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
118569496
label
Miscellaneous Memos and Correspondence January 1983-March 1983 (3)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
118569496
contentType
document
title
Miscellaneous Memos and Correspondence January 1983-March 1983 (3)
citationUrl
identifierLocal
137
collections
Records of the White House Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff (Reagan Administration)
Michael K. Deaver's Correspondence Files
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
118569496
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1985-12-31
year
1985
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1981-01-01
year
1981
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
4347a8488ea65d1f
ocrText
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Digital Library Collections
This is a PDF of a folder from our textual
collections.
Collection: Deaver, Michael
Folder Title: Miscellaneous
Correspondence and Memos Jan.-March
1983 (3)
Box: 28
To see more digitized collections
visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library
To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories
visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection
Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected]
Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing
National Archives
Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/
HOLMES TUTTLE
361 NORTH LA BREA AVENUE Los ANGELES, GALIFORNIA 90036
213 935-3246
file
March 8, 1983
Mr. Mike Deaver
Deputy Chief of Staff
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Mike:
I am sending along letters I received about The Newport
Foundation. I know nothing about The Newport Foundation.
However, I advised them that I would send the letters back
to the White House for consideration. If you care to ack-
nowledge them, fine, if not, fine too.
Sincerely,
Holmes
Holmes by like
HT/b
encl.
THE NEWPORT FOUNDATION
FEB 2 22 2 1983
for Study of Major Economic Issues
Rec'd Mr. Dart's Office
400 Newport Center Drive
Suite 508
Newport Beach, California 92660
(714) 644-4311
18 February 1983
Mr. Justin Dart
Chairman of the Board
Dart Industries, Inc.
8480 Beverly Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90048
Dear Mr. Dart:
I suspect that you would be one of the first to agree that all of the brains
in this country are not necessarily concentrated in Washington, D.C.. If
you agree with this premise, then you might be willing to assist us in
getting our message, on a major economic issue, to the President for his
consideration.
Perhaps our motivations are not too different. I have reference to the
article in the L.A. Times of February 6, 1982, where you are quoted as saying,
"What America so sadly lacks are more patriots like yourself." Those of us in
the Newport Foundation will most likely never achieve your level of contri-
bution; however, we have contributed more than three years of our personal
time and effort, without any form of remuneration, in an attempt to improve
our nation's economic health. We feel we have a contribution to make, but to
date, we have been unsuccessful at reaching someone at a level in government
capable of implementing any of our suggestions.
I have avoided seeking your help because my neighbor, Mr. Ed Ramsey, has in-
formed me that the doctors want you to slow down. For this reason, we recently
sent a letter to Holmes Tuttle in hopes that he might respond to our request.
We have had no reply, so I am enclosing a copy of the letter we sent to
Mr. Tuttle for your review.
I am a U.S. Naval Reserve Officer, retired. I am interested in seeing our
nation militarily strong and economically sound so that my children and my
grandchildren can enjoy the American way of life that has in the past been
the envy of the world.
Sincerely yours,
Robert C. Baird
Robert C, Baird, Director
Energy Economics Study Group
THE NEWPORT FOUNDATION
for Study of Major Economic Issues
400 Newport Center Drive
Suite 508
Newport Beach, California 92660
(714) 644-4311
31 January 1983
Mr. Holmes Tuttle
361 N. La Brea Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90036
Dear Mr. Tuttle:
We would like to meet with you briefly to describe a matter which we
believe is critical to the continued success of the current administra-
tion and even to the future of our country.
We lead a group of business and professional citizens in Orange County
who study national economic problems. A statement of purpose of our
organization, The Newport Foundation, is provided as Enclosure (A).
The Newport Foundation and the University of Southern California Economics
Department have jointly sponsored meetings, i.e. Enclosure (B) which resulted
in a book being published, Enclosure (C). Our monthly breakfast meetings
are shown on local cable T.V. We have made three separate mailings to each
member of Congress, Enclosures (D), (E), and (F).
Our studies over the past few years have concluded that the economic health
of the nation is seriously jeopardized by the approximate $80 billion dollar
annual direct cost for imported oil. In addition, there are hidden costs
which must be borne by society. These costs are estimated, by the Institute
of Gas Technology, to be of the same magnitude as the direct costs of
importing oil. These hidden costs contribute to inflation, cause unemploy-
ment, undermine the U.S. balance of payments, weaken the currency, and add
to national security costs.
An equally serious consequence of our current situation is the risk to
national security which results from dependence upon an insecure source for
30-40% of our nation's oil needs. The strategic petroleum reserve will not
suffice if we are subjected to a total OPEC embargo or if the enemy sinks
the oil tankers during a state of war.
There has never been a more opportune time to take action to wrest control
away from the OPEC cartel, but the window of opportunity will be open for
only a short time. We can be energy independent by 1988 if the President
directs the nation to achieve it as a national goal!
Mr. Holmes Tuttle
31 January 1983
-2-
We have attempted to arrange a meeting with the President, Enclosures
G and H, but feel our prospects would be greatly enhanced by your
assistance.
Professor Nake M. Kamrany, Senior Economist, USC, Dr. Delmar Bunn,
Executive Director, The Newport Foundation, and the writer would like
to discuss our ideas with you. Brief biographical data on each of us
is contained in Enclosures (B) and (I).
May we please meet with you?
Sincerely yours,
RobertC. Baird
Robert C. Baird,
Director
Energy Economics Group
Enclosures Included
Enclosures:
(A) State of Purpose, The Newport Foundation
(B) Brochure, "Solutions to the Energy Problem: Alternative Approaches
to the U.S. Energy Crisis"
(c) Book - "U.S. Options for Energy Independence" published by Lexington
Books, Lexington, MASS., D.C. Heath and Company
(D) Pamphlet "A Basic Energy Program" published in 1979 by Citizens for
Legislative Limit of Oil Imports*
(E) Pamphlet "America Decides" published in 1980 by Citizens for
Legislative Limit of Oil Imports*
(F) Pamphlet "Need for an Oil Import Tax" published in 1982 by The
Newport Foundation
(G) Letter dated January 11, 1983 to James Baker, III, requesting a
meeting with President Reagan
(H) Letter dated January 14, 1983 to James Baker, III, commenting on
Wall Street Journal article, same date.
(I) Biographical sketch excerpt from book - "Official Who's Who in
Orange County," 1980 Edition
* The name later changed to The Newport Foundation
THE NEWPORT FOUNDATION
for Study of Major Economic Issues
400 Newport Center Drive
Suite 508
Newport Beach, California 92660
(714) 644-4311
11 January 1983
Mr. James A. Baker, III
Chief of Staff and
Assistant to the President
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Subject:
REQUEST FOR MEETING WITH PRESIDENT REAGAN
Dear Mr. Baker:
This will confirm my telephone request of Monday, January 10th. I spoke with
a secretary, Kay.
I am a Director of the Newport Foundation of Newport Beach, California, which
was formed for the study of major economic issues. It is comprised of people
in a diversity of professions, i.e., doctors, lawyers, engineers, businessmen,
economists, etc. A statement of purpose is enclosed.
We are appealing for a meeting with the President in an attempt to persuade
him to assume a leadership role in restoring the United States to a position
of energy independence. We feel this goal can be achieved within five years
with direction and leadership by the President.
As you know, the benefits of achieving energy independence are enormous. It is
a prerequisite to sound national security. Who can envision even a limited
conflict with Russia while we are importing 30% of our oil. The SPR is capable
of handling only minor disruptions in oil imports.
From an economic standpoint, direct payments for imported oil are on the order
of 60 billion dollars a year. This is a direct charge. There are indirect
costs that must be borne by our society in terms of unemployment, inflation,
loss of value of the dollar, and national security. A study by Professor Lemon
for the Institute of Gas Technology estimates that the real cost to our economy
is on the order of $100 per barrel of oil imported. This means that we are
spending on the order of $150 billion a year outside of our economy which would
not be required if we were energy independent. This constitutes a national
disaster that must be corrected if we are to restore jobs to our unemployed.
