.
A second option (followed by Colorado) would prohibit U.S.
Senators and Representatives from serving more than a specified
number of consecutive terms. Under this option a U.S. Senator,
for example, could serve two terms, sit out for a term and then
stand for election again. This proposal is similar to laws in
many states which apply to gubernatorial terms and similar to the
limitation on Presidential terms found in the 22nd Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution. It has the advantage of allowing the
electorate to choose experienced representatives for office,
while at the same time preventing those individuals from
exploiting the perquisites of elective office -- immediate access
to the press, access to Congressional media facilities, and the
frank -- to retain the seat in perpetuity. This proposal would
slow, but not prevent, lengthy service in the House or Senate.
DECISION:
The term limitation amendment shall limit
total terms or total service.
The term limitation amendment shall limit
consecutive terms.
(3). Limiting Service in Both Houses or a Single House. (This
option need be considered only if the decision in (2) is to limit
total terms or total service.) There are again two basic
options. Under the first (adopted by Oklahoma), service in both
houses is considered in determining eligibility. This option
3
effectively rotates the seats and prevents a member who has
served the limit from using the perquisites of office to run for
a seat in the other house.
Under the second option (followed by California and Colorado)
members of one house, who are no longer eligible for re-election
to that house, may run for a seat in the other body. This option
focuses more narrowly on rotating membership in a single house.
DECISION:
The limitation on total service shall
include service in both houses of Congress.
The limitation on total service shall apply
to service in a single house in Congress.
4
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
04a. Note
The President to Boyden/John Sununu
1/22/91
Re: Amendment Options (1 pp.)
Open on
Expiration of PRA
(Document Follows)
By
(NLGB) on 7105
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff to the President, Office of the
Series:
Brady, Philip D.
Subseries:
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Chron File 1/91 [2]
Date Closed:
6/8/2000
OA/ID Number:
05480-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1999-0735-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRAJ
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA)
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DATE:
1-22-91
FROM THE PRESIDENT
To:
Boyden/ John Sununu
I checked three of hte four options.
I would like advice on (2). I am
inclined ot feel that if one sits
out a hwile, he should be allowed
to run again.
But, is there a a way to do this
whole limitation question
by encouraging the states ot take actio
or do we have to. sponsor a
Constiutional; Amendment.
I worry abotu trying to amend
for so mmany different causes,
(Balanced budget, flag, etc etc.)
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
04b. Memo
C. Boyden Gray to the President
1/18/91
P-5
Re: Options for a Constitutional Amendment Limiting
Congressional Terms (4 pp.)
Open on Expiration of PRA
(Document Follows)
By
(NLGB)
on
6/7/05
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff to the President, Office of the
Series:
Brady, Philip D.
Subseries:
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Chron File 1/91 [2]
Date Closed:
6/8/2000
OA/ID Number:
05480-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1999-0735-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - 15 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information I(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRAJ
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
91 JAN 18 PM 6: 35
January 18, 1991
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
1-22-91
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
C. BOYDEN GRAY cmh
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Options for a Constitutional Amendment Limiting
Congressional Terms
We are currently preparing a draft constitutional amendment to
limit the term of service of U.S. Senators and Representatives.
Before we can draft such an amendment, we need your guidance on
several key provisions. This memorandum explains briefly the
various state provisions recently enacted and sets forth the
options available to us.
BACKGROUND
Three states, California, Colorado, and Oklahoma, have recently
adopted some form of term limitation for their state legislators.
One state, Colorado, has also amended its Constitution to limit
the terms of its U.S. Senators and Representatives as well. Each
of these proposals differs slightly from the other two in regards
to the term of service permitted, whether the limitation applies
to total service or merely prohibits serving consecutive terms,
and whether the limitation covers service in both houses of the
legislature.
California. California's constitutional amendment finds that the
"increased concentration of political power in the hands of
incumbent representatives has made our electoral system less
free, less competitive, and less representative," resulting in "a
class of career politicians," who have "become representatives of
the bureaucracy, rather than of the people whom they are elected
to represent." The amendment limits the terms of state senators
to two four-year terms and state representatives to three two-
year terms.
Colorado. The Colorado amendment limits the terms of U.S.
Senators to two consecutive six-year terms and the terms of U.S.
Representative to six consecutive two-year terms. State senators
are limited to two consecutive four-year terms; and state
representatives. to four consecutive two-year terms. Terms are
considered consecutive unless they are at least four years apart.
Oklahoma. The Oklahoma amendment provides that no one shall be
eligible to serve more than 12 years. in the Oklahoma State
Legislature. The amendment specifically provides that years in
the legislature need not be consecutive and that years of service
in both the Senate and the House of Representatives shall be
included in determining eligibility.
