LETTER TO ROBERT GATES FROM JOSEPH R. WRIGHT, JR.

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 26
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: March 28, 2011
• Sequence Number: 5
• Publication Date: December 2, 1987
• Content Type: LETTER

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
sue.
STAT
IC STAFF
Routing Slip
TO:
ACTION
COORD
INFO-
EO/ICS
D/ICS
DD/ICS
DD/RE
EA-D/ICS
SA-D/ICS
SA-D/ICS-EP
REO
COMIREX
SIGINT
HUMINT
MASINT
I PC
PBO
PPO
CCISCMO
IHC
RDCO
LL
SECRETARIAT
ADMIN
REGISTRY
ILI-)ae
SUSPENSE:
Date
REMARKS:
STAT
STAT
STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
L Y J.'CUTIVE SECRETARIAT
ROUTING SLIP
STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
December 2, 1987
Honorable Robert Gates
Deputy Director
Central Inttlligence Agency
Washington, D.C.. 20505
Ana I
UC 1907
EncHosed are talking points on the differs ces betwe - the budget
agreement and a sequester -- along with the egative'impact that
would occur if the Congress does not follow up 'the general
agreement as was announced last week and a sequester occurs.
I've also included a copy of the White House talking points on
the budget agreement, the President's letter to the Speaker on
the short-term CR, and the Administration position on the CR. As
you can see, the impact of a sequester would be fairly dramatic.
This is going to be a tough package to get through the Congress
by December 16th when the short-term CR ends.
Copies have also been provided to your Cabinet Secretary who has
been asked to contact key members of your oversight committees.
I would appreciate all you can do to help him in this effort and
explain it to outside groups in your speeches, statements,
discussions, etc. We need to make sure that the agreement is
followed through as it was negotiated -- and that a sequester
does not take place.
Look forward to seeing you then. If you need any
further information on the budget agreement or the sequester, do
not hesitate to let me know.
Best regard.;
Enclosures
D uty Director
R. Wright, Jr.
4~0~i2 ~
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
WASHINGTON
December 2, 1987
MEMORANDUM FOR ADMINISTRATION SPOKESPERSONS
MARION C. BLAKEY 1)4(,/
SUBJECT: SEQUESTRATION AND THE BUDGET AGREEMENT
Attached for your information and use are Talking Points that
explain the difference between the Sequester Order and the
bipartisan Budget Agreement.
If you have any questions concerning these materials, please feel
free to contact the White House Office of Public Affairs at (202)
456-7170.
Thanks very much.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
December 2, 1987
WHITE HOUSE TALKING POINTS
SEQUESTRATION AND THE BUDGET AGREEMENT
Overview
On November 20, 1987, President Reagan signed a Sequester Order
that forces across the board reductions of $23 billion in
spending for national security and domestic programs during FY
1988. The President's signature was required by the
r are indiscriminate and are
he budget. Many major programs are
ons are made blindly, in some cases
they are even counter-productive. For example, the cuts diminish
the Government's ability to collect all of the taxes owed. That
alone will add to the deficit.
On the day the President signed the Sequester Order, he also
accepted a package of more targeted and broadly based budget cuts
agreed to by congressional leaders. That Budget Agreement
includes some increases in revenue similar to those President
proposed in his FY 1988 budget. The Budget Agreement, while
clearly preferable to the Sequester, is not in force until
implementing legislation is-passed by the Congress and signed by
the President. Until then, the Sequester is still in force.
What follows is an explanation of why the bipartisan Budget Agreement
should be passed by Congress to replace the Sequester Order.
The Budget Agreement
o The Agreement between the President and the joint leadership
of Congress represents $76 billion in firm deficit reductions
over the next two years.
In FY 1988, the current fiscal year, the Agreement
reduces the deficit by more than $30 billion. That is
$7 billion more than the Sequester provides.
In FY 1989, the Agreement reduces the deficit by
$46 billion. The Sequester does not apply to the FY
1989 budget, other than the second-year effects on the
reductions in budgetary resources.
o The Budget Agreement preserves vital defense capabilities by
providing about the same budget authority for FY 1988 as in
FY 1987.
-- The compromise Budget Agreement will ensure $285.4 billion
in defense outlays in FY 1988 and $294 billion in FY 1989.