Another way of looking at this problem is a study conducted by the International
Energy Agency, which estimates that the latest oil shock of 1979-80 cost the
western industrial nations on the order of 10% of their GNP or approximately
one trillion dollars.
-2-
Mr. James A. Baker, III
11 January 1983
The subject of energy overshadows all other economic issues that we have studied
during the three years of our existence. We feel energy independence is the
single most important ingredient in action necessary to restore our nation's
economy.
The best possible near-term means of mitigating the Russian stranglehold on
Western Europe's economy, which is being applied by the Russian Yamal gasline,
is to have the United States become energy independent.
We must recognize that Russia is the world's leading oil producer. Russia is
rapidly moving toward overtaking the United States as the number one producer
of natural gas. Russia is also building large plants to produce methanol from
coal. Energy export could put Russia in a strong financial position in the
coming years.
As a result of our studies, we have suggestions on how this goal of energy inde-
pendence for the USA can be achieved by 1988, which as a consequence, will put
America back to work and reduce our deficit. We would appreciate an audience
with the President to discuss these ideas. We would be represented by:
Dr. Delmar Bunn Executive Director of the Newport Foundation
Professor Nake Kamrany - Head of Advisory Board of the Newport Foundation
and Senior Economist, University of Southern California
Robert Baird - Director, Energy Economic Studies of the Newport Foundation.
President Kennedy will be remembered for mustering our technical capability for
putting man on the moon. Let President Reagan be remembered for his leadership
in restoring energy independence to the United States.
Sincerely yours,
Robert C. Baird
Robert C. Baird
Director, Energy Economic Studies
Enclosure: Statement of Purpose
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
THE NEWPORT FOUNDATION
For Study of Major Economic Issues
400 Newport Center Drive
Suite 508
Newport Beach, CA 92660
(714) 644-4311
The Newport Foundation was born out of a recognition of the need for effective, long-range, United
States policy in numerous economic areas.
Many believe that the world is in its present serious straits in part because of the lack of prudent eco-
nomic policy. Yet in democracies it is not professional politicians, economists or single great leaders
who can alone correct this course or 'save us.' The individual citizen has a vital role in the democratic
development of effective policy. The answers must finally come from 'us.'
The Newport Foundation was organized to provide a means for thoughtful input toward sound policy
development. The Foundation is dedicated to providing a structure within which business and profes-
sional people, some of those laboring daily in the economic front lines, may creatively develop their
best concepts. It might be described as a citizens' 'think tank.'
The Foundation works simply. Each group studies an economic problem area and meets at least
monthly to share the results of its work. Currently, issues centering around energy economics, the
Japanese-American trade problem complex, and the re-tooling and productivity of America are being
studied by such groups. Guidance and instruction are provided by an economist where needed.
Periodically, programs from each group are televised to the community; feedback is encouraged. Let-
ters, brochures and papers are written; one book produced by The Newport Foundation has already
been published by a major publisher. Finally, best-developed views are communicated to national
policymakers.
The Foundation is non-partisan and party unaffiliated. Individual members are, however, active in
directions they consider vital.
The community is invited to become involved, to contribute to finding better national courses.
Interested individuals are invited to attend one or several meetings of current study groups. Participa-
tion and support are welcomed.
THE NEWPORT FOUNDATION
for Study of Major Economic Issues
400 Newport Center Drive
Suite 508
Newport Beach, California 92660
(714) 644-4311
14 January 1983
Mr. James A. Baker, III
Chief of Staff and
Assistant to the President
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Mr. Baker:
Today's Wall Street Journal mentions that the President is considering
an oil import tax. This is one of the subjects we had hoped to discuss
with him if given an opportunity in response to our letter of 11
January 1983.
We have spent three years of work on the economic aspects of an oil
import tax. Three separate mailings on this subject have been sent
over a three-year period to every Senator and Congressman in Washington.
Letters were also sent to many others in government. A copy of the
article sent with our latest mailing, March 1982, is enclosed.
We have spent more time on the subject of an oil import tax and its
economic potential than any other group in this nation. We have done
this under the leadership of the Department of Economics at the
University of Southern California. We have published a book in which
the oil import tax is discussed in depth.
We would like to talk with you and others in the White House or anyone
else close to the President.
If asked to come to Washington, the Newport Foundation would be
represented by the three individuals proposed in our 11 January 1983
letter; namely, Dr. Bunn, Professor Kamrany, and the writer.
Sincerely yours,
Robert C. Baird
Robert C. Baird
Director
Energy Economic Studies
Enc: "Need For An Oil Import Tax"
March 1982
NEED FOR AN OIL IMPORT TAX
Robert C. Baird, Director
Energy Economics Group
The Newport Foundation
Immediate enactment of a tax on imported
oil is required to stimulate growth of
domestic energy production and to reduce,
and eventually stop, the hemorrhage of
$80 billion a year which the U.S. now
pays for oil imports.
This huge payment results from the drama-
tic increase in oil prices during the last
decade controlled by the OPEC cartel and
from our national policy of suppressing
the growth of domestic oil and gas pro-
duction by price control, regulation, and
excessive taxation. The combination of
these factors has, in effect, subsidized
oil imports and insured the growth of the
OPEC cartel at the expense of the Ameri-
can consumer.
The U.S. petroleum industry is at a com-
petitive disadvantage even after the im-
portant presidential action of decontrol-
ling oil prices early in 1981. Domestic
oil production is heavily taxed in many
ways while imported oil comes in with no
U.S. tax. To decrease our dependence on
foreign oil we should be doing just the
opposite - taxing oil imports and lighten-
ing the tax load on domestic production.
We could and should be doing all we can
to develop energy resources in this coun-
try. By so doing, we can begin to put
America back to work. For example, it is
a national disgrace that we are shutting
down coal mines in Pennsylvania as
shown in ABC's "60 Minutes" a few weeks
ago.
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
THE NEWPORT FOUNDATION
For Study of Major Economic Issues
400 Newport Center Drive
Suite 508
Newport Beach, CA 92660
(714) 644-4311
The Newport Foundation was born out of a recognition of the need for effective, long-range, United
States policy in numerous economic areas.
Many believe that the world is in its present serious straits in part because of the lack of prudent eco-
nomic policy. Yet in democracies it is not professional politicians, economists or single great leaders
who can alone correct this course or 'save us.' The individual citizen has a vital role in the democratic
development of effective policy. The answers must finally come from 'us.'
The Newport Foundation was organized to provide a means for thoughtful input toward sound policy
development. The Foundation is dedicated to providing a structure within which business and profes-
sional people, some of those laboring daily in the economic front lines, may creatively develop their
best concepts. It might be described as a citizens' 'think tank.'
The Foundation works simply. Each group studies an economic problem area and meets at least
monthly to share the results of its work. Currently, issues centering around energy economics, the
Japanese-American trade problem complex, and the re-tooling and productivity of America are being
studied by such groups. Guidance and instruction are provided by an economist where needed.
Periodically, programs from each group are televised to the community; feedback is encouraged. Let-
ters, brochures and papers are written; one book produced by The Newport Foundation has already
been published by a major publisher. Finally, best-developed views are communicated to national
policymakers.
The Foundation is non-partisan and party unaffiliated. Individual members are, however, active in
directions they consider vital.
The community is invited to become involved, to contribute to finding better national courses.
Interested individuals are invited to attend one or several meetings of current study groups. Participa-
tion and support are welcomed.
dilebere
POINTS TO CONSIDER FOR SMALL BUSINESS INITIATIVES
Small business is the President's natural constituency and
represents a large percentage of the voting populatiion.
Richard Wirthlin has identified small business as an
important Reagan constituency.
Recent Heller Survey shows a 20% decline in small
businessmen who feel this Administration's policies
encourage entrepreneurship.
