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
66328144
label
October 1983 Incoming (4)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
66328144
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
October 1983 Incoming (4)
citationUrl
collections
Records of the White House Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff (Reagan Administration)
Michael K. Deaver's Correspondence Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
66328144
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
72cab4bf91a2599a
ocrText
1
085
ToDAys Date
Oct.24, 1983
Mh. nikholas Michael
10:00 A.M. EST
Twe
stage
1710 Tanglowed Square
# 473 # 473
Inwicnapolis, Indiana
46260
The Hon. Mr. Michael Deaver JR.
Depaty White House Chief of Staff
assistant (Adm.) to the President (Pusident
The White House,
Washington D.C. 20501 -
MR. DEAVER,
In this hour of national crisis,
OUCR the SAVage Butchery of our Maines
in Beinut, Rebanca, I wish to express
to you, my totally logal support to our
great President, Ronald W. Reagan.,-anday.
now is the time for natural
support, and unity. It is time for resolve.
(3)ofs
While I am proud to be a Deaver - Reager
Republican, I am also looking at the infamous
Beirut massacre of Oct 23, 1983, above all,
as a American. In this hour, it would
so easy to "cut and Ruse", but this would
only reward aggression. To "cut and new now,
would place President Reogan in the
same league as neville Cham berlain, (1938- -
Munich). 2 only a matter of months, truly,
we would face a god-Awful war
in the middle EAST. Do, & favor
President Reagans "tough-it-out" "position now,
in Lebanun. President Reogan has my loyal,
total support, and while he has not
announced for 1984, he has my vote
2 am ready to work for him in 1984, !!!
(#$ and work )
There are people like alan Cranstan, Ernest 3
Hollings, and "Tedny" Kennody, who would "cut-
and- run", in Lebawon, and in EL SALUADOR.
They are appeasers!! They are blind to history,
and its traism, that "apprasement only LeADS
to inevitable wak". Remember Munich and yalta ??
What must be understand is this, in toto;
A. The Russians are on the verge
vezo
(-
500-to-
of establishing an offensive - mode
800
mile
capability, in Central SyRiA (TArget=ISRAEL)
B.
Jurkey, our strong N.A.T.O. ally, now,
is directly threatened by Souiet, Syrian,
and Iranian aggression, and guerrille-
like Armenian and Kurdistani terrorists.
C. The Russions enterso to destroy,
as their number One MIDDLE Eastern
tARget, the state of ISRAEL.
Trulu ( Holocaust - number Two)
Decretory Deaver, now is the time
4
to support President Reagon He is
America's "Winston Churchill "of the 1980's
and beyond. He has my support, totally,
as do you. now is the time for
Courage, and as a Deaver Reagan Republisan,
may d be worthy, to call mgself
- a Deaver- Reagan Republican and an
american.
Thank Yere -
Good Bless you Both
d remain loyally -
Sincerely James.
Nikholas -Michael Dayo
P.S - See page 1/1 5 (5q5) of nutred
page 5065
5
United States Department of State
Washington, D.C. 20520
February 23, 1983
Dear Mr.. Stage:
Thank you for your letter to Mr. Deaver in which you
expressed support for President Reagan and discussed several
aspects of the Middle East situation.
and Franian FD
It was good of ycu to let us have your assessments and
information about Soviet activity in the Middle East and
related aspects of the situation there. Submissions such as
yours are an important means of keeping in touch with the
American people and we appreciate the effort you made to
share your thoughts. Although it is not possible for us to
comment specifically on all the correspondence we see, I
want to assure you that your letter has been carefully read
and noted by responsible officials in the Department.
In closing, let me again express our appreciation for
your support of the President and the Administration's
policies.
With our best wishes,
Sincerely,
John John Hughes Aughos
Assistant Secretary
for Public Affairs and
Department Spokesman
Mr. Nikholas M. Stage,
1710 Tanglewood Square,
Suite 473,
Indianapolis, Indiana 46260.
PAUL LAXALT
NEVADA
till
-
United States Senate
WASHINGTON, D.C.
October 24, 1983
Dear Bernie:
Thank you for the note and for your
input on the re-elect and the Korean air-
liner tragedy. Indeed, I appreciate your
interest and concern.
Again, thanks and best wishes.
Sincerely,
P.
PAUL LAXALT
U.S. Senator
PL:1kr
Mr. Bernie Webb
Box 439
Carrington, ND 58421
Banie
10/31-
THE BARON REPORT
file
TO:
Our Subscribers
October 24, 1983
FROM: Alan Baron
No. 188
SPECIAL REPORT:
SELECTING A PRESIDENT -- AND A V-P
EXCELLENT ISSUE -
REQUIRED
READING
PRESIDENTIAL PERSONALITIES
When critics deride American voters, they usually charge that, particularly in
the television era, personalities count more than issues. What they ignore is that,
particularly in Presidential elections, personality - or character - is the most
critical consideration.