OPTIONS IN DRAFTING A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
As the various proposals of California, Colorado, and Oklahoma
demonstrate, there are a number of ways of approaching term
limitations. We need your guidance on three interrelated
questions: (1) How long shall U.S. Senators and Representatives
be allowed to serve? (2) Shall the limitation apply to total
terms or only to consecutive terms? (3) Shall the limitation
apply to service in both houses? Each of these options are
discussed briefly below.
(1). Limit on Term of Service. Fundamental to any term
limitation proposal is the limit on the number of years or the
number of terms that a senator or representative may serve. The
term of service limit most frequently mentioned is 12 years for
Senators and Representatives, although Colorado and California
permit state senators to serve longer than state representatives.
A further option as to whether the time limitation applies to
consecutive terms only or to total years of service is addressed
below.
(a) Term Limits for U.S. Senators. Anything less than two
terms (12 years) would seem unreasonably short;
anything more than 12 years would seem to defeat the
purpose for the amendment. The 12 year limit is
reasonable and finds support in the press and in the
three states that have enacted term limitations.
DECISION: The term limit amendment shall provide that
no U.S. Senator shall serve more than two
terms.
Approve
Approve as modified
Disapprove
(b) Term Limits for U.S. Representatives. There is no
compelling argument for limiting Representatives to a
different term of service than Senators, and different
term limits would undoubtedly deflect debate from the
principle of term limits to the nuances.
2
DECISION: The term limit amendment shall provide that
no U.S. Representative shall serve more than
six terms.
Approve
Approve as modified
Disapprove
(2). Limiting Total Terms or Consecutive Terms. There are two
basic options here. One option (followed by California and
Oklahoma) limits the total number of terms or years that state
senators and representatives may serve without regard to whether
the terms were served consecutively. This option reflects a
philosophy that the legislature should be representative of the
public, and that that can best be accomplished by rotating public
office. This proposal gives finality to public service in the
legislature. On the other hand, this option would prevent the
electorate from selecting citizens with prior legislative
experience.
A second option (followed by Colorado) would prohibit U.S.
Senators and Representatives from serving more than a specified
number of consecutive terms. Under this option a U.S. Senator,
for example, could serve two terms, sit out for a term and then
stand for election again. This proposal is similar to laws in
many states which apply to gubernatorial terms and similar to the
limitation on Presidential terms found in the 22nd Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution. It has the advantage of allowing the
electorate to choose experienced representatives for office,
while at the same time preventing those individuals from
exploiting the perquisites of elective office -- immediate access
to the press, access to Congressional media facilities, and the
frank -- to retain the seat in perpetuity. This proposal would
slow, but not prevent, lengthy service in the House or Senate.
DECISION:
The term limitation amendment shall limit
total terms or total service.
The term limitation amendment shall limit
consecutive terms.
(3). Limiting Service in Both Houses or a Single House. (This
option need be considered only if the decision in (2) is to limit
total terms or total service.) There are again two basic
options. Under the first (adopted by Oklahoma), service in both
houses is considered in determining eligibility. This option
3
effectively rotates the seats and prevents a member who has
served the limit from using the perquisites of office to run for
a seat in the other house.
Under the second option (followed by California and Colorado)
members of one house, who are no longer eligible for re-election
to that house, may run for a seat in the other body. This option
focuses more narrowly on rotating membership in a single house.
DECISION:
The limitation on total service shall
1
include service in both houses of Congress.
The limitation on total service shall apply
to service in a single house in Congress.
4
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date: 01/22/91
FOR:
SHIRLEY GREEN
FROM: PHILLIP BRADY
Assistant to the President
and Staff Secretary
Information
XX
Action
Let's Discuss
JAN 10 '91 12:39 AMERICAN STEEL FOUDRIES PURC
P.1/3
NORMAN A. BERG
POTUS
1508 JAMON ROAD
WHEATON, ILLINOIS 60187
has not
seen
January 10, 1991
20 corresponder
President George M. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear President Bush,
You have the unqualified support of my wife and
myself with regards to your handling of the Middle East
crisis.
We think you are doing a splendidjob, and we want you
to know that we support you in every aspect of your handling
of this, a most difficult situation.
Sincerely,
Norm and Shere Berg
Post-It brand fax transmittal memo 7671
Co. To George Bush
# of pages 3
Co. From n Berg
Dept.
Phone #
Fax #
Fax #
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DATE: 01/22/91
NOTE FOR: THE CHIEF OF STAFF
The President has reviewed the attached, and it is
forwarded to you for your:
Information
XIX
Action
Thank you.