STAT
Fm adaiww tafeneatm em tea ttikra Nmum nMrs of ware 1 wm. as&mn
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
WHITE HOUSE TALKING POINTS
The Sequester order will reduce FY 1988 defense budget
authority by about $15 billion below the level of the
Budget Agreement.
o The Agreement begins to control spending for entitlement
programs. Savings in FY 1988 are achieved in Medicare ($2
billion); agriculture ($900 million), and guaranteed student
loans ($250 million). An additional $1.6 billion in savings
will be achieved in FY 1989.
o The Agreement includes $11 billion in additional revenue --
$9 billion in taxes and $2 billion in user fees and IRS
compliance reviews. This increase is acceptable as long as
it will not interfere with economic growth and meet the
President's criteria -- "no revenue other than the kind that
we called for in our budget."
-- Off limits are any changes in Federal income tax rates
for individuals or businesses, indexing of income tax
rates, and new value-added taxes.
Any revenue legislation requires the President's
approval and his signature, and it is subject to
his veto.
o The President has already proposed measures that would
increase revenues by extending certain payroll taxes to
uncovered workers, continue the practice of offsetting tax
refunds when debts are owed to the government, and
eliminating the tax loophole on employee stock option plans.
o While no compromise will be seen as perfect by all sides,
the Budget Agreement between the President and the
bipartisan congressional leadership is far better than the
across-the-board cuts that would take place under Sequester.
Summary
The Reagan Administration believes that much more can be cut from
virtually all areas of domestic spending. The problem is that
the Sequester Order does so blindly and across the board. It is
this indiscriminate nature of the Sequester Order that results in
cutting away lean meat rather than budget fat.
Page 2
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
WHITE HOUSE TALKING POINTS
NATIONAL DEFENSE
The
Sequester order
now
in force requires substantial redu
in
defense spending and
threatens to return us to the days
our
planes couldn't fly
and our ships couldn't sail for la
sufficient operation and
maintenance funds. The Sequester
now in force is reducing our defense Budget Authority by a
$15 billion, or 5 percent below the amount provided for in
Budget Agreement. Spare parts, munitions, and support equ
will suffer a disproportionate share of those cuts.
This is how the Sequester Order will diminish our defense
o $7 billion will be cut from the operation and mainten
our national defense. In real, inflation-adjusted to
that means we will spend 10 percent less on operation
maintenance of our defense structure in FY 1988 than
1987. Even the Congressional Defense Authorization
Conference Report admits that the Sequester Order put
spending:
below the minimum level of funding
necessary to maintain the current operating
levels and readiness of our military forces."
o The Sequester will soon sink the Navy's ability to ma
ships with experienced crews. The Navy could be forc
leave ships tied up at the dock, not deploy them in
essential waters.
o The order forces cuts in the number of flying hours,
reducing pilot training and combat readiness. Some u
might be forced to curtail operations, thus reducing
Nation's ability to keep the peace and defend freedom
home and abroad.
Navy pilot training would be reduced by 29 perce
below the FY 1987 level.
Air Force flying hours will be cut to 80 percent
FY 1987 level.
Army flying hours will drop by 22 percent from F
o The Sequester Order forces the deferral of equipment
maintenance thereby disrupting shipyards and aircraft
facilities. Newly purchased equipment will remain in
Page 3
For ?ooilional IManwion. c@fl His WNW Nouu Omcs 91 Public Aft* c 456-7170.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
tions
.when
of
Order
Dut
the
pment
apability:
-ice of
-is,
and
n FY
its
d to
Its
.he
at
of the
1987 levels.
repair
?::arehouses.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
WHITE HOUSE TALKING POINTS
o The Order forces curtailment of field exercises that develop
and maintain combat preparedness.
o The Sequester Order undermines our defense posture, thereby
weakening the President's ability to persuade the Soviets to
continue to negotiate seriously on arms reduction.
Undermining Our Defenses
o Procuring of spare parts to sustain aircraft, vehicles and
ships will be cut. Lower levels of spare parts will reduce
our ability to fly combat sorties and undermine the
investment we made in new weapons over the past seven years.
o Funding for ammunition and spare parts will be cut by 10
percent in real terms from the FY 1987 level.
0 Production of anti-tank munitions will be sharply reduced
and stockpiles for NATO forces will remain at unacceptably
low levels under the Sequester.
o Severe cuts will be made in the production of Navy and Air
Force missile systems.
o Production slowdowns will force the loss of skilled workers
in munition plants that would reduce our ability to surge
production lines during emergencies.