Certainly that's true for the post-WWII generation, which can recall the issues
of 1964 (LBJ promising not to send American boys to fight in Asian wars) and 1968-72
(Nixon promising to restore respect for law).
But character considerations are more complex than issue ones. The values
Americans seek are often inherently inconsistent. The candidate who "tells it like
it is" and "says what he thinks" may not be pragmatic and willing to adjust to
reality. (Wallace got high marks for the first: Nixon, in China, for the second.)
The candidate who refuses to deal with pressure from special interests may be
divisive, or unable to produce real results.
We set different standards for different offices. Ronald Reagan could rampage
against leftwing agitators in California; he needed to prove his ability to bring
people together to win the White House.
And for different parties. Democrats, presumed to be compassionate, must prove
they're tough. Republicans, vice-versa.
And for different sexes. Women are stereotyped as more honest and sincere
than men, but less shrewd and competent. They must emphasize the latter traits.
During the weeks to come, the Presidential campaigns will be making strategic
decisions in terms of defining their candidates' personalities and characters. A
recent Gallup Poll provides a starting point.
(1) RR is viewed as a colorful, interesting, decisive leader who says what he
believes and has a well-defined program for progress. But RR is also seen as
insensitive to poor people and the common man and too extreme. The White House
strategy, for months, has been to walk the fine line needed to negate the negatives
without undercutting the positives.
(2) WM is a mirror-image of RR. He is seen as more concerned about poor people
and common people, more moderate. But he's not seen as having any well-defined
program for progress, saying what he believes or suggesting imaginative solutions to
national problems.
(3) JG runs parallel (but usually ahead) of WM in the categories in which
Mondale and Reagan have mirror-images. JG clearly outpaces both in more personal
characteristics: he's seen as the most intelligent, likable, decisive, able, etc.
It's hardly surprising, from the Gallup results, that Mondale seeks to turn his
battle with Glenn into one focusing on issues instead of personal characteristics.
Glenn, to win, must focus on character.
He has an obvious opportunity to do so, by zeroing in on the issues (Soviet
grain sale, sale of jets to Arabs, sale of nuclear materials to India) on which
Mondale strongly advocated one position as VP and now takes an opposite - and more
politically expedient - one.
-2-
Proponents of that approach argue that (1) Mondale is not intensely loved, even
by his backers; (2) It's early, and time can heal wounds; (3) Mondale will be hit on
these switches in the fall, anyway, and if he can't handle them now he won't be able
to then; (4) Mondalers are vehemently anti-Reagan and will rally in November; (5)
Glenn has few other viable options. Glenn himself has been reticent, not wanting to
"tear the party apart" (although he feels more comfortable on the offensive since
Mondale opened the battle). :Some Glenn backers suggest a hard attack on Mondale would
undercut Glenn's nice guy image; but "nice guys" (e.g., Carter, Humphrey, McGovern,
Stevenson) have seldom done as well on the Democratic ticket as tough ones (e.g., FDR,
HST, JFK, LBJ).
Gallup's numbers:
Characteristic
R
M
G Characteristics
R
M
G
Bright, Intelligence
53
56
65 Well-Defined Program For Progress
43
26
27
Likable
50
50
63 Know Where He Stands
41
35
33
High Moral Principles
50
49 58 Imaginative Solutions to Problems
37
31
34
Colorful Interesting Prsnlt
50 33 46 Exceptional Ability
35 32 41
Says What He Believes
50
30
39 Puts Country's Interest First
35
31
46
Decisive, Sure of Himself
48
41 53 Takes Moderate Positions
34
45
50
Strong, Leadership Quality
47
36
47 You Can Believe In Him
33
35
47
Good Judgement in Crisis
44
40 54 Sides With Average Citizen
23
38
42
Religious, Person
43 33 33 Sympathetic To Poor
21
44
37
(figures are percentages; first place is underlined)
VICE-PRESIDENTIAL CHOICES
Washington is already talking about next year's Number Two:
(1) The whole election timetable has moved forward so far that, as John Sears
notes, IA and NH are closer to the real end of the process than the real beginning;
(2) Washington's conventional wisdom (highlighted in the recent Washington Post
article by Common Cause Pres. Fred Wertheimer) awards Mondale the nomination, leaving
only Number Two in doubt;
(3) Women (as the NOW convention conveyed) are demanding serious V-P
consideration;
(4) White House strategists have named the reelection campaign "Reagan-Bush '84",
in an effort to (a) bolster RR with the critical moderate/suburban/upscale Republicans
to whom Bush appeals, and (b) stop-before-it-starts any effort by frustrated New
Righters to push for a replacement to Bush to appease transgressions like the RR's
moderate response to the Korean shoot-down, arms sales to "Red" China and the Martin
Luther King Jr. holiday.