A few actions by the Administration could solidify small
business support.
Small businesses are vocal and have strong support on the
Hill. They have sidetracked Administration initiatives felt
to be detrimental. Their strength should not be
under-estimated.
We need to be cognizant of small business interests in our
decision making.
Most small businesses do not look to SBA for assistance and
in fact have been critical of many of our programs. We are
endeavoring to redesign programs to address these
criticisms. However, policies of the Treasury Department
and Justice, as examples, have a broader impact on a
substantial number of small businesses.
Support for the President by women is also eroding while SBA
is mounting a campaign to assist the growing number of women
entrepreneurs.
Democrats are also co-opting the "high-tech" issue when it
is this Administration's economic policies which have
provided incentives for greater innovation.
Allocation of government resources to the small business
issue are minimal yet provide the oportunity to address the
needs of an important constituency.
The attitude toward the SBA is changing - ask
representatives of Merrill Lynch, Soloman Brothers or Chase
what they think of our financing proposals. Ask Mike
McKevitt of NFIB what he thinks of our new direction. We
are trying to address the broadest spectrum of small
business.
Jobs bill is a good vehicle for small business
initiatives--can be effectively packaged.
State of Small Business Report opportunity for the President
to announce new initiatives.
Recognition of Problem
Small Business, accounting for 50 percent of all
employment, was solidly behind President Reagan
in 1980.
*
The last major statement on small business by
President Reagan was in March, 1982 transmitting
his State of Small Business Report to the
Congress.
*
There was no mention of small business in the
State of the Union.
*
A recent Heller Survey showed small business
support for the President is eroding.
*
The President has made a strong commitment to
minority business development yet legislative and
budget proposals provide Democratic Congressional
leaders a platform for criticizing Administration
action.
*
Support for the President by women is also
eroding while SBA is mounting a campaign to
assist the growing number of women entrepreneurs.
2
*
The Democratic Party is co-opting the small
business issue. Consider the fact that the DNC
small business Advisory Committee includes five
prominent Republican small business leaders and
the DNC will be sponsoring statewide small
business meetings through 1984.
*
Several potential Democratic Presidential
candidates are positioning themselves as
representing the entrepreneurs and have actively
sought meetings with national small business
representatives.
*
Proposals to recreate the Reconstruction Finance
Corporation or provide loans to businesses
through amendments to the Defense Production Act
create new and bureaucratic programs and do not
recognize deficit problems.
*
The private sector, large business, small
business, financial institutions and others, are
looking for specific strategies through federal
partnerships to develop the economy.
Proposed Solution
*
Small business record in job creation is well
documented - their inclusion in a major
Administration employment creation effort
3
achieves the dual goals of small business support
for the President and addressing unemployment
problems.
*
A combined administrative program packaging
existing on-line programs of the SBA with
legislative initiatives to creatively adapt and
expand these programs to meet job creation is
already close to completion at SBA.
*
SBA has demonstrated the ability to form
partnerships with states, localities, and the
private sector to deliver assistance by
leveraging non-Federal resources. Through these
partnerships and our network of 100 field
offices, we have a proven track record, in
contrast to the Presidential PSI Task Force which
does not have the reputation for delivering.
*
SBA uniquely addresses two important aspects of
employment: both employee and employer growth
through its fostering of small business.
*
The 97th Congress has shown that Members will
approve certain program levels and changes
without regard to stubborn opposition by the
4
Administration as evidenced by OMB's positions.
We need to avoid these unnecessary battles and
take credit for the inevitable result.
*
Transmittal of the President's Second State of
th
Small Business Report on or about March
1983
provides the opportunity to unveil a meaningful
small business job creation program.
*
Specific Elements of the Program are attached.
emocratic National Committee
News
For Release:
$25 Mass. Ave. NW
Thursday, May 27
ashington, D.C. 20036
Contact:
02) 797-5900
Bob Neuman
202/797-5900.
Democrats Call For Small Business Conference
Democratic Chairman Charles T. Manatt today called for the creati
4 a nationwide conference on small business to assess current policies
he Reagan Administration as they impact on the nation's small business
"While there is mounting evidence and acceptance of the Reagan
dministration's unfair policies on low and moderate income indi duals
amilies, there has been too little attention given to the impact of th
eagan Administration's program and continued high interest rates on
merica's small business--the lifeblood of our economy," Manatt said.
"Mr. Reagan's tax bill passed in 1981 does relatively little for
mall business. Though it is the nation's leading job producer, small
usiness gets but 17.8 percent of the business tax cuts in the bill.
urthermore, a study by the Library of Congress indicates that over the
ourse of the next four years that meager share will shrink.
"The Reagan Administration has resisted calls for small business
epresentation on the Federal Reserve Board. The leading cause of busi
failures and bankruptcies that are plaguing the economy is high interes
tates, yet the Fed has no input from small business or agriculture.
"The Reagan Administration's unceasing favoritism to corporate gi
is dramatically revealed by a recent statement by the Assistant Attorne
General for Anti-trust William Baxter who was quoted as calling the
Robinson-Patman Act (which prevents price discrimination) 'an unjustifi
protection for small business, from the rigors of competition."
Manatt charged the Reagan Administration "defies logic and good S
in promulgating policies that punish small business.
"If we are to have a vigorous competitive economy we must have a
consistent economic policy that fosters the formation and the growth of
small business. This can only be accomplished with the active particip
of the small business community and individuals sensitive to the ramif:
of economic policies on small business.
"The Reagan Administration has not solicited small business part:
pation on a regular basis and this absence has resulted in the qrossly
TIONAL
emocratic
Small Business Council
DEMOCRATIC
COMMITTEE
nocratic National Comminee
1625 Massachusetts Avenue. N.W.
Washington. D.C. 20036
(202) 797-5900
Robert Bender
Executive Director
November 30, 1982
The Honorable Thomas P. O'Neill
2231 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Mr. Speaker:
The Small Business Council wholeheartedly supports
your efforts to develop and pass a jobs program. Many of
our economic problems would be alleviated if we take care
of unemployment.
The rebuilding of our nation's infrastructure is an
excellent beginning for addressing the unemployment is-
sue. However, any long-term jobs program must take into
account the overwhelming ability of small business to
create the new jobs and innovations needed to get our
economy moving and to keep it productive and competitive.
Small firms have greater potential than large ones
for rapid growth, for providing services to local economies,
and for effectively using local job markets. Any jobs pro-
gram to be viable must include provisions to stimulate small
business start up and growth. Your efforts to include these
types of provisions in previous legislation such as the
1981 ERTA and Small Business representation on the Federal
Reserve Board are appreciated. Please continue your efforts.
The Small Business Council, which was formed by the
Democratic National Committee to provide a forum for Small
Business in the Democratic Party, appreciates your concern.
We look forward to working with you and your staff in de-
veloping positive legislative programs important to the
development of Small Business and our economy.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Bernard Featherman
Chairman
Small Business Council
Democratic
Small Business Council
Democratic National Committee
1625 Massachusetts Avenue. N.W.
Washington. D.C. 20036
(202) 797-5'
Robert Bender
Executive Director
November 30, 1982
The Honorable Robert C. Byrd
133 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C.
20510
Dear Senator Byrd:
The Small Business Council wholeheartedly supports
your efforts to develop and pass a jobs program. Many of
our economic problems would be alleviated if we take care
of unemployment.
The rebuilding of our nation's infrastructure is an
excellent beginning for addressing the unemployment is-
sue. However, any long-term jobs program must take into
account the overwhelming ability of small business to
create the new jobs and innovations needed to get our
economy moving and to keep it productive and competitive.
Small firms have greater potential than large ones.
for rapid growth, for providing services to local economies,
and for effectively using local job markets. Any jobs pro-
gram to be viable must include provisions to stimulate small
business start up and growth. Your efforts to include these
types of provisions in previous legislation such as the
1981 ERTA and Small Business representation on the Federal
Reserve Board are appreciated. Please continue your efforts.