The Budget Agreement
These changes in the Nation's defense posture are already
mandated by the Sequester Order now in force. It can be
replaced, and its adverse impacts on our defense posture
lessened, by congressional acceptance of the bipartisan Budget
Agreement. While the Agreement provides a lot less than we need,
it would make far smaller cuts in our defense program than
Sequestration. The Budget Agreement, then, is key to maintaining
national security now and in the future.
Page 4
Mvap~ ~
For &Wit*W i donnttion, c1N it o V1*1 MOM Off cs of Pubic MaW ; 4W7170.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
WHITE HOUSE TALKING POINTS
CONTROLLING CRIME
The Sequester forces an estimated $327 million reduction in the
Justice Department's law enforcement activities. A cut of this
size would severely limit the Administration's ability to fight
crime and to reduce the flow of drugs into the United States.
Adopting the Budget Agreement would preserve our ability to fight
crime and pursue the war against drug abuse.
Under the Sequester Order
o The Drug Enforcement Administration would furlough
employees and reduce coverage on drug interdiction programs.
o The FBI would be forced to postpone hiring for 700
positions. It would also postpone purchases of key
equipment, reduce investigative case travel and curtail
training for local law enforcement personnel.
o Enforcement of the new immigration reform law would be
slowed because of hiring restrictions in the Immigration and
Naturalization Service. Also, Operation Alliance, a
U.S.-Mexican effort to stop drugs entering the U.S., would
be curtailed.
o Three new prisons could not be staffed, leaving them idle.
The Budget Agreement
o The Agreement would eliminate the need for automatic
Sequester-driven reductions in law enforcement expenses and
ensure that the laws would be enforced, the border patrol
would be increased, and much needed prison facilities would
be available.
o In addition, at the Treasury Department, the U.S. Customs
Service would furlough employees for up to 23 days and
reduce coverage on drug interdiction programs.
Page 5
For additional tnforn atan, cat the WhNI Noun Olga of Pu01k AM*s: 456.7170.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
WHITE HOUSE TALKING POINTS
TRANSPORTATION
The Sequester order now in force could mean more air traffic
delays and fewer safety inspections. It would cut $192 million
from air traffic control, including the operation and maintenance
of air traffic control equipment and facilities, and from
inspections. That would stretch an already hard-working air
traffic control system beyond anticipated limits, and could
reduce the margin of safety if there are fewer inspections of the
planes we fly on and the men and women who fly them. The Budget
Agreement, by comparison, would continue adequate funding to
maintain the air traffic control system and to continue vital
Federal inspections. The Budget Agreement will maintain the
margin of safety the Sequester Order would reduce.
Coast Guard operations would be cut by $120 million. That
money would reduce marine safety and drug enforcement operations.
Under the Sequester Order:
o The present air traffic control system would remain static;
there would be no increase in the number of air controllers.
That means delays in the air and on the ground.
o Training opportunities for existing air traffic controllers
would be limited. That means fewer fully qualified
controllers to guide planes safely through crowded skies.
o The FAA's maintenance workforce would be reduced. When
computers go down and communication equipment fails, it will
take far longer to repair them. That translates into longer
delays as air traffic controllers slow the system down to
compensate for their increased workload.
o There could be fewer Federal inspections of planes and
pilots because of reductions in the aviation inspector
workforce. That is a clear risk to the safety of the flying
public.
o Up to 16,000 FAA employees not involved in sa'.ety-critical
work could be subject to furlough for as long as three
months. As a result, there will be reductions in logistical
support and less policy and managerial oversight of FAA
activities.
Page 6
For additional iMonnttron. CIN the Whlto NO UM Ofte of PubMc Aft h; 4561170.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
WHITE HOUSE TALKING POINTS
0 10 patrol boats and eight cutters would be decommissioned.
This would impede interdiction of boats smuggling marijuana
and cocaine into the U.S.
o 10 aircraft that fly 8,000 patrol hours a year in search of
smugglers, illegal foreign fishing operations, and mariners
in distress will be grounded.
0 10 search and rescue stations will be closed. Each year
they rescue hundreds of mariners who suffer boating
accidents.
0 10 field offices will be closed that had been involved with
vessel inspections, marine pollution abatement, and port
security.
o These cuts mean more lives will be lost at sea, and more
lives will be lost at home as drug smugglers continue their
crimes with sharply reduced Federal detection.