When politicians, particularly Democrats, talk about Number Two they usually
begin by seeking "geographical balance". Former Carter aide (and prospective medical
school freshman) Hamilton Jordon argues that a Southerner is critical for the Dems,
as do most DC "insiders". Business Dems are pushing Sen. Bentsen (TX), and Govs.
Graham (FL) and White (TX), on the assumption they can "deliver" their "mega-states".
Carter's for Sen. Nunn (GA). Washington's media generally buys the "balance" theory
as well. In discussing possible women, Time recently reported that "electorally rich
California" was a big asset for San Francisco Mayor Feinstein, but that Lt. Gov.
Griffiths (MI) "scores low on geography" because Glenn and Mondale are also
Midwesterners.
Actually, Time and the Washington "insiders" score low on history - and
probably in their assessment of the judgement of the electorate, as well. Because,
with one exception, there is virtually no indication that any significant number of
voters support ;Presidential ticket because of "home state pride" in the Vice
Presidential nominee.
-3-
Sixteen of the 18 VP choices since WWII have clearly not "delivered" their
states. Of the nine Republicans, four - Warren (48), Lodge (60), Miller (64), Agnew
(68) - lost their states. The GOP would have carried the states of the other five -
Nixon (52 and 56), Agnew (72), Dole (76), Bush (80) - with other VP nominees. Of the
nine Democrats, two - Kefauver (56), Shriver (72) - lost their states. And Democrats
would have carried the states of the others - Barkley (48), Sparkman (52), Humphrey
(64), Mondale (76 and 80) - based on comparisons with similar states and other years,
had other VP candidates been on the ticket. The two possible exceptions:
TEXAS
A switch of less than 24,000 votes out of nearly 2.3 million would
1960
have cost JFK Texas, so it's likely LBJ delivered. But the
number of votes he delivered was minimal. Texas Dems ran 1% ahead
of their US average in 1960; Stevenson had run 2% ahead in 1956
and 4% ahead in 1952.
MAINE
The Humphrey-Muskie ticket ran 13% ahead of its US average in 1968.
1968
(Nixon ran 1% behind his US average; Wallace ran 12% behind his.)
The clincher comes in comparing the Demo Presidential vote in Maine
and neighboring Vermont. In other recent elections, Maine Dems ran
0-5% better; in 1968, 12% better.
More typical of the lack of impact of "home state pride" are the following
examples selected from the 16 of 18 choices which did not impact the results:
MINNESOTA
Carter-Mondale ran 5% ahead of its US average (80), 6% ahead (76).
1976
But in 1972, following the bitter battle for the nomination
& 1980
between Minnesotan Hubert Humphrey and McGovern, the McGovern-
Shriver ticket ran 8% ahead. Despite Mondale's presence on the
ticket in 1980, John Anderson made his best showing in the
Midwest in Minnesota (9%).
TEXAS
Reagan-Bush ran 4% ahead of its US average in Texas in 1980. The
1980
GOP ran even with its US average in Texas in 1976; 5% ahead in 1972.
It's unlikely that Bush can be credited for the 4% gain from 76 to 80,
since the gain was greater in other Southern states, like Florida
(9% gain, from 4% behind GOP average to 5% ahead) and Arkansas (10%
gain, from 13% behind GOP US average to 3% behind).
KANSAS
The GOP Presidential ticket always does better in Kansas than the
1976
nation. But the gap was lower when Sen. Dole (R-KA) was on the
ticket in 1976 than in any other recent year. Kansas Republicans
ran 4% ahead of their US average with Dole in '76; they ran 7% ahead
of their national average (64,72,80); and 12% ahead (68).
All this is not academic, since the campaign strategists for the major
candidates are still, generally, starting with "geographical balance" in their Veep
evaluations. Nor is it meant to convey that the choice of a V-P nominee is not a
critical one for the candidate. It is, indeed, the first decision a new nominee
makes. And the decision - how it is made, the criteria used in making it - "sends a
message" about the Presidential nominee to the electorate.
If that "message" is that the choice was based strictly on politics, it can be a
negative. That would, for example, be the "message" if Mondale chose Gov. Mark White
(TX). White is an astute politician, but he has served as Governor for less than two
years, and the media would report Mondale's decision as one based on White's presumed
ability to deliver Texas - not his presumed ability to serve as V-P or President, or
even his role as the leader of a major element of the Democratic Party.