The Small Business Council, which was formed by the
Democratic National Committee to provide a forum for Small
Business in the Democratic Party, appreciates your concern.
We look forward to working with you and your staff in de-
veloping positive legislative programs important to the
development of Small Business and our economy.
Thank you: for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Bernard Featherman
Chairman
Small Business Council
mocratic
Small Business Council
NATIONAL COMMITTES
ocratic National Committee
1625 Massachusetts Avenue. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
(202) 797-5900
Robert Bender
Executive Director
From:
Rob Bender
To:
Executive Committee
Small Business Council
There will be a meeting of the Small Business
Council on December 16, 1982, in Washington, D.C. The
meeting will take place in the Rayburn House Office
Building on Capitol Hill.
The Agenda for the meeting follows:
8:45
Coffee
9:15
Administrative Matters
9:30
Antitrust and Small Business
10:30
Government Procurement and
Contracting Out to Small Business
11:30
International Trade and Small Business
12:30
Lunch
DNC Chairman Charles T. Manatt
1:00
Management Assistance to Small Business
2:00
Capital Formation and Small Business
3:00
Tax Policy and Small Business
4:00
Urban and Rural Development
5:00
Senator Gary Hart.
5:30
Reception
The meeting will consist of issue briefings by
members of our Council, Congressional Staff and represen-
tatives from Small Business associations.
You are encouraged to stay at the St. Charles Hotel.
The manager of this hotel has been associated with the
Democratic Party and is a Small Businessman. The number
is 800/424-2463.
I look forward to seeing all of you on December 16.
mocratic
Small Business Council
COMMITTED DEMOCRATIC
nocratic National Committee
1625 Massachusetts Avenue. N.W.
Washington. D.C. 20036
(202) 797-5900
Robert Bender
Executive: ector
To:
Executive Committee
Small Business Council
From: Rob Bender
The Executive Committee of the Small Business
Council will meet on December 16 in Room B-369 Rayburn
House Office Building. This room is in the basement of
the Rayburn Building. Coffee will be served at 8:45 a.m.
Enclosed are copies of letters sent by our Chair-
man, Bernard Featherman, to Senator Robert Byrd and
Speaker Tip O'Neill concerning jobs programs.
Also, information about the St. Charles Hotel
in enclosed. Note the $10.00 rebate, which was re-
quested by the Chairman of our Council.
TASK FORCE DESCRIPTIONS
Issue
Tax Policy
To examine the effect of tax policies on small busi-
ness. To ensure that taxes do not over penalize small
business and that adequate account of size differences
in the ability of corporations to generate capital is
considered. To develop new tax policy to help the small
business still in its loss phase and those that are the
emerging profit firms.
Financial Assistance and Capital Formation
To examine government policies and programs which ef-
fect the ability of small business to create or retain
capital. To examine and evaluate government programs de-
signed to provide capital for small business. Generally
review capital availability for small business through
public and private organizations.
Regulations and Antitrust
To examine the effects of government regulations and
paperwork on small business. To evaluate the economic
impact of regulation and government initiatives to lessen
the paperwork burden on small business. Investigate
policies and programs of regulatory and enforcement
agencies which create discriminatory or unfair burdens on
small business.
To examine the Antitrust laws and their effectiveness
in promoting competition. To examine economic trends to-
ward concentration in industries and. the results of such
concentration. To review government policies and programs
which tend to impede growth in productivity and encourage
economic concentration.
Urban and Rural Economic Development
To examine government programs designed to address eco-
nomic growth factors specific to urban and rural areas.
To evaluate the resources of federal, state and local govern-
ments and the private sector which are devoted to rural and
urban economic development.
International Trade
To evaluate the export potential and capabilities of
small business. To examine and investigate Federal Gov-
ernment programs, state initiatives and private sector
mechanisms available to small exporters or potential
exporters. To evaluate the availability and adequacy
of information on overseas markets and market development.
Management Assistance
To examine the extent to which small business desires
and needs are recognized and taken into account in the
development of programs. To examine government and
other private programs available which offer help to
small business start up and development.
Government Procurement
To examine and investigate federal efforts to provide
small business with an equitable share of procurement
contacts. To reveiw and evaluate government execution of
statutory provisions designed to increase small business
participation in federal procurement.
Innovation
To examine and investigate government policies and pro-
grams which impede the growth of innovative small businesses.
To review the contributions of small business to the innov.
tive process. To examine possible government and private
sector initiatives to encourage small business innovation
and technology.
Political
Democratic Party Liaison
To develop small business participation on the national,
state and local level. To increase their involvement in
the party and the 84 Convention.
Minority Liaison
To develop the Black-Hispanic small business constituency
and to ensure that the needs of the minority groups are
addressed.
Labor Liaison
To work with the Labor Council in developing policies.
Big Business Liaison
To work with Business Council in developing policies.
DEMOCRATS AND SMALL BUSINESS
A REAL POSSIBILITY
I. INTRODUCTION:
Historically, businessmen of all types have been viewed as
"Republican" and been thought to have been "captured" by the
Republican party. Although Democrats have been able to gain con-
siderable support from the business community on a wide range of
specific business issues, the Democratic political strategy has
been focused on ways to neutralize the business opposition to
Democratic candidates, or retarget business' attention away from
business issues and into issues that may affect other aspects of
their lives.
It is unlikely that this strategy will change significantly in
the foreseeable future. Despite an enviable record in the Congress
in an advocacy for many specific business issues, and in particular
on behalf of small business, the Democratic members, candidates for
national office, and the party, have failed to aggressively adver-
tise our successes, or comprehensively reach out to that community:
The events of 1981-1982 provide an ideal opportunity to rev se
that trend. A Republican President dominates the Federal economic
gameplan. With Republicans in the majority in the Senate, and a
functioning majority in the House, business was under the impres-
sion that the Messiah had indeed made the second coming, and the ills
of the past would be over.
The facts prove that not to be the case; actually business is
rapidly parting company with the President over the deficit, and his
entrenchment on economic, tax and fiscal policies. Small businesses
have long ago questioned their fate under "Reaganomics," but have
been traditionally without a visible leader, and an effective forum.
Politically, the time is ripe for Democrats, and the DNC, to
séize the leadership vacuum and seek to publicize their interest and
concern for the most outcast segment of the business community --
small business.
II. AN APPROACH
A simultaneous, three-pronged process to involve, and publicize,
the Democratic Party's affiliation with small business could be under-
taken.
-2-
A. Phase I - Leadership Identification
Effective Democratic elected Federal and local representatives
should be identified, and their participation enlisted and encouraged.
Their input should be solicited, and they should be included in strate-
gy sessions on party positions and proposed legislation.
Through the DNC, and the respective campaign committees, Democratic
candidates for elected offices should be encouraged, and supported, in
their campaign efforts to talk up the treatment of small business by
this Administration. "Heavy Hitters" could be brought into tight races.
In addition, there is a nationwide resource of Democratic activists
in small business associations, and of Carter Administration small bus-
iness "specialists" that should be identified, and their support and
work sought.
The DNC should be a resource of potential witnesses for Congressiona
or regional hearings; legislative Committee and Subcommittee chairper-
sons, or others in appropriate roles, should be encouraged to hold hear-
ings and/or conferences on a wide range of small business "problems"
such as interest rates or access to capital.
B. Phase II - DNC Council Established
The DNC should establish a "Small Business Council" to provide a
readily identifiable, and visible, Democratic forum for the small bus-
iness sector. The Council would provide a structured group that could
communicate with Democratic officials on areas of interest to small
business which the Council generated, or transmitted.
The Council will also provide a means to publicize to the small
businesses of the nation the positive actions which Democrats are
taking on their behalf, and, of course, on the benefits of supporting
Democrats and the DNC.