The Budget Agreement
By providing a far higher level of funding, the Agreement would
provide for continued hiring of air traffic controllers,
continued training, and continued maintenance on equipment. Coast
Guard operations would remain in force. Lives would be saved
and illegal drugs seized. In the starkest terms, for some, the
difference between the Budget Agreement and the Sequester Order
is the difference between life and death.
Page 7
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
WHITE HOUSE TALKING POINTS
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
Under the Sequester Order, the deficit reduction would be less
than $23 billion because IRS' ability to collect money owed the
Government will be reduced. By comparison, the Budget Agreement
provides funding to maintain IRS collections, and to serve the
taxpayers with information and timely refunds.
Under the Sequester Order:
o IRS funding will be cut and its ability to collect all the
revenues owed will be reduced. IRS officials report that as
much as $2 billion in taxes will not be collected because of
insufficient resources. The loss of that $2 billion in
revenue will force the deficit up by an equal amount.
o IRS services to taxpayers filing under the new tax reform
law will be cut. Funding reductions for IRS make it
impossible for IRS to meet its increasing workload because
there are insufficient funds to provide staff to answer
taxpayers' questions at IRS district offices.
The Budget Agreement:
If Congress passes the Budget Agreement, it will provide the funds
IRS needs to continue collecting revenue owed the Government,
help taxpayers comply with the new rules for new, lower rates,
and maintain IRS ability to get tax refunds back to taxpayers in
an average of six weeks.
Page 8
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
WHITE HOUSE TALKING POINTS
VETERANS ADMINISTRATION
President Reagan's commitment to provide essential help for those
who served their country is substantially reduced by the
Sequester Order. By comparison, the Budget Agreement, if
adopted, would preserve benefits for hundreds of thousands of
people, including Vietnam-era veterans.
Under The Sequester Order:
o 23,000 veterans who suffered a disability in the service of
the Nation and who are training in the VA's Vocational
Rehabilitation program will see their subsistence allowances
cut substantially, from $310 a month to $256 a month.
o Monthly benefit checks for 193,000 Vietnam-era veterans and
their 41,000 dependents training under the G.I. Bill will be
cut by over 10 percent. That will disrupt educational plans
and programs and reduce the ability of these veterans and
their dependents to take advantage of educational benefits
they are now provided.
The Budget Agreement
0 If the Sequester order is replaced by the Budget Agreement,
then funding of job training for veterans who suffered
disabilities in service would continue. Benefit checks for
Vietnam veterans using the G.I. Bill will be restored.
Page 9
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
WHITE HOUSE TALKING POINTS
OTHER DOMESTIC PROGRAMS
The Sequester orders the following reductions:
o EDUCATION: Educational programs would be cut by $1.4
billion. Pell grants, which provide aid to needy college
students, would lose $200 million and as many as 200,000
recipients would lose their awards.
0 AGRICULTURE: Federal inspectors could be furloughed for up
to 30 days a year, which would delay meat and poultry
inspections and force slowdowns and even shutdowns of meat
and poultry processing operations. The economic loss to the
industry could be large. In addition, support payments and
loans to farmers would be cut by $1.4 billion. This would
significantly affect farm income, reducing the income of a
typical farmer by as much as $4,000.
0 HEAD START: Will be cut by $100 million and 41,000 children
will lose its services.
o AGING: The Administration on Aging will lose $64 million
and 22.7 million fewer meals would be served to senior
citizens in their homes or in group settings.
o HEALTH: Research on cancer and heart disease will be
curtailed as NIH protects AIDS research, but other research-
grant support will be cut by $500 million.
0 ENERGY: General science programs would be reduced to
funding levels approximating those of FY 1986. That means
curtailed operations at Fermilab, Brookhaven National
Laboratory and the Stanford Linear Accelerator. Contracts
and grants to individual researchers elsewhere would be cut
by at least 30 percent.`-The Science and Technology Centers
initiative, part of the President's Competitiveness
Initiative, would be cancelled. National Science Foundation
research support for 500 scientists and engineeers would be
terminated.
Summary
The Budget Agreement is not a perfect document. It is a
compromise, and that means the Administration could not cut as
much from the budget as should be cut. More should be cut from
many domestic programs. But the Agreement is far preferable to
the Sequester Order and its indiscriminate, across-the-board cuts
that take away muscle and bone as well as the fat.