PHILLIP D. BRADY
Assistant to the President
and Staff Secretary
(x2702)
cc:
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
The
VP
MEMO
Heritage Foundation
To:
All Interested Parties
From:
David M. Mason Director, Executive Branch Liaison
Date:
This
wal
January 10, 1990
John
Subject:
Policy Review interview with Newt Gingrich
wp
Iw
with
"I didn't torpedo the budget deal. The American people
did, " argues Newt Gingrich in the upcoming issue of Policy
Review.
In this advance copy of his interview, Gingrich discusses
the mistakes of the budget negotiations, why he was almost
defeated in his reelection bid, what the Bush administration
needs to do to shore up Republican support in the Congress, and
how the GOP can do better in congressional elections in 1992.
According to Gingrich, "the White House needs three things
it doesn't have now: a visionary agenda, a consistent
communications strategy to articulate and reinforce that agenda
among the American people, and a grass-roots outreach operation
that will overwhelm the Washington establishment if it resists
the President's reforms."
I trust that you will find this article interesting. If you
have any comments or questions, please feel free to contact me.
214 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20002
(202) 546-4400
MIRACLE WHIP
Can Newt Gingrich Save the Bush Presidency?
DEC 13 1990
AN INTERVIEW BY ADAM MEYERSON
N
ever one to shy away from a fight, House Minority
Another important lesson of 1990 is that if you don't
Whip Newt Gingrich (R-GA) became a true conservative
run, you can't win. In Virginia, not one of the five
hero this past October when he followed the lead of
Democratic incumbents in the House was challenged.
Republican backbenchers and came out against Presi-
All five Republicans were. Is it any surprise, looking at
dent Bush's budget agreement. The shabby treatment
the arithmetic, that the Democrats picked up a seat? No
he then received from the White House further strained
one predicted a Republican would beat Douglas Bosco
relations between the administration and conservatives,
in California, Doug Walgren in Pennsylvania, or Robert
already badly damaged by the president's betrayal of
Kastenmeier in Wisconsin, but we pulled off victories
his tax promise.
because we had someone running. The GOP needs 210
In an interview with Policy Review editor Adam Meyer-
serious challengers if it's going anywhere in '92.
son in November 1990, Gingrich discussed the most
serious mistakes in the budget negotiations, how House
P.R.: Presumably, one of the differences between 1978-
Republicans and the White House can work together if
80-84 and 1986-88-90 is that conservative grass-roots
the White House is interested, how the GOP can do
groups are much less involved in congressional elections
better in congressional elections, and why he came so
than they used to be.
close to losing his own race in Georgia.
Gingrich: I do think conservative grass-roots efforts have
Policy Review: The elections in 1990 were the third dis-
lost momentum in the past four to six years. I don't
aster in a row for House Republicans. Why were
see the same drive and energy among the activists that
Republicans so successful in picking up House seats in
I saw in the early '80s. Maybe they have lost faith in
1978, 1980, and 1984? And why did they lose seats in
Congress as a place to get things done. Perhaps the
1986, 1988, and 1990? Have Republicans abandoned
national mood has shifted, with new issues such as en-
issues and coalition strategies that used to work for
vironmentalism becoming a little more important. But
them? Are there some issues that worked once for the
in the past year we've seen the conservative grass roots
GOP but don't work any more?
aroused over the child-care and quota bills. I expect
we'll see a revival of conservative activism if the
Gingrich: I don't agree that 1990 was a disaster-the
Democrats move left and adopt a more union-driven
party in the White House usually loses seats in off-year
agenda.
elections, especially third-term off-year elections. What
we lost was the opportunity to make history-by beating
P.R.: Have the Reagan Democrats been going back to
the odds and picking up seats in the House and Senate
the Democratic Party in congressional elections, and if
as well as a few governorships.
so, why? How do Republicans get them back?
Obviously anti-Communism isn't the issue it used to
be. But one of the lessons of 1990 is that the tax issue
Gingrich: The Reagan Democrats voted Republican be-
still works. Anti-tax Democrats beat incumbent Repub-
cause of the no-new-taxes pledge, strong Republican
lican governors in Nebraska and Kansas. Republicans
positions on foreign policy and Communism, and the
John Engler in Michigan and George Voinovich in Ohio
sense among many Democrats that the national
won on an anti-tax platform. Even Mario Cuomo got the
Democratic leadership was unacceptable to their values.
message, and has just introduced a no-new-taxes budget.
In addition to his tax reversal, President Bush made a
The values of the Reagan movement still win at the polls,
terrible mistake by constantly inviting House Speaker
as we saw with the defeats of Big Green in California and
Tom Foley, Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell,
of Jim Hightower in Texas. Republicans who have strayed
and other congressional Democrats down to the White
from Reaganism tended to get hurt.