Compare a Mondale selection of White with one of John Glenn. It would certainly be
"political", but Mondale would also be portrayed as selecting a VP (a) qualified for
the Presidency, and (b) representative of a major element of the Democratic Party, not
-4-
totally comfortable with Mondale. Furthermore, Mondale would, by selecting an
adversary (as did Kennedy with Johnson and Reagan with Bush), display
evidence of inner-security and lack of personal pettiness toward political foes. Our
guess: Glenn would be a better choice than White for Mondale - in Texas.
The same principle applies to non-geographic factors. Glenn supporters often
mentioned Gov. Mario Cuomo (NY), at least until he endorsed Mondale. Mario Cuomo is
qualified, but the media would convey the choice as based solely on his appeal to blue-
collar, Catholic and Italian-American voters. (Ironically, in 1982, Cuomo lost the
blue-collar vote in NY and ran no better with fellow Italian-Americans than with other
voters.)
The principle applies to sex, too. If a women is chosen and the perception is she
was chosen because of her sex, neither the nominee nor the women's movement will
benefit. Yet that could easily happen, not because there are no women fully qualified
to serve as Vice President and President, but because there are few, if any, Democratic
women who have the qualifications expected of V-P nominees. Of the 18 post-war V-P
nomination, 15 have gone to persons who have proven their ability to win statewide
elections for Governor or Senator. The three -exceptions - one winner, Bush; two
losers, Miller and Shriver - all had held national positions. Bush was RNC Chairman,
UN Ambassador, CIA Director, Chinese Ambassador, and Presidential candidate. Miller,
RNC Chairman; Shriver, Peace Corps Director (and he was hardly first choice).
There is a second negative for feminists focusing on V-P: they're playing
Ronald Reagan's game. After all, if the movement measures progress by appointments
to top jobs, the first Supreme Court Justice, first UN Ambassador and record number
of Cabinet appointments constitute a big plus for RR.
At some point, the issue of racial balance will arise. In 1972, at a meeting
with California black politicians, Ed Muskie was asked whether he would consider
naming a black VP. Muskie candidly replied that he didn't think he could win the
November election with one. And said it would be dishonest to pretend otherwise.
His response was well received in the room. But it was leaked to the press, and
blacks reacted with public outrage. (McGovern Manager Frank Mankiewicz said Muskie
was
running
for
"President
of
the
Country
not
the
Country
Club.")
Of course, McGovern did not consider a black VP. And despite pledges to the
contrary (Ernest Hollings opened his campaign by mentioning Barbara Jordan and Gloria
Steinem as a possibilities) neither, almost certainly, will this year's nominee
seriously consider a black or a woman.
But a black or a woman could well be considered in the near future - if they
first prove their ability to be elected Senator or Governor, and are not perceived to
be chosen because of demographics.
That leaves the issue of ideological balancing. This is not as difficult as in
the past, because the ideological spectrum within each party has narrowed considerably
during the past two decades. The Democratic right has moved left (Sens. Nunn and Byrd
opposed troops to Lebanon) and the GOP left has moved right (Gerald Ford, who had one
of the most conservative voting records in Congress, is now a moderate). And an
attempt at ideological balance which was too blatant - such as McGovern's flirting with
Wilbur Mills in 1972 and Reagan's with Richard Schweicker in 1976 - could come off as
too "political," unless the potential VP had superior qualifications.
In today's political environment, beneficially balancing a ticket is a more
subtle task than simply looking at demographics. If Mondale could not bring himself
to consider Glenn (Carter never considered the most logical liberal in 1976, Morris
Udall, because of the bitterness during the primaries), he could consider a
generational/attitudinal balance with someone like Sens. Joe Biden (Del), Bill Bradley
(NJ), Dale Bumpers (Ark) or Gary Hart (CO). They would also make logical choices for
Glenn.
LATE NOTE: As we go to press, new polls show Rep. Mike Lowry (D-WA) only
5-7% behind Sen. Dan Evans (R-WA) in the campaign for the
Special November election to fill Sen. Jackson's seat. Evans
started 30-40% ahead, so an upset's possible
Wh113ar
LYN NOFZIGER
Fll.
October 25, 1983
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mike Deaver
FROM: Lyn Nofziger
L
If the President stops in Guam on the
way to or from Asia, I would like to suggest
that you all bring Jan McCoy in and have her
as part of the greeting party.