All elected officials (at both the Federal and local levels) should
be encouraged to establish and coordinate state and district-by-dis-
trict Small Business Councils. Parenthetically, Speaker O'Neill has
already established a Small Business Task Force of the House Democratic
Caucus.
In addition, the Council can serve as a focal point for fundraising
efforts for candidates, and the party. Careful coordination with the
Congressional campaign committees should be expected.
C. Phase III - Research
A repository of research on small business positions, and those
in a responsible position to assist with the research of small business
issues, must be developed.
-3-
Among the initial, and relatively easy research that could be
undertaken include the status of the 60 delegate recommendations
from the 1980 White House Conference on Small Business, and an
anaylsis of how they fit into the Democratic Party; and the identi-
fication of issues from several states that have had follow-up small
business meetings.
CONCLUSION
Real opportunities exist for the Democratic party to seize the
moment and show small business that we, as a party, have their real
interest in mind -- and deserve their cooperation and support.
The timing provides several key chances to highlight the current
plight of small business, and the lack of attention being paid to them
by this Administration.
Finally, this multi-phased effort could provide a needed corner-
stone in the reinvigoration of the DNC and the party.
DEMOCRATIC
NATIONAL COMMITTEE 1625 Massachusetts Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 797-5900
Charles T. Manatt
Chairman
DNC SMALL BUSINESS COUNCIL
The purpose of the Small Business Council is to promote
the role of Small Business in our economy. The Council will
act as a Small Business Advocate within the Democratic Party
by performing the following functions:
1) The Council will provide an opportunity for Small
Business to communicate with Democratic officials on issues
important to Small Business.
2) The Council will provide a forum by which Small
Business and the Democratic Party can develop positive legis-
lation important to the development of Small Business.
3) The Council will be used to inform Democratic candi-
dates on Small Business issues and stress the importance of
working with their Small Business community.
4) The Council will provide a means to keep Small Bus-
iness informed on the positive actions taken by Democrats
on their behalf.
The task of the Small Business Council will be to
develop a Democratic Small Business Agenda and to form a
partnership between the Democratic Party and the Small Bus-
iness Community. In developing a Democratic Small Business
Agenda, the emphasis will be on issues that need to be ad-
dressed in 1983-84 and a Small Business Plank in the 1984
Democratic Platform.
Holemeter Twick g. samella
SMALL BUSINESS
ASSESSES
UPDATE
Yet, despite the fact that strong dissatisfaction is also reflected in the rather
small percentage who feel well represented in Washington and who believe the
Administration policies are supportive of small business (about four out of ten),
nearly two-thirds (64%) still think the country should "stay the course" with
THE REAGAN
the President's economic policies. However, when the elements comprising
DECEMBER
1982
ADMINISTRATION
the President's program are examined individually, it appears that 54% of the
respondents disapprove of the proposed increases in military spending, while
75% and 70%, respectively, do approve of the reduction in domestic spending
To determine the extent to which the attitude
and the tax cuts.
toward the Reagan Administration on the part
The same percentage of executives who expected the President's tax
of a national cross-section of small business
program to help them when asked in December 1981 (55%), said that it is
executives may have altered since the summer
helping them when polled in December 1982. Of the remainder, 39% say the
of 1981 (when the Heller Small Business
program is of no help, and 4% report that it has actually hurt their businesses.
Institute sponsored a six-city focus group
Among those who view the President's tax program as helpful, the most fre-
TWO AFTER ARS
series), the panelists were twice recontacted
quently cited measures are: the investment tax credits and tax cuts, realistic
by telephone-first in December 1981, and
depreciation schedules, and reduced capital gains tax. For those who consider
again in December 1982.
the tax program detrimental, by far the most often named factor is the unbalanced
All but three of the original 77 participants
budget pushing up the cost of money.
were reached for this second update. In
An area where there was a major modification of opinion, and one in which the
seeking to contact panelists, it was learned
Administration did not fare well, concerns Reagan's policies toward
that there was at least one bankruptcy, anoth-
entrepreneurship. The latest update found a 20-point drop since July 1981, from
er bankruptcy suspected, and two sell-outs.
71% to 51%, in those who find these policies supportive, and a 9-point
This unfortunate micropattern seems to
fall since December 1981. Interestingly, while the percentage of those who think
parallel the trends in the macro-community
Reagan's programs nonsupportive of entrepreneurship remained the same as
of small businesses. In the phone interviews,
last year (32%), the "not sure" contingency more than doubled, from 8% in both
the panelists were asked the same questions,
'81 surveys to 17% in '82.
when applicable, as those in the survey con-
Of the major proposals being put forward today to prop up the social security
ducted at the time of the initial meetings. The
reserve fund, the one receiving the greatest approval (82%) from this cross-
few subjects that had become nonissues since
section of small business respondents is to allow for greater earnings without
the summer of 1981 were deleted. Substituted
loss of benefits, but with taxation of one-half of that income above a pre-
were topical items, such as the proposed re-
determined ceiling. Support of this proposal is followed closely by the desire
visions in the social security system and the
to push up the retirement age (76%). The reduction of benefits for those now
President's plea for the country to "stay the
entering the system was also favored, though by a smaller majority (60%). As
course" with his economic policies.
for increasing the social security tax, that approach was frowned upon by all
It was found that after Reagan's supportive
but about a fourth of the group.
acceptance in December 1981, when 41% of
However, after all their doubts about economic ills were aired, these execu-
the surveyed small business panelists said
tives' views on the prospects for small business enterprises over the next
their confidence in the President's leadership
five years are virtually unchanged from December 1981 to December 1982. An
of the nation had grown since his inaugura-
identical plurality, 45%, expect conditions to improve while 22% project declining
tion, only 25% of the panelists contacted in
prospects in 1982, compared with 24% in 1981. The balance, 29%, think the state
December 1982 said their confidence had
of small business will be unchanged over the coming half-decade, compared
increased. On the other hand, the percentage
with 31% who thought that way in December 1981.
of those who reported that their confidence
The tables that follow trace a composite of attitudes registered by this group
had diminished nearly doubled, from 18% in
of business people from six urban centers across the country: Boston, Phila-
1981 to 30% in 1982.
HELLER
The Heller Institute for Small Business and its Policy
SMALL BUSINESS
Study Committee neither endorse nor disagree with any
©
1983
Walter E. Heller International Corporation
of the survey findings reported in this booklet. (See inside
Institute For Small Business
INSTITUTE
cover and page 1 of Points at Issue 1, Small Business
Assesses the Reagan Administration, Heller Small Busi-
Quotation permitted provided acknowledgment is made
SPECIAL REPORTS
ness Institute Special Reports, 1981, which this booklet
supplements.)
Yet, despite the fact that strong dissatisfaction is also reflected in the rather
delphia, Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas and Los Angeles. Because of the sample size,
small percentage who feel well represented in Washington and who believe the
it is difficult to draw any regional conclusions. It can be noted, however, that the
Administration policies are supportive of small business (about four out of ten),
Chicago respondents were consistently the most pessimistic, except as to the
nearly two-thirds (64%) still think the country should "stay the course" with
question about reduced inflation, in which case 93% answered in the affirmative,
1982
the President's economic policies. However, when the elements comprising
the highest proportion of any city. Most consistently optimistic, on the other
the President's program are examined individually, it appears that 54% of the
hand, were the participants from Dallas.
respondents disapprove of the proposed increases in military spending, while
Though these panelists' opinions cannot be regarded as representative of the
75% and 70%, respectively, do approve of the reduction in domestic spending
entire small business community, they appear to be confirmed by findings of
attitude
and the tax cuts.
the Heller/Roper Small Business Barometers during the same periods. The
the
part
The same percentage of executives who expected the President's tax
Barometers survey random, nationwide samples of over 1,000 chief executive
business
program to help them when asked in December 1981 (55%), said that it is
officers of firms having under 500 employees, and are conducted three times
summer
helping them when polled in December 1982. Of the remainder, 39% say the
yearly by The Roper Organization for Walter E. Heller International Corporation's
program is of no help, and 4% report that it has actually hurt their businesses.
