March 2, 1981
It's a pleasure to be with you today for your annual Congressional City Conference. The last time
I was in this room, not too many weeks ago, was for the National Prayer Breakfast. And I hope
that what was said then and what I did then has had some lasting effect. I'm especially pleased to
have been introduced by my longtime personal friend, Mayor Bill Hudnut.
I understand and appreciate the part your organization has played in the Pennsylvania Avenue
development plan here in Washington. The new 12-story building you've constructed overlooking
Western Plaza is a fine example of what can be done to revitalize the inner city. It should serve to
stimulate others to invest in such worthwhile efforts.
As you're well aware, rejuvenation of the American economy is the number one priority of my
administration. This, I believe, was the mandate of the voters last November. It was a mandate
that I sought, yet something all elected officials should understand, because it's a mandate for all
of us. The election did not commission me to attempt economic reform alone, but to work with
elected officials -- Federal, State, and local -- to put America's economic house in order. And
that's why I'm here.
We've got a job to do together, and I believe we should open a clean, clear line of communication
now. Our job, of course, is to get the economy of the United States moving again. It's essential
for you as representatives of the cities; it's essential for all of us as Americans. One thing is
certain: The time for business as usual has passed.
In the last two decades, Americans have suffered oppressively increased taxation, inflation,
unemployment, and interest rates. The middle class, the life-blood of democracy and the American
way of life, cannot withstand these pressures indefinitely. And the economic tremors rippling
through our economy suggest that these people are near the breaking point. I don't know how
many of you earlier this morning might have had an opportunity to watch on television as some
citizens were being interviewed who publicly have stated they are simply going to rebel at paying
their income tax, and they're going to appeal to others to do the same.
We're suffering the worst inflation in 60 years. Almost 8 billion -- million -- Americans are
continuing to be out of work. I've been here only a month, and I'm beginning to talk in billions
when I mean millions. [Laughter] Interest rates have climbed to an unprecedented 20 percent,
with home mortgage rates of 15 percent destroying for millions the dream of home ownership.
Investment in industry is lagging behind our major competitors, with too much of the personal
savings of our people flowing into nonproductive inflation hedges instead of job-creating,
long-term investment or savings.
Millions of Americans feel that for them the standard of living is actually going down, and it is. It's
shocking and a depressing fact that after being adjusted for the continued cheapening of the dollar
by inflation, the hourly earnings of American workers have dropped by 5 percent in the last 5
years. This is a complete reversal of the American experience and will have profound impact on
the spirit of our people if something isn't done and done quickly.
And while our workers have been experiencing a decline in their standard of living, government
has continued to spend money like there's no tomorrow. And come to think of it, that could be a
self-fulfilling prophecy. In those same 5 years, those workers' taxes went up by 67 percent.
Federal spending grew to 23 percent of the nation's gross national product, the highest peacetime
share in our history. And the Federal Government has shown a deficit every year after 1969.
In fiscal year 1980 that deficit was $59.6 billion, the second largest in history. And we face
another deficit of similar magnitude in this year of fiscal 1981. Now, this kind of irresponsibility
can't go on. What most Federal officials have been afraid to admit is that Federal spending has
been for some time increasingly out of control. If left unchecked, the current situation would lead
to a redoubling of the Federal budget within 5 years.
For a time, it's appeared that Congress had more solutions than the country had problems; or, put
another way, I've said before that cures were developed for which there were no known diseases.
Just conceiving of a program that might help someone somewhere was itself reason enough to
pass a law and appropriate money. Eventually, with so many programs, safeguarding public funds
became an impossible task. One government estimate suggested that between 1 and 10 percent of
all spending on social programs was, and probably still is, being lost to fraud alone, at a cost of up
to $25 billion. When that cost or the cost of waste is added to that sum for fraud, the figures are
even more appalling.
Of course, spending isn't the only aspect of government that seems out of control. In the last
decade, American business and, yes, local government, has had to deal with an avalanche of
Federal regulation. Between 1970 and 1979, expenditures for the major regulatory agencies
quadrupled. The number of pages published annually in the Federal Register nearly tripled, and
the number of pages in the Code of Federal Regulations increased by nearly two-thirds. The cost
of this has been staggering. An estimated $100 billion per year -- now I can say billion -- is added
on to the cost of everything we buy, just to pay for the cost of Federal regulations. And then
there's the unseen cost which is harder to calculate but nonetheless devastating: Regulation tends
to smother innovation, discourage new investment, increase labor costs, and reduce
competition.