As you know, she is the High Commissioner
to the Trust Territories, and is certainly
one of our highest ranking women. From every-
thing I hear she's doing a hell of a job down
there. In addition, the governor of Guam is
a Democrat and it would be nice to have one
of our Republicans also in the party.
1605 NEW HAMPSHIRE AVENUE. N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009 (202) 332-4030
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 26, 1983
80
MEMORANDUM FOR JAMES A. BAKER III/MIKE DEAVER
THRU:
KEN DUBERSTEIN
KerD.
FROM:
M. B. OGLESBY,
DAVID L. WRIGHT
div
SUBJECT:
Congressman Carl Pursell (R-Michigan) St. Lawrence
Seaway Proposal
Following up on Carl Pursell's (R-Michigan) September 22
letter to the President, we invited Carl to brief Jack Svahn
and Connie Horner (OMB) on October 25 in the Roosevelt Room
on his proposal to modernize the St. Lawrence Seaway.
The briefing was productive from our standpoint. While a
number of questions were raised regarding the cost and
feasibility of the proposal, it clearly offers great appeal
to Representatives and Senators in the Mid West. In addition,
1984 marks the 25th anniversary of the Seaway; and a joint
British-Canadian-American celebration apparently is in the
works.
Without prejudicing our position on Carl's proposal, Jack
Svahn offered to pursue the possibility of setting up an
Administration working group on the Seaway. We see alot
of merit in the working group or task force approach; and we
think careful thought should be given to possible Presidential
participation in next year's festivities. Our only cautions
are that (1) Gulf state and Eastern seaboard Congressmen
and Senators may have reservations about further development
of the Seaway on the basis of concerns regarding their com-
petitive access to foreign markets; and (2) we need to be
certain that the American economy would benefit equitably with
respect to the Canadian economy under any proposal we
might eventually endorse.
CC: Jack Svahn
Connie Horner
OF THE ERIOR
United States Department of the Interior
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
March
1849
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240
3.
October 27, 1983
Mr. Michael K. Deaver
Deputy Chief of Staff
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mike:
I am pleased to share with you a copy of our third annual report
to the President, "A Year of Enrichment: Improving the quality of
life for all Americans.' This report outlines many of the most
important accomplishments at the Interior Department in the past
three years.
As I prepare to leave the post of Interior Secretary, I look with
pride to the major changes we have made in managing our natural
resources. The restoration of our national parks, wildlife
refuges and public lands is well underway. Our actions to reduce
the Nation's dependency on foreign sources of energy and strategic
minerals are working. Balance is being restored.
I have been proud to serve with you on President Reagan's team.
We came to Washington to make a difference. We have brought
change.
Thank you for your support and friendship over the past three
years. It has been an honor to serve this great Nation and to
have worked with you.
Sincerely,
Jan
SECRETARY
Enclosure
FVI
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 28, 1983
fice
MEMORANDUM FOR MICHAEL K. DEAVER
ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT
AND DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF
FROM:
FRED F. FIELDING
COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
Correspondence From Howard Stern Concerning
Denial of a Visa Application
In early August, 1983, I requested the Department of State to
respond to a letter from Howard Stern to you in which Mr. Stern
objected to a form letter used by the U.S. Embassy in Jamaica in
responding to applicants for a visa to visit the United States.
We recently received a copy of the Department of State's reply to
Mr. Stern; it is attached, together with a copy of Mr. Stern's
letter to you, for your records.
Villine
September 21, 1983
FILE
Mr. Howard Stern
Stern's Luggage Inc.
194 Oakridge Mall
San Jose, Ca. 95123
Dear Mr. Stern:
This is in reply to your letter of July 18 to Mr. Michael K. Deaver,
Assistant to the President, expressing your concern about the form
letter used by the Embassy at Kingston, Jamaica, explaining the
basis for the denial of an application for a visa to visit the
United States.
Neither the Embassy nor the Department of State intends in any way
to give offense to visa applicants in Jamaica or elsewhere. I must
tell you, however, that the paragraph which concerns you is merely
an attempt to explain in layman's terms the controlling provision
of United States immigration law. Section 214(b) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act, as amended, reads, in pertinent part, as follows:
"Every alien shall be presumed to be an immigrant
until he establishes to the satisfaction of the
consular officer, at the time of application for
admission, that he is entitled to a nonimmigrant
status under section 101 (a) (15) of this title."
Section 101 (a) (15) defines the various classes of nonimmigrants
(temporary travellers), including tourists, business visitors,
students, and others. One of the elements of the definition of
tourists, business visitors, students and several others is the
requirement that the applicant have "a residence in a foreign
country which he has no intention of abandoning." Thus, a consular
officer considering an application for such a visa is required by
law to refuse the application unless the applicant can establish
that he has such a residence and that he does not intend to abandon
it.
