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
702230
label
Budget [1990] (1 of 2) [8]: Budget Talking Points
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
702230
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Budget [1990] (1 of 2) [8]: Budget Talking Points
citationUrl
identifierLocal
29137-004
collections
Records of the White House Office of the Chief of Staff to the President (George H. W. Bush Administration)
John Sununu Issues Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
702230
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
e0766fcb1d92af2f
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
1998-0004-F[1]; 1998-0251-F
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:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
OA/ID Number:
29137
Folder ID Number:
29137-004
Folder Title:
Budget [1990] (1 of 2) [8]: Budget Talking Points
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
15
24
6
3
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Talking Points for Coffee with
Republican Members of the House and Senate
Regarding the budget, the Democrats are passing bills that
would increase the deficit rather than reduce it. It is
clear that they will leave without having done the job to
reduce the deficit.
A $100 billion sequester should not be anyone's first
choice. Congressional enactment of a more responsible,
five-year deficit reduction program is clearly preferable.
That is why I convened a budget summit. That is why I
offered to the summit negotiators what remains the only
detailed deficit reduction plan yet put on the table. That
is why I agreed to offer a further deficit-reduction plan
just ten days ago - if the Democratic negotiators would
offer just one plan, and exchange it with us.
Last week, we informed the Democratic leadership that we
were ready to exchange plans as the Democratic leaders
suggested. They did not respond. Again this week, we
informed them that we were ready. We are still waiting for
a Democratic proposal.
Their plan seem to be: leave town for vacation.
The disruptive effects of deep across-the-board cuts lie
ahead - if the Congress does not act responsibly.
If the Democrats really care about preserving economic
growth and essential public services, the Democratic
negotiators must offer a deficit reduction plan before
leaving for vacation.
Our negotiators remain ready to meet at any time, anywhere,
to exchange serious deficit reduction proposals with the
Democratic negotiators.
I hope budget negotiations will move forward in good faith.
They should intensify in early September at the very latest.
The Congress - before adjourning for recess - must set a
firm date in September for an up-down vote on a summit
agreement.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Talking Points for Coffee with
Republican Members of the House and Senate
Regarding the budget, the Democrats are passing bills that
would increase the deficit rather than reduce it. It is
clear that they will leave without having done the job to
reduce the deficit.
A $100 billion sequester should not be anyone's first
choice. Congressional enactment of a more responsible,
five-year deficit reduction program is clearly preferable.
That is why I convened a budget summit. That is why I
offered to the summit negotiators what remains the only
detailed deficit reduction plan yet put on the table. That
is why I agreed to offer a further deficit-reduction plan
just ten days ago - if the Democratic negotiators would
offer just one plan, and exchange it with us.
Last week, we informed the Democratic leadership that we
were ready to exchange plans as the Democratic leaders
suggested. They did not respond. Again this week, we
informed them that we were ready. We are still waiting for
a Democratic proposal.
Their plan seem to be: leave town for vacation.
The disruptive effects of deep across-the-board cuts lie
ahead - if the Congress does not act responsibly.
If the Democrats really care about preserving economic
growth and essential public services, the Democratic
negotiators must offer a deficit reduction plan before
leaving for vacation.
Our negotiators remain ready to meet at any time, anywhere,
to exchange serious deficit reduction proposals with the
Democratic negotiators.
I hope budget negotiations will move forward in good faith.
They should intensify in early September at the very latest.
The Congress - before adjourning for recess - must set a
firm date in September for an up-down vote on a summit
agreement.
And just so everyone's cards are ont he table, I will veto
any spending bill that exceeds the budget I have proposed.
Until the Congress enacts a responsible, five-year program
for economic growth and deficit reduction.
And if the Democratic in Congress fail to act by October 1,
it is they who will have to bear the responsibility for the
consequences.
I need the support of each and every one of you. We must
stand together if we are going to get some action on a
sensible deficit reduction plan.
That is the message I will make sure is heard over the next
few weeks, until serious negotiations are resumed again. I
believe the public does care that the democrats have lead
congress into this deficit swamp and should know that
failure is the cause of the crunch of Sequester.
Thanks for coming, and have a safe, happy recess.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Talking Points for Coffee with
Republican Members of the House and Senate
Thank you all for coming down here today. I have a couple
of items to cover this morning. First, thank you for
helping produce a very effective parternship between the
White House and the Republicans in the House and Senate. It
has made a big difference in critical legislation. Second,
I wanted to bring you up to date on where things stand on
civil rights. And Third let you know where we stand on the
budget.