Institute for Small Business.
group
Among those who view the President's tax program as helpful, the most fre-
contacted
quently cited measures are: the investment tax credits and tax cuts, realistic
981,
and
depreciation schedules, and reduced capital gains tax. For those who consider
the tax program detrimental, by far the most often named factor is the unbalanced
rticipants
budget pushing up the cost of money.
In
An area where there was a major modification of opinion, and one in which the
learned
Administration did not fare well, concerns Reagan's policies toward
anoth-
entrepreneurship. The latest update found a 20-point drop since July 1981, from
sell-outs.
71% to 51%, in those who find these policies supportive, and a 9-point
to
fall since December 1981. Interestingly, while the percentage of those who think
mmunity
Reagan's programs nonsupportive of entrepreneurship remained the same as
nterviews,
last year (32%), the "not sure" contingency more than doubled, from 8% in both
I. Representation
questions,
'81 surveys to 17% in '82.
con-
Of the major proposals being put forward today to prop up the social security
1. How do you feel about the representation you are getting in Washington?*
The
reserve fund, the one receiving the greatest approval (82%) from this cross-
Poorly
Neutral/
Well
since
section of small business respondents is to allow for greater earnings without
Represented
Mixed
Represented
ubstituted
loss of benefits, but with taxation of one-half of that income above a pre-
posed re-
determined ceiling. Support of this proposal is followed closely by the desire
Dec. 1982
33%
25%
42%
and
the
to push up the retirement age (76%). The reduction of benefits for those now
Dec. 1981
42
14
44
stay
the
entering the system was also favored, though by a smaller majority (60%). As
July 1981
30
23
47
for increasing the social security tax, that approach was frowned upon by all
supportive
but about a fourth of the group.
41% of
However, after all their doubts about economic ills were aired, these execu-
2. How would you characterize the Reagan Administration's policies
said
tives' views on the prospects for small business enterprises over the next
toward small business?
eadership
five years are virtually unchanged from December 1981 to December 1982. An
identical plurality, 45%, expect conditions to improve while 22% project declining
Neutral/
Non-
naugura-
acted
in
prospects in 1982, compared with 24% in 1981. The balance, 29%, think the state
Supportive
Mixed
Supportive
had
of small business will be unchanged over the coming half-decade, compared
Dec. 1982
45%
9%
46%
ercentage
with 31% who thought that way in December 1981.
nfidence
The tables that follow trace a composite of attitudes registered by this group
Dec. 1981
47
18
35
18%
in
of business people from six urban centers across the country: Boston, Phila-
July 1981
59
16
25
its
Policy
with any
© 1983
Walter E. Heller International Corporation
*Respondents were asked to indicate their feelings by using a scale of zero to 10.
(See inside
"Poorly" includes ratings of zero through 4; "Neutral/Mixed (Feelings)" includes only 5;
Institute For Small Business
Business
"Well" includes 6 through 10. This same interpretation of numerical ratings applies also to
Small Busi-
Quotation permitted provided acknowledgment is made
questions of a similar type that follow.
this booklet
3. Generally in your representation what is the importance of the role
III. Administration's General Program
B-1. [
played by such organizations as: a) SBA, b) Congress, c) Small business
A. President Reagan says, "We should stay the course," when referring
associations?
to the direction he has taken, and in which he now wishes to lead the
nation. Do you agree or disagree with this aim?
(a) SBA
Neutral/
Not
-
Important
Mixed
Important
Agree
64%
Dec. 1982
29%
24%
47%
Disagree
20%
15
No Opinion 16%
2. I
Dec. 1981
24
61
July 1981
42
20
38
N
B. Basically, "stay the course" means maintaining the three key parts of the
P
(b) Congress
Neutral/
Not
President's program: increase military spending, cut taxes, and reduce
Important
Mixed
Important
spending on domestic programs. Taking them one by one, which do
V. Distr
you support or not support?
Dec. 1982
53%
14%
33%
Do Not
One
Dec. 1981
54
13
33
Support
Support
Don't Know
zone
July 1981
49
13
38
of a C
Increase military
incer
spending
46%
54%
-
(c) Small business associations
Neutral/
Not
revita
Cut taxes
70
30
-
Important
Mixed
Important
Reduce domestic
Dec. 1982
67%
17%
16%
spending
76
21
3%
Dec. 1981
27
14
59
Dec.
July 1981
61
17
22
IV. Coping with Government Regulations
Dec.
July
A-1. Do you think the softening of regulatory burdens has actually
II. Tax Relief and Incentives
benefited small business?
VI. Fina
In general, to what extent has the Reagan tax program been a help, or
Neutral/
hindrance, to the operation of your business?
Yes
Mixed
No
The
A great help
14%
(See A, below)
Dec. 1982
6%
chan
61%
33%
some help
41%
(See A, below)
Dec. 1981
51
13
36
no help
39%
July 1981
51
20
29
Has hurt
4%
(See B, below)
Dec.
Don't know
2%
2. If not, do you think this loosening of regulations has actually hurt
Dec.
small business?
A. When those who said the program has been of great or some help
July
were asked what specific tax measures were of help, the three most
Yes
12%
frequently mentioned measures were: investment tax credits along
No
68%
VII. Soc
with tax cuts, realistic depreciation schedules, and reduction in capital
Neither benefited
A. Th
nor hurt
20%
gains tax.
pr
B. Those who said the program had hurt their business most frequently
a)
gave the following three reasons why: unbalanced budget pushing up
cost of money, tighter rules on tax free revenue bonds, and
inconsistent economic policies.
B-1. Do you believe environmental standards are becoming too lax?
reduced for those entering the program in the future; c) the retirement
Neutral/
age should be raised; d) workers who retire at the normal age should be
Yes
Mixed
No
allowed to earn more without loss of benefits, but should be taxed on
one-half of those revenues above $20,000 for individuals or $25,000
Dec. 1982
20%
17%
63%
Dec. 1981
20
6
74
per couple per year. Which of these proposals do you favor and which
July 1981
22
12
66
do you not favor?
Do Not
Don't
2. If yes, specifically which environmental standards do you mean?
Favor
Favor
Know
Most frequently mentioned: pollution and waste control, selling of
(a) Increase social
public land, and failure to enforce existing laws.
security taxes
28%
71%
1%
(b) Reduce benefits for
V. Distressed Communities
future entrants
60
36
4
One administration approach to urban revitalization is the "enterprise
(c) Increase retirement
zone" designed to stimulate economic development in depressed areas
age
76
23
1
of a city. Do you believe these programs stressing tax relief and financial
(d) Allow greater
incentives instead of new spending programs could be an effective
earnings without
revitalization tool?
benefit loss, but
Neutral/
tax above ceiling
82
17
1
Yes
Mixed
No
B. Do you favor any other ideas?
Dec. 1982
53%
22%
25%
Dec. 1981
63
12
25
Those most often mentioned, in order of frequency, are:
July 1981
63
5
32
federal workers should be included in the system, funds should be
taken from general tax revenues, and Medicare and Medicaid
payments should be derived from other sources.
VI. Financial
The inflation rate has dropped significantly. Do you see indications of this
VIII. Entrepreneurship
change through a reduction in your day-to-day business costs?
A-1. How encouraging and supportive do you consider Reagan policies
Neutral/
to be toward entrepreneurship?