While the existence of this requirement can be seen in the way in
which you have perceived it, it is at the same time, a basic element
in the statutory system for controlling immigration to the United
States. The Congress has established both numerical limitations on
immigration to the United States and detailed substantive requirements
to qualify for immigration. The United States has traditionally been,
and remains today, the principal country of immigration in the world,
Large numbers of those who desire to immigrate, but cannot do so,
nevertheless seek to settle in the United States.
-2-
In recognition of the fact that the United States has never had the
sort of internal mechanisms which exist in many countries for the
control of the movements and activities of aliens, the Congress
established the nonimmigrant visa system with its attendant require-
ments for qualifications as the means of denying access to the
United States to those intending to settle permanently but seeking
to enter in the guise of temporary travellers.
The problem of illegal immigration has reached such serious propor-
tions, largely because of illegal entry over our land borders by
those who could not qualify for temporary visas if they sought them,
that the Congress is now considering amendments to our immigration
law, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1983, which would
significantly increase our ability to deter illegal immigration.
The Administration strongly supports enactment of such legislation.
I trust that this information will clarify this situation for you.
Sincerely,
for
Louis P. Goelz
Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Visa Services
CC: L/CA: DRHenderson
Drafted:
Cleared:
CA/VO/L:
CA/VO/P/IW: WFKingsbury
9/21/83
JOWN & COUNTRY VILLAGE
DEL MONTE CENTER
194 OAKRIDGE MALL
373-1316
629-3244
241-9071
153354
STERN'S LUGGAGE. INC.
Since 1852
194 OAKRIDGE MALL
SAN JOSE CALIFORNIA 95123
July 18, 1983
Mr. Mike Deaver
% The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D. C. 20500
Dear Mike,
Our family went to Jamica for a vacation and ran into a touchy situation
While attending a Rotary meeting in Ocho Rios. Their exchange student had
been refused a visa to participate in the Rotary exchange program with a club
in New Jersey. A copy of the form letter for refusal is enclosed. I called
the Embassy and talked to Jim McHugh who has since taken care of the problem
with the student's visa being granted.
I am writing you, not knowing to whom else to do so, not about the Embassy
personnel, but about the form letter. The people in Jamica were furious at
the implications of the first paragraph, as I am sure you would be insulted
if receiving such a notice from another country. It insinuates, if not states,
that each person would prefer living in the U. S. rather than their native
country and would become an illegal immigrant to do SO. Even if this is true
in many cases, we can not tell this to everyone anymore than I could tell
each one of my sustomers they are considered to be shoplifters and must prove
to usthat they are not.
TOO often our policies are targeted to foreign governments and agencies,
instead of to the people. But it is the people in the long run who will
determine their governments and Whether they will be friendly to us or not.
We seem to understand this so well when we are campaigning in our own country
and forget it in our foreign policy or transactions with other people. Very
few times in history can attitudes be changed with one bold stroke. They
generally are formed over a period of time by an accumulation of small incidents
such 2S this lctter. Please see if we can change the wording to give a more
favorable impression.
Once at a barbecue for the then gubernatorial candidate Reagan, I was
trying to keep the crowd secking autographs from his side while he grabbed a
few. bites to eat. My wife stood beside him saying s'ic would protect his rear.
I am still trying to protect his rear.
Sincerely,
EMBASSY OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Kingston, Jamaica
3645
Dear Visa Applicant:
929 - 4850
We regret that we are unable to grant you a visa at this time.
WHY WAS YOUR VISA REFUSED?
Under United States law, every visa applicant is presumed to be an immi-
grant who intends to live forever in the United States. You must convince
the visa officer that you are not going to stay in the United States. You
must give really good reasons for returning to Jamaica.
WHEN MAY YOU APPLY AGAIN?
You should wait. until there are major changes in your personal circumstances.
Cr, if you ncglected to mention really IMPORTANT facts concerning your ties
to Jamaica, you might also reapply.
HOW MAY YOU REAPPLY?
If you feel that, based on the above, you genuinely qualify for a visa, WRITE
US A LETTER, listing YOUR ties to Jamaica. You MUST enclose a self-addressed,
stamped envelope to receive a response. The letter should not be more than
ONE PAGE in length and it MUST BE POSTED to: Visa Re-Application, American
Embassy, P.O. Box 541, Kingston 5. The letter MUST include your complete name,
date and place of birth, and the date of your last visa refusal. In your
letter, give us verifiable facts concerning your ties to Jamaica. For example,
you can state the nature of your job, how long you have been employed in this
job, your income or how long you have owned your business or farm. If married,
you can provide the same information about your husband or wife.