Page 10
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
THE WHITE HOUSE
December 1, 1987
This is to register my concerns with the provisions of
H.J. Res. 395, the Continuing Resolution, which I understand
is scheduled to be considered in the House in the near future.
While members of the Howse and Senate are working to develop
legislation that would implement our bipartisan budget agree-
ment, it would be counterproductive for the Congress to act on
a measure that clearly violates both the spirit and the terms
of that agreement.
Let me also point out there are many extraneous provisions
included in the Resolution to which I must take exception. In
addition I am informed that further objectionable measures may
be incorporated into the Resolution by the Rules Committee.
It is imperative in my view that essential nonlethal aid
to the Nicaraguan democratic resistance be continued in the
Resolution. To fail to provide such assistance at this
critical time would undercut the peace process and undermine
our commitment to democracy in Central America.
I trust that we can continue our bipartisan effort and work
toward implementation of the agreement reached last month.
I urge you and your colleagues to develop a Continuing
Resolution that is faithful to our agreement.
We are working to carry out the Administration's part of
this agreement, and I trust the House will do the same.
If A.J. Res. 395 were sent to me in its current form for
signature, I would have no hesitation in vetoing the measure.
Sincerely,
The Honorable Robert H. Michel
Republican Leader
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
THE WHITE HOUSE
December 1, 1987
Dear Mr. Speaker:
This is to register my concerns with the provisions of
H.J. Res. 395, the Continuing Resolution, which I understand
is scheduled to be considered in the House in the near future.
While members of the House and Senate are working to develop
legislation that would implement our bipartisan budget agree-
ment, it would be counterproductive for the Congress to act on
a measure that clearly violates both the spirit and the terms
of that agreement.
Let me also point out there are many extraneous provisions
included in the Resolution to which I must take exception. In
addition I am informed that further objectionable measures may
be incorporated into the Resolution by the Rules Committee.
It is imperative in my view that essential nonlethal aid
to the Nicaraguan democratic resistance be continued in the
Resolution. To fail to provide such assistance at this
critical time would undercut the peace process and undermine
our commitment to democracy in Central America.
I trust that we can continue our bipartisan effort and work
toward implementation of the agreement reached last month.
I urge you and your colleagues to develop a Continuing-
Resolution that is faithful to our agreement.
We are working to carry out the Administration's part of
this agreement, and I trust the House will do the same.
If H.J. Res. 395 were sent to me in its current form for
signature, I would have no hesitation in vetoing the measure.
Sincerely,
Q.., (Z..~
The Honorable Jim Wright
Speaker of the
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
November 24, 1987
WHITE HOUSE TALKING POINTS
THE DEFICIT REDUCTION AGREEMENT
"[The agreement) provides the necessary
services for our people, maintains our national
security, and does both at a level that will not
over-burden our taxpayers. In a word -- fairness."
--- President Reagan
November 21, 1987
o President Reagan and the bipartisan congressional leadership
have agreed to Federal budget deficit reductions totaling
$76 billion over the next two years. With these reductions,
the Government should comply with the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings
targets for FY 1988 and FY 1989.
The deficit will be reduced by $30.2 billion in FY 1988
and $45.85 billion in FY 1989.
-- The $30.2 billion savings in FY 1988 substantially
exceeds the $23 billion deficit reduction that would be
achieved through the sequester (reduction) order for
FY 1988, which was issued last week as required
by law.
o The revenue increases in this deficit reduction package are
comparable in size to those originally proposed by President
Reagan in the FY 1988 budget he sent to Congress in January 1987.
o President Reagan's leadership and a strong economy helped
cut the deficit by $73 billion in FY 1987. This package
will continue our progress toward controlling the budget
deficit.
o. The agreement preserves President Reagan's commitment to a
safety net of essential services for the poor.
o The agreement preserves President Reagan's commitment to
protect Social Security.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
WHITE HOUSE TALKING POINTS
THE AGREEMENT
(in billions of dollars)
FY 1988 FY 1989
Category Budget Outlays Budget Outlays
Authority Authority
Domestic $145.1 $160.3 $148.1 $169.2
International
Affairs 17.8 16.5 18.1 16.1
Defense 292.0 285.4 299.5 294.0
Spending Cuts
o The agreement reached with Congress reflects the President's
commitment to balancing the budget primarily through
spending cuts.
o The agreement provides for a total of $36.25 billion in
spending cuts over two years -- $11.6 billion in spending
cuts in FY 1988 and $19.95 billion in FY 1989.
o These cuts are part of the President's promise to reduce the
rate of increase in Federal spending. In real terms,
domestic spending grew at an annual rate of more than 6.5
percent between 1960 and 1980. Since 1980, the growth rate
in spending has been held to about 2 percent.