House for negotiations and photo opportunities. This
14
Policy Review
DEC 13 1990
3
Drawing by Alexander Hunter for Policy Review
Winter 1991
15
DEC 1 4 1990
legitimized the Democratic leadership in the eyes of
Gingrich: There are four main reasons I came so close
the American people.
to losing. First, my district sent me a message: come on
Still, Republican victories in North Carolina, South
home. People said they wanted me to be a representative
Carolina, and Alabama showed that in parts of the
first, and a whip second. They wanted to see me a little
country the Reagan coalition is alive and well. Phil
less on the "Today Show" and a little more in Clayton
Gramm, who is becoming a major conservative spokes-
County. Bob Michel warned me of this. He said he had
man, won more than 60 percent of the vote-the highest
his closest race right after he was elected minority leader.
margin ever for a Republican Senate candidate in
Second, my opposition to federal intervention in the
Texas-with the support of a lot of Democrats. In Califor-
Eastern strike clearly hurt. A lot of my constituents work
nia, Pete Wilson used the quota issue very effectively in
at the Atlanta airport, which is a big hub for Eastern.
The machinists union remained deeply bitter about my
stand, and actively worked against me.
Third, the Republican ticket was weaker than I
A free society functions well
thought in Georgia. We had a terrific year in '88, but in
'90 there was an anti-tax vote against Republican officials
only if there is honesty.
in two of my counties.
Fourth, my support for the congressional pay raise
That's why breaking the
also hurt. My opponent sent out five pieces of direct mail
on the pay raise.
no-new-taxes promise was so
What have I learned? I'm going to spend much more
time in my district, get on the airplane more often to
destructive.
come home. I would not change my vote on the Eastern
strike. I think I did the right thing for the country. And
I would rather pay the price of running harder in the
district than voting for something I don't believe in.
his gubernatorial campaign to break up Dianne
Feinstein's coalition and win Democratic votes, especially
P.R.: What were the president's major mistakes in the
from Asians.
budget agreement?
The way to win the support of Reagan Democrats
hasn't changed: We have to show that the Democratic
Gingrich: In retrospect, Bush shouldn't have gone to
Party is irresponsible on crime, values, fiscal issues, and
the summit at all. He's head of one of two teams in
foreign policy.
the Super Bowl, not commissioner of the National Foot-
ball League. Any time he negotiates with the Democratic
P.R.: What effect did the budget controversy and Presi-
leadership, he weakens his own team. For the same
dent Bush's reversal of his no-new-taxes pledge have on
reason, it was a mistake that I initially joined him.
congressional races?
Giving up the tax pledge was a terrible error, because
it struck at the core of people's respect for politicians.
Gingrich: They were harmful at the margins. Our great
Bush had built up a rapport with the American people,
loss was the opportunity to gain seats rather than lose
who thought he was someone who would do what he
them. The election results in places like New York and
promised. They trusted him. Losing that trust was a more
New Jersey showed how vulnerable the Cuomo-Florio
serious consequence of Bush's raising taxes than any
Democrats were. But our side got confused by the rever-
damage done to the economy. Americans are now going
sal of the tax pledge. A lot of Republican voters stayed
to find it harder to trust any politician.
home. The breaking of a campaign commitment
Another error has to be the White House's failure to
flowered the Republican Party's believability. And the
develop a consistent communications strategy. The presi-
president's fund-raising ability was substantially
dent started with a strong bargaining position on almost
weakened in October, which may have had an effect
every issue he cared about, but the strength of his hand
on some close races.
was seriously eroded because he failed to cultivate the
support of the American people.
P.R.: In your own race, were you helped or hurt by your
Capital gains is one of the best examples. This was,
opposition to the summit agreement?
and is, a winnable issue. The American people want more
investment, they want better jobs, they want economic
Gingrich: I was hurt either way. I ended up losing votes
growth; lowering capital gains taxes is a way to achieve
from Republicans angry with me for going against the
all these things. In October '89, the House carried a
president. I also would have lost votes of conservative
capital gains tax cut, without a tax increase, by 264 votes.
Democrats, independents, and Republicans if I didn't
By October '90 we ended up with a tax increase without
go against him.
a capital gains cut. Without a coherent communications
strategy, the administration was put on the psychological
P.R.: What other reasons do you give for your own brush
defensive. The president let the Democrats define the
with defeat? Are there issues, such as the Eastern Air
capital gains issue as one of rich against poor. It's not
Lines strike, where you would respond differently if
It's an issue of growth.
you could do it over again?