After we read your letter, if it appears that you might qualify for a visa, we
will send you a letter within 30 days inviting you to reapply. If it appears
that there would be no merit in making another application at this time, we
will also inform you by letter within 30 days.
Please DO NOT inquire about the status of your request to reapply for. a visa.
No one will be able to give you this information, and we do not provide informa-
tion or decisions on visa reapplications by telephone.
VISA FRAUD
Do not employ visa arrangers to help you. These people will take your money,
but they cannot help you to get a visa: United States, nonimmigrant visas are
- continued -
2
FREE for all Jamaicans and can only be issued by a United States consular
officer.
And remember --- do not make false statements about yourself to a consular
officer. If you do, you may never get a visa for the rest of your life.
The stamp placed in your passport will permit us to locate your previous
application should you reapply.
Thank you for your interest in visiting the United States of America.
Sincerely,
Michael Carpenter
Consul General of the
United States of America
Title 8 of the United States Code, Section 1184 and Section 214(b) of the
United States Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as amended; say in
part, (b) "every alien shall be presumed to be an immigrant until he estab-
lishes to the satisfaction of the consular officer, at the time of applica-
tion for a visa and the immigration officers, at the time of application
for admission that he is entitled to a nonimmigrant status
"
Title 8 of the United States Code; Section 1361 and Section 291 of the
United States Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as amended, say in
part; "Whenever any person makes application for a visa or any other document
required for entry, or makes application for admission, or otherwise attempts
to enter the United States. the burden of proof shall be upon such person to
establish that he is eligible to receive such visa or such document
Title 8 of the United States Code; Section 1101 and Section 101 (a) (15) of
the United States Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as amended, define
a nonimmigrant visitor as "(6) an alien having a residence in a foreign
country which he has no intention of abandoning and who is visiting the United
States temporarily for business or temporarily for plessure."
Title 8 of the United States Code, Section 1182 and Section 212(a) (19) of the
United States Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as amended, makes in-
eligibile for a visa "Any alien who seeks to procure. or has sought to procure
or has procured a visa or other documentation, or seeks to enter the United
States by fraud, or by willfully misrepresenting a material fact"
1
235
28 Oct.
Dear Tur. Dewer,
indicating how the people are feeling elbot
Here are some clippings
our overwent and its performance
these days.
that the have been in afghanistan hunch
I we bright remind the Sorits
longer than we shall ever be in Trena-
adp when Busw afghanistan
da. he undet Bon save we'll leave Gren-
Now they her we and the rest
is the world felt when they went
offended They wedn't Lotter !
there ! The pretend they are to
Siccerely,
frot Walker
GOOD MORNING
THIS MORNING U.S. MARINES
INVADED THE GALAPAGOS ISLANDS
AND ANTARCTICA To ENSURE THE
SAFETY OF STRATEGICALLY
IMPORTANT TORTOISES AND
PENGUINS
5:10
AUTH
IT'S ALWAYS
AND I SHOULD BE
INTERESTING
ABLE To SPEND MORE
LEARNING THE ROPES
TIME OUTDOORS IN
OF A NEW JOB
THIS ASSIGNMENT.
non
nnn
JUDGE CLARK
AND I WON'T EVEN
HAVE TO LEAVE
THE OFFICE !
1
416
&
e
DEPT. or INTERIOR
PROP. or
%
R. RHAGAN
IIIII
AUTH
@10/18/83 THE PHUBDELPHIA INSUIRER
LET ME SEE IF I'VE GOT THIS
BY BOLSTERING A GOVERNMENT
STRAIGHT- - OUR MISSION IS To
THAT CAN'T GOVERN
KEEP A PEACE THAT DOESN'T EXIST.
BEIRUTE
IN ORDER TO UNIFY A COUNTRY
HEY- WE'VE GOT
TORN APART BY AGE-OLD RIVALRIES
18 MONTHS
WASSERMAN
01983 LOS LOSANGELES TIMES SYNDICATE
To the Editor:
So James Watt has resigned, so
what? The Reagan administra-
tion fully intends to carry on
what President Reagan calls Mr.
Watt's "outstanding job
in
his
Clark's departure bodes
stewardship of the natural re-
sources of the nation" by turning
the environment over to private
enterprise for profitable ruin-
better than his arrival
ation, all in the name of "individ-
ual liberties" as opposed to "big
government." The public may be
reassured that their individual
If it is to be William P. Clark for
Mr. Clark - though he is most as-
rights are going to continue to be
Interior, best it be done quickly In the
suredly conservative- lacks the rabid
well protected through the sale
three days since the overdue depar-
zealotry that Mr. Watt brought to his
and leasing of public lands to the
ture of Secretary James G. Watt, there
mission. As the head of the National
energy corporations (at lowest
was a wistful moment of hope that
Wildlife Association pointed out, Mr.
market value) to be despoiled
and removed forever from the
perhaps now - with even most Senate
Clark's only qualification may be sim-
use of the public in their virgin
Republicans joining the chorus -
ply that he does not come "predisposed
state.