Revenues: The President did not agree to new taxes
o The revenue increases in this deficit reduction package are
comparable in size to those originally proposed in the FY
1988 budget. As President Reagan said in announcing the
agreement:
"I would like to remind you that in the budget
last January that I sent up to the Congress,
I had proposals in there for $9 billion in
revenues. And this has been part of our proposal
all the way. But they are not taxes dealing
with changes in the income tax or taxes that
we think would be deleterious to the economy.
But these sources of revenue [have] been there
laying on the shelf since January."
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
WHITE HOUSE TALKING POINTS
SPECIFIC SAVINGS
(in billions of dollars)
FY 1988
FY 1989
Revenue Increases
Receipts
9.00
14.00
User fees
0.40
0.40
IRS enforcement (net)
1.60
2.90
Subtotal, revenues
11.00
17.30
Outlay Reductions
Defense
5.00
8.20
Non-defense discretionary
2.60
5.80
Entitlements programs:
Medicare
2.00
3.50
Agriculture
0.90
1.60
Federal personnel
0.85
0.85
Guaranteed student loans
0.25
0.00
Subtotal, entitlements
4.00
5.95
Subtotal, outlays
11.60
19.95
Other
Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation
premiums
0.40
0.40
Veterans Administration housing fee
0.20
0.20
Veterans Affairs loan sales
0.80
1.00
Asset sales
5.00
3.50
Debt service
1.20
3.50
7.60
8.60
TOTAL DEFICIT REDUCTION
30.20
45.85
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
STATEMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION
4 _
Y.1. PLOLICY
December 1, 1987
(House Rules)
N.J. RES. 395: FY 1988 OMNIBUS FULL-YEAR CONTINUING RESOLUTION
(Sponsor: Whitten (D) Mississippi)
The President's senior advisers would recommend veto of the
full-year continuing resolution as reported by the House
Appropriations Committee. It is deficient for several reasons.
H.J. Res. 395 fails to reflect the budget agreement reached
between the President and the bipartisan leadership of the
Congress. It is absolutely imperative that funding levels
provided in FY 1988 appropriations bills be consistent with the
bipartisan budget agreement for domestic, international, and
defense spending. Action taken on appropriations bills, in
conjunction with reconciliation, must achieve the important and
necessary reductions to the deficit.
The resolution also is deficient because it fails to include
non-lethal aid to sustain the Nicaraguan democratic resistance
while the process leading to security and democracy in Central
America unfolds.
In addition, by referencing House-passed or House-reported
bills, the continuing resolution includes language provisions
that, by themselves, make the resolution unacceptable. The most
serious objectionable provisions, any one of which would cause a
veto recommendation, are identified in the attachment.
Five items concerning arms control, any one of which would
prompt a veto recommendation, can be resolved by amending the
provisions to make them consistent with the DOD Authorization
Conference Report. These provisions are as follows:
0 Prohibit the development, testing, or deployment of an
ABM System under certain circumstances (Defense);
0 Limit U.S. strategic nuclear forces to the numerical
sublimits of the SALT II agreement (Defense);
o Prohibit U.S. nuclear explosions exceeding one kiloton
(Defense);
o Impose a one-year moratorium on the testing of the
Space Defense System (ASAT) against objects in space
(Defense); and
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
o Prohibit the development or deployment of the
Space-Based Interceptor Project (Defense).
The Administration is strongly opposed to efforts expected on
the House floor to add entire authorizing bills to the continuing
resolution. For example, inclusion of the Fairness Doctrine,
which the President has already vetoed, would certainly lead to a
veto recommendation. An omnibus continuing resolution is not the
appropriate vehicle for legislation that should be debated and
enacted separately. Any attempt to ensure passage of legislation
in this way would result in a veto recommendation.
Finally, the bill contains numerous other objectionable
provisions, any combination of which could trigger a veto. These
provisions have been summarized in previous Statements of
Administration Policy on each of the bills included in the
resolution by reference.