One last mistake was Budget Director Richard
16
Policy Review
Darman's decision to make a deal with Senator Robert
P.R.: Can conservative House Republicans work with
Byrd. The result was a fiasco-a more than 10 percent
Chief of Staff John Sununu after what he has been
increase in discretionary spending in the name of fixing
saying about them?
the deficit! This was clearly a victory of Washington
insiders over the American people.
Gingrich: We can work with Sununu. I'm encouraged
by the choice of Bill Bennett as Republican National
P.R.: What lessons do you hope the White House will
Committee chairman. The sniping we have seen from
learn from the budget fiasco?
the White House doesn't help President Bush or the
Republican Party. Some of it has been childish. But we
Gingrich: That in '91 and '92 the Democrats should be
want to help the president succeed. If the White House
dealt with at arm's length, and with a veto strategy. And
says it wants to cooperate, and the offer is sincere, we'd
that cutting spending, not raising taxes, is the best op-
like to work with them. The next couple of months will
portunity to build a majority.
tell us how sincere they are.
I also hope the White House will work on its com-
munications strategy right away. In the Persian Gulf crisis
P.R.: What role should the House minority whip play
we're seeing the same problem we saw with the budget.
when House Republicans and the president disagree
The president started with a very strong domestic hand
about a major issue?
in his response to Saddam Hussein. But without a con-
sistent communications strategy, his position has been
Gingrich: I represent the 6th District of Georgia, and
eroding week by week. The president will have to resolve
as whip I represent the House Republican Party. I don't
this weakness if he hopes to do well in 1992.
represent the president. My duty was to stand with the
P.R.: What have you learned from your own role in the
budget agreement? Did we get a worse budget deal
because you helped torpedo the first one, and if so,
I didn't torpedo the budget
was it worth it?
deal. The American people
Gingrich: I should have been negative about the budget
summit much earlier. I should have reacted to initial
did.
discussions of tax increases much more publicly and
strongly than I did. Allowing comity in negotiations to
prevail over the articulation of values was a mistake.
I didn't torpedo the budget deal. The American
60 percent of House Republicans who voted against the
people did. The president asked for their support; he
budget agreement. I'm prepared to be President Bush's
got their rejection. In my office, 83 percent of 775 phone
ally, not his deputy floor manager.
calls were against the deal. The president then had the
option of letting the deal collapse and going to veto
P.R.: What advice would you give the White House in
strategy. It's not my fault that when the country rejected
terms of its operations?
the deal, the White House decided to cut a worse deal
with the Democrats. That's Darman's problem, not
Gingrich: The White House needs three things it doesn't
mine.
have now: a visionary agenda, a consistent communica-
tions strategy to articulate and reinforce that agenda
P.R.: What are the most effective ways President Bush
among the American people, and a grass-roots outreach
and House Republicans can work together? Are there
operation that will overwhelm the Washington estab-
enough conservative Democrats for Bush to build a
lishment if it resists the president's reforms.
conservative base comparable to Reagan's boll-weevil
The White House also has to stop thinking that
coalition in 1981 and 1982?
politics and governing can be separated. The American
people don't wear one hat as citizens and another hat
Gingrich: House Republicans and the president have
as voters. You cannot manipulate the American people
far more in common than the president has with the
by cynically running political campaigns differently than
Democratic leadership. We ought to sit down and lay
the way you run the country. Americans are looking for
out a reform agenda not just for Republicans but for
genuine ideals and values in politics. They want politics
all Americans.
to reinforce governing.
The president has to pursue a veto strategy, and we
can give him the votes to make it succeed. There aren't
P.R.: What explains the relatively high-22 percent-
enough conservative Democrats to win 218-vote victories.
black vote for Republican congressional candidates in
But there are more than enough conservative Repub-
1990? What should the GOP do to increase that per-
licans and Democrats for the president to win the 146
centage?
votes he needs to sustain vetoes. The goal should be two
years of vetoing bad legislation, bringing spending under
Gingrich: The black community is increasingly interested
control, and defining where we would take the country,
in becoming part of mainstream America. More and
plus finding 210 Republican candidates to run in '92.
more blacks are joining the middle class, going to school,
Winter 1991
17
DEC 1 2 THE
building businesses and professional careers. I think it's
Conservative Republicans are opposed to quotas precise-
entirely natural that more and more, especially younger
ly because we're against people like David Duke. We are
blacks, are voting Republican.
explicitly for integration and civil rights for everyone-
Gary Franks' victory in Connecticut this past year was
but civil rights based on individual characteristics, not
very important. We now have a conservative Republican
genetic code. I would urge President Bush to sign the
in the Congressional Black Caucus. Other rising conser-
LaFalce bill, which would protect civil rights, and at the
vative spokesmen-Keith Butler in Detroit, Ken Black-
same time be very firm against quotas.