This Federal Goliath, unleashed and uncontrolled, brought us to the economic brink that is now
confronting this Nation. Too many officials appear to feel totally helpless in the face of the
monumental task of restoring order to the Federal Government's economic policies. Perhaps no
one had the clout to get the job done. Whatever the reason, we now have much work to do.
Together, we can put our economic house in order again and regain control of this situation.
We must realize that the economic crisis confronting America is not the result of a natural disaster
or a catastrophe beyond our control. Inflation, unemployment -- all of it -- was basically caused by
decisions that we, as a people, made. Now the only power needed to restore America's strength is
willpower.
You may have heard a rumor to the effect that I've submitted a program to Congress, a four-part
program which will get this country moving in the right direction again, I believe, increase the
standard of living for our people, and cut the inflation and unemployment rates.
First, I've asked for a substantial reduction in the growth of Federal expenditures. Second, I've
asked for a significant reduction in Federal tax rates. And third, I've asked for the prudent
elimination of excessive regulation. Fourth, while recognizing the independence of the institution,
I have pledged to work with the Federal Reserve Board to develop a monetary policy which is
consistent with those policies.
Let me refer back to the second of those points and just add this one fact. All of us must accept
the fact which has been proven in this century, proven here in our own country several times, that
a reduction in Federal tax rates does not necessarily result in a reduction in tax revenues. The
economy expands, it reduces the burden for the individual, but the overall share goes up as the
base of the economy is broadened.
Now, these four complementary policies form an integrated and comprehensive program, the
details of which have been examined by the best economic minds in the country, people who are
working with me on a daily basis. However, this program now faces a political gauntlet of interest
groups. And, may I say, I know that in many instances there's legitimate concern, concern that
some worthwhile program is now going to be unable to meet the purpose for which it was
founded. And yet at the same time, I'm finding it increasingly difficult not to call some of the
interest groups selfish interest groups, because we are not cutting at the muscle fiber of these
programs.
And this is where you come in. You are not only important because of the power you wield on
Capitol Hill, but also because you are looking out for the interests of millions of citizens who
inhabit the great urban areas of America. You and I have shared goals. We both want what is best
for those who live in our cities, just as I'm sure we both want what is best for the people of this
country, wherever they reside.
Now, I know that you, like all Americans, recognize the importance of getting our economic
house in order. The plague of inflation and stagnation is brutalizing this country. I don't have to
remind you of the effects on local government: The cost of every service you provide skyrockets;
tax revenue declines when businesses close their doors; and when coupled with the increased
unemployment, the economic burden reaches a critical stage. Local government was not designed
to withstand this kind of economic upheaval. Unless something is done to turn the economy
around, local governments will suffer right along with many other respected American
institutions.
On principle, we should never forget this: There is no better Federal program than an expanding
American economy.
Even as our program for economic recovery awaits action by the Congress, we've already started
to do what we can within the executive branch to cut back spending and regulation.
The Office of Management and Budget is now putting together an interagency task force to
vigorously attack waste and fraud. Highly motivated and expertly trained professionals will be
appointed as Inspectors General to the Cabinet departments.
We've suspended for 2 months the flood of last-minute rulemaking done by the previous
administration so that we can look closely at it. We've eliminated the ineffective and
counterproductive wage and price standards of the Council on Wage and Price Stability. We
accelerated the decontrol of domestic oil. We have concentrated our efforts to enhance the
effectiveness of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980. We placed a freeze on Federal hiring.
We've also begun taking action on particularly controversial rules. For example, rules mandating
extensive bilingual education programs, passive restraints in large cars, the unnecessary labeling of
chemicals in the workplace, controls on garbage truck noise, and increased overtime payments for
executives have been withdrawn or postponed. These actions alone are expected to save the
American public and industry almost $1 billion annually.
The administration will be reviewing a host of other regulations in the near future. Vice President
Bush, who will be meeting with your executive committee this afternoon, is heading a special
Presidential task force to clear away many regulatory roadblocks, as many as possible. His role in
our regulatory reform effort should suggest the importance that we place on this issue. I'm aware
that Bill Hudnut is circulating a questionnaire regarding regulatory relief which will be presented
to the Vice President and the Task Force on Regulatory Relief this afternoon.
Now, all of this is being done to start us on the road toward recovery. What is important is that
we begin. I'm sure we'll get there -- if we work together.
Now, there are those who oppose almost everything in the economic program. They oppose the
program, but for the most part they offer no alternative. Well, hoping things will get better won't
make it so. I've been told that some Members of Congress disagree with my tax cut proposal.