President Reagan might be pressured
with any point of view." The Senate's
Meanwhile, those of us who
to edge away from his severest pro-
confirmation hearings, given (once
may raise objection to these cyni-
development stances. Not that Mr. Rea-
again) Mr. Clark's shortcomings,
cal policies and the Reagan New-
gan sent signals to that effect. But
might serve better purpose as a plat-
speak that is used to cover them
hope, as they say, springs eternal.
form to air the misdirection of the
are labeled as traitors: As your
There was a casual, almost cynical
President's "privatization" policies.
article points out, Mr. Watt has
characterized environmentalists
note to the President's abrupt an-
That is not to underestimate Mr.
as subversives wishing to over-
nouncement nominating his trusted
Clark's capability to translate the Pres-
throw our form of government.
national security adviser for the Inte-
ident's philosophy into action. Mr.
Mr. Watt has been Mr. Reagan's
rior post. Unlike William D. Ruckels-
Clark was laughed off stage the first
loud mouthpiece, giving voice to
haus, who came off the bench under
time the Senate got a crack at him
the Reagan mentality (and this
similar circumstances, Mr. Clark has
(that time for an 18-month stint as
includes the bigotry) in a way
virtually zero background in - and no
deputy secretary of state) The prime
calculated to delight Mr. Rea-
apparent devotion to - things envi-
ministers of African nations? Shucks,
gan's far-right supporters while
not besmirching Mr. Reagan
ronmental or having to do with natu-
ol' Judge Clark had no idea who they
himself in the eyes of the general
ral resource conservation policy. Mr.
were. But the yuks soon stopped and,
public. It is a strategy that has
Reagan did nothing to dispel that im-
lo and behold, Mr. Clark soon emerged
worked remarkably well, despite
pression by revealing the nomination,
as a power behind the throne, orches-
Mr. Watt's version of overkill in
almost as a postscript, at a gathering of
trating the ouster of the key State
the role. Now Mr. Watt's useful-
Christian evangelical women, empha-
Department official in charge of Latin
ness has come to its appointed
sizing as he did it his high regard for
American policy, urging massive mili-
end, and Mr. Reagan will appoint
tary exercises in the Caribbean, chart
some other good steward to ad-
the service of Mr. Watt.
minister the same policies while
With 18 months remaining in his
ing a tough-hombre course on arms
keeping a close mouth this time,
term, the President has sent a message
talks.
SO as to allow Mr. Reagan to carry
that the Watt legacy will not be al-
Whatever else he has been, Mr
on his re-election campaign with-
tered. There will be a lower profile,
Clark has demonstrated as national
out having to answer for Mr.
yes, but no mid-course correction, no
security adviser that, while he is a
Watt's license, and to appear
apology, no retreat. The infrastructure
trustworthy staff man, he can also pro-
moderate by comparison.
remains intact: Interior solicitor Wil-
foundly influence the President's
Are we women, Jews, blacks,
"cripples" and every other kind
liam H. Coldiron; Assistant Secretary
strategy. In the muddle that passes as
of American going to let Mr. Rea-
Garrey E. Carruthers, supervising the
administration foreign policy, Mr.
gan get away with this? Or are
giveaway coal-leasing program; Robert
Clark became an increasingly strong
we going to turn back the 1984
F. Burford (husband of Anne, the for-
voice for military brinksmanship.
Orwell has predicted for us in
mer EPA administrator), at the helm
That has been a dangerous, dead-
favor of a government answer-
of the Bureau of Land Management;
end course And in the end, it may well
able to us and run in our inter-
and an endless roster of loyalists who
be Mr. Clark's departure from the for-
ests, the kind of government
those subversives who founded
favor expanded oil and gas leasing on
eign-policy front rather than his
our nation called democracy.
public lands.
unwelcome arrival at Interior - that
JERILYN BOWEN
That said, let it also be noted that
gives reason for hope.
Merion.
E: PEROT WALKER
3009 PARK RD
LAFAYETTE HIL PA 19444
SOUTHE ASTERN 28 PM OCT F61 PA
CIVIL
SERVICE
1983
1883
1983
USA2Oc
Tur, Twicheel K. Seaver
White House Executive office
Washington
d.c. 20500 D.C. 20500