P.R.: What are the cutting-edge issues for conservatives
in the next two years?
President Bush has to pursue
Gingrich: America is much more prepared for systematic
a veto strategy. House
reform than its politicians are. Big-city schools don't
teach. Health care is too expensive and chaotic. Crime
Republicans can give him the
is rampant. Most government is much too bureaucratic.
Probably no more than 25 percent of the American
votes to make it succeed.
people would say the current system works and that we
just have to raise taxes for it to work better. The other
75 percent will embrace an agenda of systematic reform.
Reform conservatism means taking government
well in Cincinnati, Louis Sullivan at Health and Human
seriously. If there's going to be a Department of Labor,
Services, to name just a few-are providing a new kind
conservatives have to know how to run it. We have to
of black leadership. I hope and expect that black support
know enough of the details to know how to give each
for Republicans will go up.
program and agency a thorough overhaul.
I see seven key words for the conservative reform
P.R.: Why do you think David Duke won so many votes
agenda. Safety-both personal and national. Working-
in Louisiana? Is public sentiment against racial quotas
a strong economy, a welfare system that encourages
growing, and if so, is there a way to address the concerns
work, homework. Saving-IRAs for everybody, savings
of quota opponents in a way that isn't racially polarizing?
plans for health costs. Investing-a good start would be
capital gains tax cuts. Learning-whether through Polly
Gingrich: One of the unsung positives of 1990 is the
Williams's vouchers or the earning by learning plan in
pro-civil rights, anti-quota argument that the president
Georgia or decentralized, computerized learning by
has been articulating. Being against quotas and for in-
adults. Health-environmental protection, incentives
tegration is overwhelmingly the majority opinion in
for personal health. Honesty. The last theme is where
America. It is also a position a very significant part of
breaking the no-tax-increase promise was so destructive.
the black community feels comfortable with.
A free society functions well only if there is honesty.
Quotas are the way to get David Duke more votes.
Cynicism and corruption destroy a free society.
18
Policy Review
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 22, 1991
NOTE TO MARLIN FITZWATER
Pursuant to our conversation
the attached has been approved
and is ready for release.
Phil.
Phillip D. Brady
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
January 22, 1991
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
I have today regretfully accepted the resignation of Susan
Engeleiter as Administrator of the Small Business Administration
to be effective on or before May 1, 1991. Susan has notified me
that she intends to return to the Midwest to pursue a career in
the private sector.
When I asked Susan to join my Administration in May 1989, I gave
her the assignment of revitalizing the SBA and setting it upon a
stable course for the future -- a course of encouraging
entrepreneurship and helping men and women of all ethnic and
economic groups utilize small business ownership as a path to
full participation in the American economy. She has certainly
accomplished that important mission.
In addition, she has been an effective advocate for women and
minorities in this Administration, serving as Chairwoman of the
National Women's Business Council, a member of the President's
Commission on Minority Business Development and successfully
expanding the Women's Network for Entrepreneurial Training to a
nationwide mentoring program for new business owners.
Administrator Engeleiter has been a forceful advocate for small
businesses throughout the country and a valued member of this
Administration. I sincerely thank Susan for her service. Both
Barbara and I wish her the very best as she returns home to the
Midwest.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date: 1/18
1
91 JAN 18 PM 10: 54
TO: Sharon Phil Phil
FROM:
Special MICHAEL and Executive Assistant P. JACKSON Secretary to the President mf
for Cabinet Liaison
No changes, except Cab.
Correspondence
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
01/19/91
Phil- FVI
TO:
GENERAL SCOWCROFT
FROM:
PHILLIP D. BRADY
Assistant to the President and
Staff Secretary
The attached has been forwarded
to the President
(The attached was not
included in the Senior
Staff's copy of the
Cabinet Report.)
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
01/19/91
TO:
THE CHIEF OF STAFF
FROM:
PHILLIP D. BRADY
Assistant to the President and
Staff Secretary
The attached has been forwarded
to the President
(The attached was not
included in the Senior
Staff's copy of the
Cabinet Report.)
Cabinet
Correspondence
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
DEAR Mr. PRESIOUS,
THURSDAY, JANUARY 17
How Proun we WERE of You ADDRESS TO The
NATION ON The PERSIAN GOLF
PLEASE KNOW THAT You Anc IN an THOUGHTS Am
PRACERS THESE CHALLIN aws TIMES
1/a Ans Yan FAMILY
GINER AUSI Jean an BIOTTO Wir
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
01/18/91
TO:
PATTY PRESOCK
FROM:
PHILLIP D. BRADY
Assistant to the President and
Staff Secretary
The attached has been forwarded
to the President on the early
Saturday morning run to
Camp David.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 18, 1991
MR. PRESIDENT:
General Scowcroft will deliver
the briefing paper for your
meeting with former Prime
Minister Lee Kwan Yew to you
this weekend at Camp David.