Well, you know it's been said that taxation is the art of plucking the feathers without killing the
bird. [Laughter] It's time they realized the bird just doesn't have any feathers left. [Laughter]
Maybe some of you have heard me put it a different way on several occasions when I've said that
robbing Peter to pay Paul won't work anymore, because Peter's been bankrupt for some time now.
[Laughter]
Nevertheless, the real threat to recovery comes from those who will oppose only a small part of
the overall program, while supporting the overall effort. Needless to say, the small portion these
parochial groups oppose always deals with the cuts that affect them directly. Those cuts they
oppose. They favor cutting everybody else's subsidy as an important step in ending inflation and
getting the country moving again. The accumulative effect of this shortsightedness can be
damaging. We're all in the same boat, and we have to get the engines started before the boat goes
over the falls.
Now, we've tried to be as fair and evenhanded in developing our package as was humanly
possible. It's important to remember, when someone says that the administration is planning to cut
the budget, what we really mean is we're planning to cut the growth in the fiscal year '82 budget
from 16 percent to 7 percent. And even with our cuts, that 7 percent means that spending in fiscal
year '82 will go up over fiscal year 1981 by about $40 billion.
Within this restructuring that we've proposed, some programs are eliminated, but others are
strengthened. And we did nothing to weaken the social safety net which protects the truly needy
in this society. As a matter of fact, when we reformed welfare in California, we discovered that
the really truly deserving people that we were trying to help weren't helped as much as they
should be helped, simply because of excesses administratively, duplication, and people who were
not truly needy. We had spread ourselves so thin, that we didn't have the resources available to
really take care of those with great need.
Full retirement benefits for more than 31 million social security recipients will be continued, along
with an annual cost-of-living increase. The Medicare program will not be cut, nor will veterans
pensions, nor supplemental income for the blind, aged, and disabled. The school lunch and
breakfast programs will continue for the children of low-income families, as will nutrition and
other special services for the aging. And, yes, there will be no cut in Project Head Start or
summer youth jobs. When considering these essential programs, please remember the very best
thing that can be done to strengthen things like social security is to get the American economy
going and put people back to work, so they will be paying into the trust fund once again.
Now, I know there will be those who will charge that we're requiring sacrifices from the rest of
the government, but not from the Defense Department. They'll suggest this proves we're not
evenhanded as we promised. Well, I would remind those of you who wish to get beyond the
slogans to examine my appointment to the job of Secretary of Defense. Cap Weinberger is
anything but a big spender and was once given a nickname here in government to confirm that
fact. So although the international situation dictates more spending for defense, it does not mean
the Defense Department will be free from the cut-and-trim philosophy of this administration. I can
assure you that Cap is going to do a lot of trimming over there in Defense to make sure the
American taxpayer is getting more bang for every buck that is spent. I've even heard that there
was a sigh of relief in several other departments when it was learned that Cap-the-Knife was
going to Defense, and not to those other departments. [Laughter]
In our attempt to be evenhanded, we tried, whenever possible, to cushion the budget blows. In the
case of money going to the cities, yes, undeniably, we're cutting the amount of money the cities
could have expected had we continued through the economic crisis with a business-as-usual
attitude. But while we are reducing some of these subsidies, we are at the same time converting
many categorical grants into block grants, thus reducing wasteful Federal administrative overhead
and giving local governments more flexibility and control. And corresponding to that, we're
working to end duplication of Federal programs and reforming those that are not
cost-effective.
Take, for example, the Urban Development Action Grants program, UDAG. I want to let you all
know that we've decided to preserve the UDAG function in the Presidential program. But here's
what we are doing. The UDAG function and the Community Development Grant program will be
combined into a Community Development Support program, and we will be sending legislation up
to the Hill in the near future to enable the UDAG function to continue.
As I said, we will be funding this new community support function at a slightly smaller amount
than before, but we will be providing greater flexibility and autonomy to localities which show the
abillity to run these programs effectively. We believe the reduction will be largely covered by the
elimination of administrative overhead. We're cutting fat, not muscle.
We're giving local government the power to decide what will be done with the money. Handled
efficiently, the level of benefits may not suffer as might be suggested at first glance. However,
there could well be something in local government that can and should be cut back during these
times of economic hardship. If so, you will set your own priorities. You, not some Washington
bureaucrat, will decide where the cuts will be made if cuts are necessary.
I know that accepting responsiblilty, especially for cutbacks, is not easy. But this package should
be looked at by State and local governments as a great step toward not only getting America
moving again but toward restructuring the power system which led to the economic stagnation
and urban deterioration.