Yes
Mixed
No
Neutral/
Non-
Dec. 1982
74%
9%
17%
Supportive
Mixed
Supportive
Dec. 1981
51
9
40
Dec. 1982
51%
17%
32%
July 1981
46
5
49
Dec. 1981
60
8
32
July 1981
71
8
21
VII. Social Security
2. Should the Reagan Administration do more for entrepreneurs?
A. The social security system appears to be in serious trouble. Of the
Yes
84%
proposals to bolster funds, the following are the most often suggested:
No
16%
a) social security tax rates should be increased; b) benefits should be
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
dile
March 4, 1983
MEMORANDUM FOR MICHAEL K. DEAVER
ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT
DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF
FROM:
FRED F. FIELDING
1
COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
NCPAC Solicitation Materials
Attached is a copy of the letter I have sent to NCPAC Chairman
John T. Dolan with respect to the NCPAC solicitation letter
and related materials recently mailed to you at your White
House office. The letter cites the Federal statute prohibit-
ing political solicitation in Government buildings, and asks
that your office address and all others that may fall within
the statutory prohibition be removed from NCPAC's mailing
lists.
Please let me know if you have any other concerns about these
materials that you want to discuss. Thank you.
Attachment
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 4, 1983
Dear Mr. Dolan:
The enclosed solicitation letter and other materials were
recently received by Michael K. Deaver, Deputy Chief of Staff
and Assistant to the President. The letter was addressed to
Mr. Deaver at his Government office in the White House.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 607 (a), it is unlawful to solicit political
contributions in Government offices. Specifically, that
section provides:
It shall be unlawful for any person to
solicit or receive any contribution within
the meaning of section 301 (8) of the Federal
Election Campaign Act of 1971 in any room
or building occupied in the discharge of
official duties by any person mentioned in
section 603, or in any navy yard, fort, or
arsenal. Any person who violates this sec-
tion shall be fined not more than $5,000 or
imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
I realize that this solicitation letter was part of a larger
mailing for which address lists were used. We would appre-
ciate, however, your removing from your mailing lists Mr.
Deaver's office address and all other addresses that would
fall within the prohibited categories set forth in this
statutory section.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Orig. signed by FFF
Fred F. Fielding
Counsel to the President
Mr. John T. Dolan
Chairman
National Conservative Political
Action Committee
Suite 513
1500 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, Virginia 22209
Enclosures
ACCEPT
SECOND ANNUAL CONSERVATIVE
NEGRET
LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE
AND PRIVATE WHITE HOUSE RECEPTION
WITH
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN
February 22-23, 1983
Washington, D.C.
February 22, 1983
11:30 12:00 Noon
Senate Caucus Room
318 Russell Senate Office Bldg.
1st & Constitution
Welcome Honorable Edwin Meese, III
Counsellor to the President
Chairman, Second Annual Conservative Leadership Conference
12:00 Noon - 1:30 P.M.
Senate Caucus Room
Salute to the POWs
Honored Guests: Senator Jeremiah Denton (R-Ala.)
Congressman John McCain (R-Ariz.)
Master of Ceremonies: Senator John Tower (R-Tex.)
2:30 P.M. - 3:00 P.M.
Hyatt Regency Washington (on Capitol Hill)
400 New Jersey Avenue, N.W.
Senatorial Leadership Report
Speaker: Senator Richard Lugar (R-Ind.)
3:00 P.M. - 3:30 P.M.
Administration Briefing
Speaker: Honorable James G. Watt, Secretary of the Interior
3:30 P.M. - 4:00 P.M.
Congressional Strategy Report
Speaker: Honorable Phil Gramm
4:00 P.M.
Adjourn
5:30 P.M.- 6:30 P.M.
Presidential Reception
The White House
Speaker: The President of the United States, Ronald Reagan
February 23, 1983
9:00 A.M. - 10:00 A.M.
Hyatt Recency Washington
Continental Breakfast
10:00 A.M. - 12:00 Noon
National Conservative Policy Advisory Council Meeting
Speaker: John T. (Terry) Dolan, Chairman
National Conservative Political Action Committee
12:00 Noon - 2:00 P.M.
Luncheon
2:00 P.M.
Adjourn
********* Transportation will be provided through the Conference
USA
MIII 20c
Mr. Nelson Bunker Hunt
216 Corinth & Industrial
Dallas, Texas 75207
NCPAC
National Conservative Political Action Committee
Federal law requires us to ask for the following information:
Name
Occupation
Place of Business
City
State
Zip
the fortunes of America. You are
important a
rest
CSS and libert
worthy of yourse
President Ronald Reagan
January 20, 1981
NATIONAL CONSERVATIVE POLICY ADVISORY COUNCIL
BENEFITS OF MEMBERSHIP
Reception with President Ronald Reagan at the White House.
Exclusive access to select Cabinet officials, Senators and Representatives through NCPAC.
Semiannual dinner briefings with Key U.S. Senators and Representatives.
Monthly private intelligence and political insider reports from the Chairman of NCPAC.
Executive political updates in Washington, D.C.
Quarterly private briefings with key political and legislative leaders.
Free attendance at all NCPAC seminars.
Gold Council lapel pin which will be recognized by conservative administration and
congressional leaders.
December dinner and reception to meet with elected U.S. Congressmen and Senators
supported by NCPAC
Private telephone line to the Chairman of NCPAC and through him to elected Representatives.
(Please detach)
Dear Bunker,
As President Reagan has said, "NCPAC is our best bet to stop the
liberals from seizing total control of Congress."
I want to join the leadership of NCPAC through membership on the
National Conservative Policy Advisory Council.
I will join you for the private reception at the White House with
President Reagan on February 22. Please send me all the details.
I am enclosing my total Council Membership Commitment of
$5,000.00 for 1983.
I will bring my $5,000 Council Membership Commitment to the
reception with the President on February 22.
Name
Hon. Michael K. Deaver
Deputy Chief of Staff
Address
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave., N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20500
Phone (
)
I regret I cannot join the Council. However, I
support NCPAC's efforts to elect conservatives to
Congress. And because our need is greater than
ever, I am enclosing my highest possible check to
elect conservatives to office.
$500
$1,000
$2,500
Other
Nelson Bunker Hunt
January 21, 1983
Honorable Michael K. Deaver
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D. 20500
Dear Honorable Deaver:
I am writing you to ask you to join me on the National
Conservative Policy Advisory Council, a small but prestigious
group of Americans dedicated to electing a conservative
Congress in the '80's.
And I am extending to you an invitation to join the Council
in time to attend our next meeting on February 22 at which time
all Council Members will be invited to attend the Second Annual
Conservative Leadership Conference and Presidential Reception.
The Council is the official steering arm of the National
Conservative Political Action Committee (NCPAC), a group which
I think is our most effective tool in America to elect conser-
vatives to office. I am sure you remember NCPAC from its
successful campaigns to expose the liberal voting records of
such Senators as George McGovern, Birch Bayh, John Culver and
Frank Church.
In the elections of 1982, NCPAC was instrumental in defeat-
ing long-time Senate powerhouse Howard Cannon of Nevada. NCPAC
was very active in the New Hampshire gubernatorial race where
an upset victory for conservative Republican John Sununu
occurred. NCPAC worked with Paul Trible of Virginia throughout
the year and gave the maximum support allowable by law in his
victorious race to become the new Republican Senator from Virginia.
In a year when Republicans lost nationwide, NCPAC broke
the record of losses by being instrumental in electing two new
U.S. Senators and heavily supporting 125 conservatives nationwide.
NCPAC also, through its Independent Expenditures against
seven liberal Democrats, forced the incumbents such as Ted Kennedy
to stay in their own states, thus minimizing any effect they could
have had by supporting candidates elsewhere. Kennedy was held to
the lowest percentage of the vote since he first ran in 1962.
Honorable Michael K. Deaver
Page 2
In addition to doing the difficult and controversial
work to defeat liberals, NCPAC also accumulated an incredibly
successful record in giving appropriate technical assistance
plus direct cash contributions to 115 Congressional incumbents
including Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Senator Richard Lugar
(R-Ind.), Congressman Ron Paul (R-Tex.) and Congressman
Phil Gramm (R-Tex.). The total in 1982 was over $4 million --
the highest amount for any nationwide idealogical political
action committee.
But before I tell you more about NCPAC and the Council,
I want you to know something:
Originally, I did not want to write this letter to you.