Phillip D. Brady
SCHEDULE OF THE PRESIDENT
Monday, January 21, 1991
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Birthday Holiday Observed
B Camp David
TBD
B Arrive White House
South Lawn
5:00 pm
Meeting with former
Residence
(60 min)
Prime Minister of Singapore
Lee Kwan Yew
(Scowcroft)
(Distributed Separately)
UNP 01/18/91
4:00 pm
The President's Schedule
JANUARY 1991
Issue: 01/18/91
SUNDAY
MONDAY
TUESDAY
WEDNESDAY
THURSDAY
FRIDAY
SATURDAY
1
New Years Day
2
3
Senste Convenee
4
5
7:50 Photo Op
0.00 Mtg. with Select
B 7:15 Coffee with Mayor
Proposed & Tentative
Members of Congress
Bharon Pratt Dtxon
* 10:46 Mtg. w/Sec. General of
for Administrative
8:30 Congressional
8:30 Coffee with House
the U.N.
11:30 Photo Ope
Leadership Meeting
Republicans
Use Only
12:00 Lunch with VP
10:00 Staff Time
10:00 Radio Taping
1:30 Mig. w/Sec. Baker
11:00 Mig. with Sec. Baker
B* 12:00 Lunch w/Dr. & Mrs.
T Tentative
B* 2:30 Depart for Washington
3:30 Video Taping Session
Javier Perez
B First Lady
3:00 Admin. Time
1:15 Staff Time
de Cuslier
Away from
White House
B 3:00 Antive White House
3:15 Radio Taping
3:20 Photo Op
B 3:30 Depart for Camp David
RON WASHINGTON. D.C.
RON WASHINGTON. D.C.
RON WASHINGTON. D.C.
RON CAMP DAVID
RON CAMP DAVID
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
7:30 Hold
7:15 Hold
7:45 Photo Op
9:30 Video Taping Bession
8:30 Bridet w/Members of
10:00 Economic Policy
10:00 Presen. of the 1990
10:00 Staff Time
Congress
11:00 Staff Time
Council Mtg.
Senior Exec. Service
Presidential Rank
11:45 Photo Op with Crew of
10:00 Mtg. w/Sen. Moynihan,
3:25 Arrive White House
1:30 Staff Time
1:30 Staff Time
Awards
Space Shuttle Columbia
11:00 Staff Time
4:00 Press Conference
B 4:00 Arrive White House
2:45 Mtg. w/Clayton Youtter
11:30 Photo Ope
11:55 Photo w/Sen. Seymour
11:30 Photo Op with Veronica
4:40 Depart for Camp David
3:30 Mtg. with Sec. Cheney
B 3:30 Photo Op and Drop-by
12:00 Lunch with VP
Khilchevaki
Recept w/Fundralsers
1:00 Congressional
f/Eagle's Inaugural
Leadership Meeting
2:00 Mtg. w/Benator Dole
Event
2:30 Mtg. w/Senators
B 7:05 Depart for Camp David
3:55 Press Conference
5:15 Haircut
4:30 Cabinet Meeting
RON WASHINGTON. D.C.
RON WASHINGTON. D.C.
RON WASHINGTON, D.C.
RON WASHINGTON. D.C.
RON WASHINGTON. D.C.
RON CAMP DAVID
RON CAMP DAVID
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
7:45 Photo Ops
8 7:30 Hold
11:50 Photo Op w/Mike Deland
9:30 Congressional
11:00 Mtg with Bec. Baker
1:30 Mtg. w/Japaness
Leadership Mtg.
12:00 Press Conference
Foreign Minister Taro
1:30 Photo Ope
1:30 Meeting with
12:30 Lunch with VP
Nakayama
B 1:45 Video Taping Bession
Sec. Baker
Arlington, VA
B 3:55 Arrive White House
2:00 Mtg. w/Joseph Wilson
2:00 Drop-by mtg. of Educ.
B* 11:00 Church Service at Ft.
Arlington, VA
4:00 Press Conference
2:45 Mtg. w/ Ambassador to
Policy Advisory Comm.
Myer
* 2:30 Pentagon Briefing
3:30 Mtg. w/Sec. Brady
New Zealand
3:00 Admin. Time
B* 3:30 Depart for Camp David
4:00 Congressional
3:00 Cabinet Mtg.
Leadership Mtg.