The Administration urges the House to craft an appropriations
measure that comports with the bipartisan agreement and is free
of extraneous language provisions so that the President's senior
advisers can recommend that he sign this legislation.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
STATEMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION
POLICY
MOST OBJECTIONABLE LANGUAGE'ITEMS IN FULL-YEAR
CONTINUING RESOLUTION, ANY ONE OF WHICH COULD TRIGGER
VETO BICOMMENDATION
Rural Devel - The Continuing Resolution (CR) deletes
the authority of the Secretary of
Treasury to disallow any premium-free
prepayment of REA-guaranteed FFB direct
loans. Must be deleted or modified in an
acceptable way.
The CR prohibits any efforts to alter the
method of computing normalized prices for
agricultural commodities in effect
January 1, 1987, thus blocking
Administration efforts to end the water
subsidy/price subsidy double-dip. Must
be deleted.
The CR specifies detailed up-front
appropriations for each of the CCC farm
price support programs. This would be
difficult to administer and would likely
result in unwarranted delays in providing
loans and payments to farmers. Must be
deleted.
The CR precludes sale of loans made by
the -Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund.
Must be deleted.
The CR denies use of private debt
collection agencies in FmHA. Must be
deleted.
Com/Jus/State - The CR prohibits the sale of EDA loans
without approval of borrower. Must be
deleted.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
Defense
The CR prohibits development, testing, or
deployment of an ABM System under certain
circumstances. Must be deleted or
modified in an acceptable way.
The CR limits U.S. strategic nuclear
forces to the numerical sublimits of the
SALT II agreement. Must be deleted or
modified in an acceptable way.
The CR prohibits U.S. nuclear explosions
exceeding one kiloton. Must be deleted
or modified in an acceptable way.
The CR imposes a one year moratorium on
testing of Space Defense System (ASAT)
against objects in space. Must be
deleted or modified in an acceptable way.
The CR prohibits DOD from purchasing
foreign-made supercomputers unless the
Secretary certifies that capability is
not available from U.S. manufacturers.
Must be deleted.
The CR eliminates funding for A-76
studies or contracting-out for any
reservoir administered by the Corps of
Engineers. Must be deleted.
Dist of Columbia - None.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
Energy and Water - The CR blocks the Bureau of Reclamation
from moving to Denver or reorganizing as
planned until Congress can review the
plans. Must be deleted or modified in an
acceptable way.
The CR includes over 40 unbudgeted
construction starts and other add-ons for
Army Corps of Engineers water projects.
Particularly objectionable is the
mandated funding for: (a) the next
segment of the uneconomic $1.6 billion
Red River Waterway (LA) and (b) Helena
Harbor (AR). Must be deleted.
Foreign Ohs - The CR rescinds $64 million in previously
appropriated funds that were commited to
Korea which, it is claimed, is the amount
of the benefit Korea will receive under
the debt restructuring proposal. Must be
deleted.
The CR prohibits use of U.S.-supplied
military equipment by Turkish troops on
Cyprus and codifies the 7:10 ratio of
military aid to Greece and Turkey.
Must be deleted.
HUD-Independent - The CR prohibits selling section 312
Interior
direct loans made to rehabilitate single
and multi-family units. Must be deleted.
The CR requires that structures on the
OCS contain at least 50 percent U.S.
materials. Must be deleted.
Labor/HHS/Ed - None.
Legis. Branch - None.
Mil Con - None.
Transportation - None.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3
Treasury/Postal - The CR directs GSA to acquire a building
in Chicago, Ill. and buildings for the
EPA and DOT through lease purchase
arrangements. Must be deleted.
The CR requires the expenditure of over
$200 million from receipts from surplus
silver disposal for the acquisition of
chromium, cobalt, manganese, and platinum
metals which are not needed to meet
national security requirements. Must be
deleted or modified in an acceptable way.
Other
The CR incorporates a 3 percent Federal
Civilian pay raise in January 1988, with
65 percent absorption. Must be modified
to conform with bipartisan budget
agreement.
The CR, in virtually every Subcommittee,
includes numerous provisions which
intrude unnecessarily into Executive
Branch responsibilities and have been
detailed in previous Statements of
Administration Policy (such as staffing
floors and Chadha issues). Must be
deleted or modified in an acceptable way.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/03/28: CIA-RDP89M00699R000100010005-3