Congress will soon be leaving for August recess. The
Democrats are passing bills that would increase the deficit
rather than reduce it. It is clear that they will leave
without having done the job to reduce the deficit.
A $100 billion sequester should not be anyone's first
choice. Congressional enactment of a more responsible,
five-year deficit reduction program is clearly preferable.
That is why I convened a budget summit. That is why I
offered to the summit negotiators what remains the only
detailed deficit reduction plan yet put on the table. That
is why I agreed to offer a further deficit-reduction plan
just ten days ago - if the Democratic negotiators would
offer just one plan, and exchange it with us.
Last week, we informed the Democratic leadership that we
were ready to exchange plans as the Democratic leaders
suggested. They did not respond. Again this week, we
informed them that we were ready. We are still waiting for
a Democratic proposal.
Their plan seem to be: leave town for vacation.
The disruptive effects of deep across-the-board cuts lie
ahead - if the Congress does not act responsibly.
If the Democrats really care about preserving economic
growth and essential public services, the Democratic
negotiators must offer a deficit reduction plan before
leaving for vacation.
Our negotiators remain ready to meet at any time, anywhere,
to exchange serious deficit reduction proposals with the
Democratic negotiators.
I hope budget negotiations will move forward in good faith.
They should intensify in early September at the very latest.
The Congress - before adjourning for recess - must set a
firm date in September for an up-down vote on a summit
And just so everyone's cards are ont he table, I will veto
any spending bill that exceeds the budget I have proposed.
Until the Congress enacts a responsible, five-year program
for economic growth and deficit reduction.
And if the Democratics in Congress fail to act by October 1,
it is they who will have to bear the responsibility for the
consequences.
I need the support of each and every one of you. We must
stand together if we are going to get some action on a
sesible deficit reduction plan.
That is the message I will make sure is heard over the next
few weeks, until serious negotiations are resumed again. I
belive the public does care that the deomocrats have lead
congress into this deficit swamp and should know that
failure is the cause of the crunch of Sequester.
Thanks for coming, and have a safe, happy recess.
Thank all for comping down here 7/30/90
a couple items the cover this writing 4:15 p.m.
First, thank you we for helping produce - may affective particusly between is
(1)
The Democratically-controlled Congress will soon be leaving
white
for August recess. It is clear that they with leave without
Home
and
having done the job to reduce America's growing debt and
Republing Hunce
deficit. They are passing bills that would increase the
Senate
deficit rather than reduce it. They have passed no budget.
It has
They have offered no plan to meet their obligation to
made
produce a responsible budget.
big difference
(2) If we continue on the current Congressional path, the law
in certified
will require automatic across-the-board program cuts of
Register.
$100 billion -- so-called "sequester" starting October 1.
broand,
That is a clumsy fail-safe mechanism. But it is the law
I wantel
the only discipline we have left if, Congress failt to do
Their
job.
the Demosists in
to bring you
up to date an
(3) A $100 billion sequester should not be anyone's first
where wested
choice. It would mean cuts in virtually everything the
in ale
government touches from air traffic control to drug abuse
prevention; from military readiness to the prevention of
andjet
contagious disease. Congressional enactment of a more
process.
responsible, five-year deficit reduction program is clearly
and
preferable.
let you
(4) That is why I convened a budget summit. That is why I
know what
offered to the summit negotiators what remains the only
I will be
detailed deficit reduction plan yet put on the table. That
the daing next
over
is why I agreed to offer a further deficit-reduction plan
ten days ago -- if the Democratic negotiators would offer
just one plan, and exchange it with us.
few wash
Ten days age
(5) Last week, we informed the Democratic leadership that we
were ready to exchange our revised plan with the Democrats
in the context of the summit negotiations as the
Democratic leaders suggested. They did not respond. Again
this week, we informed them we were ready. But we have
waited in vain for a Democratic proposal.
only
(6) Their plan seems to be: leave town for vacation.
(7) But, as I have warned before: Economic growth is not as
secure as it should be. Financial markets reflect some
nervousness. The disruptive effects of deep across-the-
board cuts lie ahead -- if the Congress does not act
responsibly. This is no time for business as usual.
at all
(8) If the Democratically-controlled Congress really does care$
about preserving economic growth and essential public
services, the Democratic negotiators ought at least to offer
one deficit reduction plan before leaving for vacation.