9:00 Press Conference
RON WASHINGTON. D.C.
RON WASHINGTON, D.C.
RON WASHINGTON, D.C.
RON WASHINGTON, D.C.
RON WASHINGTON. D.C.
RON CAMP DAVID
RON CAMP DAVID
20
21
M.L. King, Jr. B-Day
Observed
22
23
Senate Reconvenes
24
25
26
7:45 Mtg. w/Members of the
11:00 Mtg. w/Pree. Ochirbet
10:00 Congressional
RNC
of the Mongolian
Leadership Mtg.
People's Republic
12:15 Working Luncheon with
12:00 Lunch with VP
11:00 Mtg. with Sec. Baker
President Ochirbet
B TBD Arrive White House
1:15 Departure Statements
1:30 Photo Ope
B TBD Depart for Camp David
1:30 Mtg. with Sec. Baker
March of Dimes Net.I
5:00 Mtg. with former Prime
3:00 Admin. Time
Poster Child
Minister of Singapore
B* 7:15 Reserve Officers
Association Dinner
(Black Tie)
RON CAMP DAVID
RON WASHINGTON, D.C.
RON WASHINGTON, D.C,
RON WASHINGTON, D.C.
RON WASHINGTON, D.C.
RON CAMP DAVID
RON CAMP DAVID
27
28
29
30
31
B* 8:00 National Prayer
B* 8:45 Address Nt. Religious
Bridet.
Broadcasters Assoc.
# 11:00 50th Anniversary of
10:30 Congressional
10:00 Cabinet Mtg.
Four Freedoms Speech
Leadership Meeting
B 4:00 Anive White House
12:00 Lunch with VP
1:30 Meeting with
Sec. Baker
3:30 Mtg. with Sec. Cheney
3:30 Congressional Hour
3:00 Admin. Time
B* 9:00 State of the Union
Address
RON WASHINGTON, D.C.
RON WASHINGTON, D.C.
RON WASHINGTON, D.C.
RON WASHINGTON, D.C.
RON WASHINGTON, D.C.
SENSITIVE DO NOT COPY
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
91 JAN 18 PM 1: 14
January 17, 1991
ACTION
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT AND MRS. BUSH
FROM:
SIG ROGICH
AZ.
LAURIE FIRESTONE
Lf
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL FOR CHANGE IN NAME OF WHITE HOUSE CONCERT
SERIES
There has been some discussion about changing the title of the
White House concert series from "In Performance" to:
In Concert at the White House
with the President and First Lady
The change is more suitable and not only denotes the location but
the hosts as well. A new title for the program would be more
promotable and would ensure a larger viewing and listening
audience in the future.
Thank you.
Approve
Approve as amended
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
91 JAN 18 PM 3: 09
January 18, 1991
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
Fred McClure m
SUBJECT:
Weekly Report on Congressional Correspondence
Attached is a report of selected congressional mail received from
January 11 through January 17, 1991. This correspondence is
being handled by the Office of Congressional Correspondence.
Attachment
91 J"013 PM 10:54
Office of
Cabinet Affairs
OF
THE
UNITED THE STATES ST OF SALAS
CABINET
REPORT
For the Week of:
January 20 - 26
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 18, 1991
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
EDE HOLIDA
SUBJECT:
Cabinet Report -- January 20 - 26
* * * THE WEEK AHEAD * * *
AGRICULTURE
January 21. Secretary Yeutter will travel to Des Moines to
address the American Grain and Related Industries Meeting (AGRI),
a large grain marketer in Iowa. Topic: the future of world
agriculture, particularly as it relates to the grain market.
Yeutter will also meet separately with the Board of Directors of
AGRI.
January 22. Yeutter will travel to Lincoln, Nebraska to receive
the Nebraskan of the Year award given by the Rotary Club.
January 25. Yeutter will travel to Chicago to address the
membership of the Mid-America Committee for International
Business and Government Cooperation. Topic: the future of
American agriculture.
COMMERCE
January 22. Secretary Mosbacher will meet with former Singapore
Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew. Topics: the Uruguay Round, Asian
Pacific Economic Cooperation and bilateral relations. Ambassador
Hills will also meet with Lee. Topic: bilateral trade issues.
January 23. Mosbacher will meet with California Senator John
Seymour. Later in the day, he will meet with Mongolian President
Punsalmaagiyn Ochirbat. Topic: U.S. commercial opportunities in
Mongolia.
January 23. U.S. Travel and Tourism officials will sign. a
tourism agreement with Mongolia. The agreement will include a
tourism side letter that guarantees that the rights and
obligations under the trade agreement will apply to the travel
and tourism industry in Mongolia as fully as they do to all other
industries and services.