For years, the Federal Government has been abusing its powers
to harass me, other members of my family, and our businesses.
The last thing I needed, I thought, was more controversy.
But then I thought about our great country, and how by
arousing controversy, often great things can be accomplished.
Controversy breaking new ground is, in fact, what has made
NCPAC so effective in helping to elect conservatives. I sud-
denly realized that by encouraging you to join the National
Conservative Policy Advisory Council, I might be able to help
elect conservatives to the Congress who will restore the American
dream of strength and prosperity.
I am proud to say the liberals in the media and the Congress
fear NCPAC possibly more than any other organization in the
country. Why? Because NCPAC has been consistently successful
in exhortingly exposing the hidden liberal voting records of
incumbent liberal Senators and Congressmen. Simply put, NCPAC
defeats them at the polls. And NCPAC does it by telling the
truth about the liberals, unmasking their actual votes back in
their home states and nothing more.
NCPAC's Council is an exclusive group of key NCPAC supporters
who meet quarterly as the steering organization for NCPAC. We
receive confidential political briefings from Cabinet officials
like Secretary of the Interior James Watt, Secretary of Transpor-
tation Drew Lewis, Secretary of Agriculture John Block, and other
prominent political leaders in Washington.
NCPAC's agenda for 1984 is tremendously ambitious but necessary
if we conservatives are to prevail. NCPAC's goal will be to mobilize
over one million conservative activists nationwide in the next 18
months. NCPAC will establish state affiliates that will identify,
Honorable Michael K. Deaver
Page 3
recruit and train the top candidates for state and federal
offices. NCPAC will also promote President Reagan's re-
election candidacy with a multi-million dollar advertising
campaign. And, NCPAC will target for defeat vulnerable
incumbent liberals (House and Senate) who face strong
challenges from conservatives.
Obviously, what we are proposing entails a tremendous
amount of work. But NCPAC did not become the most successful
organization in America by staying idle!
NCPAC's success, however, is dependent to a great extent
on the political and financial support of conservative activists
and dedicated conservatives like you, Honorable Deaver. In fact,
it was the financial support and advice from the Council that
greatly contributed to the defeat of McGovern, Church, Culver,
and Bayh in 1980.
Some of America's finest business and community leaders now
serve on NCPAC's Council. Let me mention just a few:
** John Uhlmann - President of Standard Milling Company.
You probably know the Standard Milling Company from
its products like Kingsford Charcoal and Maypo Cereal.
Robert Krieble - Chairman of the Board of Loctite
Corporation. Loctite is one of America's Fortune 500
companies. Bob is presently a member of the Board of
Directors of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
** Mrs. Helen Marie Taylor - Member of the Corporation for
Public Broadcasting. Helen Marie is a noted writer and
conservative activist from Virginia.
Robert Perry - President of Perry Homes, one of the most
successful construction firms in Houston, Texas.
** Richard DeVos - Founder and President of the Amway
Corporation and former Finance Director of the
Republican National Committee.
There are many other members I could mention. But I think
you see that this is a most prestigious and dedicated group of
conservative Americans.
Honorable Deaver, I'm sure you're very involved and busy in
your home state. I know I am here in Texas, and so are other
NCPAC Council Members. We don't like to waste time or money.
But we know when to get involved as well.
Honorable Michael K. Deaver
Page 4
As I mentioned, membership on the National Conservative
Policy Advisory Council is limited to no more than 300 nation-
wide. Each member contributes $5,000 annually for NCPAC to
carry out its programs. I also ask that you make yourself
available to attend our quarterly Council meetings in Washington,
D.C. when possible and to offer political advice on your area
of the country to NCPAC's very accessible National Chairman,
John T. (Terry) Dolan.
Ronald Reagan in 1976 called NCPAC "our best bet to stop
the liberals from seizing total control of Congress."
As usual, the President was right. NCPAC and its Council
have been doing that often difficult and controversial work
ever since, better than anyone else in America.
In 1981, President Reagan again said about NCPAC: "Thanks
to you, we have begun our historic journey toward national
renewal."
The National Conservative Policy Advisory Council was the
leading group of voluntary leaders that helped sustain the
President's momentum nationwide to secure his legislative
agenda in that year.
We want your participation as well as your crucial financial
support. We also want people of importance in government to
know your views first hand.
I have told you of the responsibility of Council Membership.
Now let me tell you about some of the benefits:
1. Private reception with President Ronald Reagan at
the White House on February 22, 1983.
2. Private meetings with Cabinet officials, other
Administration officials, and members of the
Senate and the House.
3. Quarterly private briefings with key political
and legislative leaders.
4. Monthly private political intelligence reports
from NCPAC's National Chairman, John T. (Terry)
Dolan.
5. A gold Council lapel pin which will be recognized by
conservative Administration and Congressional leaders.
Honorable Michael K. Deaver
Page 5
6. Attendance at all briefings in behalf of
NCPAC either in Washington or other parts
of the country. (I hosted four in 1982
in Dallas.)
Because of the intimate nature of our reception with
the President on February 22, attendance will be quite
limited. I will need to hear from you as quickly as
possible so I may reserve a place for you and your
spouse.
But, Honorable Deaver, the most important benefit is knowing
you are part of the most effective, independent political
organization in the country. I truly share the deep satis-
faction felt by all NCPAC Council Members as we look at the
impact we have had in defeating liberal incumbents and re-
placing them with conservatives.
I would be most proud and gratified if you would join
us for the most exciting period of our activities -- the
1984 election season.
There are a few seats available on the Council at this
time. I am inviting you personally to join with me and others
who share our concern for conservatism. I know you will
receive a tremendous degree of satisfaction and fulfillment
through your participation with NCPAC.
I am proud to say that no other group in America is so
highly regarded by conservatives -- and so highly feared by
liberals -- as the National Conservative Political Action
Committee. This is largely because of NCPAC's Council and
its efforts.
If you cannot join NCPAC's National Policy Advisory
Council, let me make a personal appeal for funds from you.
Our need is greater than ever, and every contribution helps.
Please send me your highest possible contribution of $1,000,
$500, $250 or whatever you can afford -- believe me, I will
be tremendously grateful.
I have enclosed a pledge card, which I have already
filled out for you, as well as other information about the
Council and NCPAC.
One final point. In the spring of 1982, President
Reagan personally requested that NCPAC take the lead in
electing "Reaganites" to office. The reason is simple:
NCPAC is the most dedicated and successful organization
in America today. No other group can invest your money
as effectively as NCPAC. That is why I joined the Council
and now ask you to do the same.
Honorable Michael K. Deaver
Page 6
Please take a moment to think about this important matter,
and then let me know of your decision as soon as possible. I
look forward to hearing from you at your earliest possible
convenience, and I hope to thank you personally at the Council
reception with President Reagan on February 22.
Sincerely,
nelson Bunker Hunt
N. Bunker Hunt
Chairman
Hunt Energy Corporation
NBH/scb
Enclosures
PS: Please accept my invitation to join NCPAC's Council so
I can inform President Reagan that you will be attending
our reception at the White House. If you would like to
make immediate reservations please call me or Bill George
at (703) 522-2800.
file
JACOB K. JAVITS
375 PARK avenue
NEW YORK, N.Y. 10152
March 1, 1983
Mr. Michael Deaver
Assistant to the President
and Deputy Chief of Staff
The White House
Washington, D. C. 20500
Dear Michael:
Thank you so much for the wonderful
arrangements and appointments at the White
House. It made a glorious day for my family,
my nurse and for me. The President was his
usual warm and considerate self.
Many thanks and warmest and best
regards always,
Sincerely
Atanta
JKJ: ec
To: MKD
Everyone is happy for now
on this
I've attached two pages
of the original draft
testimony with my notes.
You can see what almost
occurred and why
Elizabeth was upset.
P.S. The idea of Ac Niskanen testifying
was turned off early.