(9) Be that as it may, our negotiators and the Republican
Congress ional negotiators remain ready to meet at any time,
anywhere to exchange serious deficit-reduction proposals
with the Democratic negotiators.
(10) I hope budget negotiations will move forward in good faith.
They should intensify in early September at the very latest.
To facilitate progress, the Congress -- before adjourning
for recess -- should set a firm date in September for an
up-down vote on a summit agreement.
(11) Until the Congress enacts a responsible, five-year program
for economic growth and deficit reduction, I will veto any
spending bill that exceeds the budget I have proposed.
(12) And if the Democratically-controlled Congress fails to act
by October 1, it is they who will have to bear the
responsibility for the consequences.
That is the message & will make sure is brand of.
was the next few weeks, until the serious
mystictions are reserved gain.
I believe the public does are that special
the Decreate have lad congress additionaly 1
it into this defect swamp and should have
that failure is the came of the crunch
of Separater
2
COMPARISON OF ADMINISTRATION AND
CONGRESSIONAL DEMOCRATIC
ACTIONS ON THE BUDGET SUMMIT
Administration Actions
May 6 --
The President calls the Bipartisan leadership of
Congress to the White House to outline the need for a
budget summit.
May 15 --
The President meets with the Congressional budget
negotiators at the White House to present the reasons
for the summit meetings.
Early
After sitting through hours of meetings that largely
June --
provide a forum for Democratic Committee Chairmen to
appeal to the negotiators to protect their programs
from cuts, the Administration's negotiators complain
about the Tuesday-Thursday schedule set by Budget
Summit Chairman Gephardt, and request a more definite
schedule with more frequent meetings.
June 20 --
The Administration revises its budget proposals to
include new proposed reductions in Defense and
entitlement programs, and incorporate some of the
proposals made in the Senate Budget Resolution.
(Saving over $50 billion in 1991.)
June 26 --
After the negotiations have stalled because of, in
part, the Democratic unwillingness to discuss spending
cuts in advance of revenue increases, the President
meets with the Bipartisan leadership and issues a
statement clearly stating that the deficit package
requires tax revenue increases, as well as several
other items.
July 5 --
Despite the fact that the members of Congress are on
their 4th of July Holiday, Administration negotiators
and staff meet with Congressional staff to convene a
special Task Force on credit reform proposals.
July 16
The Administration issues a complete update of the
estimates of the budget deficit, revising the estimate
to nearly $169 billion without taking into account
RTC.
July 26 --
For purposes of exchanging offers with the Democratic
negotiators, as agreed, the Administration and
Republican negotiators develop a plan to produce $50
billion savings in the first year and $500 billion in
savings over 5 years. No Democrat response.
Administration states and restates its willingness to
exchange offers. Democrats are unable to develop
offer; propose to delay exchange until September.
Congressional Democratic Actions
June -- Despite the Budget Summit negotiations, the House
Budget committee passes a budget resolution
with domestic discretionary totals more than
$17 billion in excess of the G-R-H baseline.
These numbers are very unlikely to reflect
what comes out of the budget summit.
June -- The House Appropriations committees begin action on
appropriation bills that almost certainly
will need to be modified once the budget
summit is completed.
June -
July --
Various House and Senate authorization committees have
passed bills that far exceed the levels
likely to come out of the budget summit.
These include:
O
Child Care bill: $22 billion over the
Administration request for 5 years
Farm bill: $7-9 billion over the
current law baseline for 5 years
AIDs prevention: $3-4 billion over the
Administration request for 5 years
June -- The Senate Budget Committee votes on a resolution that
contains billions in "IRS compliance" savings
and billions more in unreconciled -- and
therefore unachievable -- user fees and other
entitlement savings.
July
-- The Senate Budget Committee votes on a budget process
reform bill that substantially alters the
G-R-H process despite the fact that budget
process reform is one of the explicit
assignments of the summit.
July
-- House action to date on domestic discretionary
appropriation bills is $24 billion in budget
authority over 1990 enacted levels, and $14
billion in budget authority over the G-R-H
baseline, which is the 1990 enacted levels
increased by inflation.
July
-- Despite criticism of the Administration proposals, the
Democratic leadership fails to put any
proposals on the table and in fact fails to
discuss any specific proposals at all.