But for many of this country's major cities, economic stagnation is not a recent phenomenon.
Increasingly, while power centralized in Washington, D.C., many great urban areas declined. I've
always thought that Washington didn't have the same problems other cities did, to a certain extent
because they grabbed hold of the fastest growing industry in America. [Laughter]
Many cities cannot even remember a time when they were economically healthy, but they were
not always blighted with seemingly unsolvable problems. In the last century, American cities were
shining examples of enterprise. They were places of optimism, where free men and women
working together didn't know the meaning of the word ``impossible.'' Alexis de Tocqueville noted
the vitality of American cities when touring this country in the 1830's. He observed: ``Towns are
like great meeting houses with all the inhabitants as members. In them the people wield immense
influence over their magistrates and often carry their desires into execution without
intermediaries.''
He described a land and a people which seem a far cry from those of today. But why? We're the
same people. If we're not, what is different? Well, the answer to that is the increased intervention
by Federal authority. Only 50 years ago, Americans still felt they could accomplish anything, and
they did. Today, the descendants of these pathfinders peer through a maze of government
regulations and often give up even before they've tried.
Local officials who once saw the local voters as boss now look to Washington, D.C., before
considering a move. And what once was a Federal helping hand is quickly turning into a mailed
fist. Instead of assistance, the Federal Government is giving orders. They call them mandates.
More often that not the command comes from Washington, but few funds to implement the order
can be found in the envelope. Mayor Koch of New York has detailed the problem of mandates
better than anyone. Last year, he said his city was driven by 47 Federal and State mandates, with a
total cost of $711 million in capital expenditures, 6.25 billion in expense-budget dollars, and $1.66
billion in lost revenue. And people wonder why New York sings the blues.
Not only are the funds not available to meet all these mandates, often the mandates themselves are
impossible to fulfill. In Fairfax County, Virginia, for example, students come from 50 different
language backgrounds, 15 of which are spoken by more than 20 students. Were it able to follow
the former HHS guidelines, the county would incur the expense of sponsoring bilingual programs
in 15 different languages, including Urdu, Hindi, and Laotian.
Now, bilingual education -- there is a need, but there is also a purpose that has been distorted,
again at the Federal level. Where there are predominantly students speaking a foreign language at
home, coming to school and being taught in English, and they fall behind or are unable to keep up
in some subjects because of the lack of knowledge of the language, I think it is proper that we
have teachers equipped who can get at them in their own language and understand why it is they
don't get the answer to the problem and help them in that way. But it is absolutely wrong and
against the American concept to have a bilingual education program that is now openly,
admittedly dedicated to preserving their native language and never getting them adequate in
English so they can go out into the job market and participate. [Applause] Thank you.
Today, I renew a pledge I made to your conference in Atlanta in December. I will examine the
mandates issued by the Federal Government and take action to remove any undue burden placed
upon local governments throughout this country.
Centralization of power in the hands of the Federal Government didn't happen by accident. Over
the years local officials helped create this power flow by turning to the Federal Government for
solutions to local problems. It appeared to be an easy way out. But now you're becoming more
aware that to get a job done, the very last thing you should ask for is Federal money. [Laughter]
First, there are so many strings attached that Federal projects take a lot longer to complete. And
second, local money pays the bill anyway. Once the Federal vacuum cleaner gets through with the
pockets of the local taxpayers, there isn't enough spare change left to run local government.
[Laughter]
What we must do is strive to recapture the bounty of vigor and optimism de Tocqueville found in
American cities. We can start by reestablishing the proper relationship between the Federal, State,
and local governments. The block grant program in our package is the first step. It cuts
considerable redtape and returns power and decisions to the cities for money taken by the Federal
Government. It is something that we, in the years ahead, can build upon.
Shortly, my administration will announce the creation of a federalism task force to find out,
specifically, what can be done to reestablish the balance between the levels of government. Your
input and participation will be important in this process. Working together, we can establish a
dialog about the proper functions of the respective levels of government and go about
restructuring the federal system to maximize efficiency and freedom.
That is, as I've said, just a start. But it is a step, a first step, in the right direction. I hope in the
years to come we'll be in direct communication. It'll take teamwork to get this country back on
the right track, and it won't happen overnight. You can count on my cooperation to make the
cities of America once again the thriving areas of commerce, culture, and freedom that once
attracted the attention of people the world over. If we don't start now, who will, and when?
Thank you.
Note: The President spoke at 12:20 p.m. in the International Ballroom at the Washington Hilton
Hotel.