May 14, 1982
The President. Now, reverend clergy and our two -- your two Senators here -- and because of
them I sleep easier at night in Washington, knowing all the things that can happen if there aren't
enough Republicans around -- [laughter] -- all the others who are here:
I had some remarks here, but John has just told me that possibly you'd rather have a dialog and
maybe some questions and anwers than me standing here and giving a lecture on why we ought to
have the budget passed immediately. And, if so, that's what I'll do. I'll be very happy to put this
back in my pocket.
Let me just say now, though, that, seriously, the importance of this Senate race this year, I'm sure
you must know, the few-vote margin that we have in the one House and for the first time in a
quarter of a century that we have at least one House of the Congress Republican. There would be
no budget cuts such as we've known them. There would be no tax cuts as we've had. I don't think
there would be the necessary rebuilding of our national security if we did not have that majority.
And we have that majority in large part because a gentleman here on the platform was in charge
of the committee that handled the election 2 years ago, congressional committee, John Heinz. And
because of that, we're in that good position. But I'm going to lose a lot of sleep if I ever thought
that -- I had 8 years in California of being up against both houses of the legislature, on the
opposite side, and it almost got to be a habit. I vetoed 993 bills. [Laughter] So, I don't want a
repeat of that kind of career.
But John did a great job in that for the Senate. And he's -- both of your Senators are doing a great
job, and I know that we're going to have one back for sure. And I think I'm going to say we're
going to have two back for sure, because I think you know how important that is.
Now, you've possibly heard some rumors to the effect that we're discussing a budget in
Washington now, and if so, if you would like, fire away, and we'll have a dialog instead of a
monolog.
Administration Accomplishments
Q. Since you've been in office, what do you consider your greatest contribution to the United
States?
The President. Since I've been in office, what has been my greatest contribution to the United
States? Well, it's one that I would have to share the credit with an awful lot of -- not only our
Republican Representatives and Senators but also some good, responsible Democrats who also
joined us. And that is the turning around of the direction that government was taking.
When we took office, the interest rates were 21\1/2\ percent, inflation was 12.4 percent, and it
was the second year in a row that we'd had back-to-back double-digit inflation. The
unemployment, it is true, was not as deep as it is today. But there's no question it had started clear
back in '79, and, as a matter of fact, I was campaigning about the tragedy of that unemployment in
1980. And all of these factors seemed to be worsening.
But while the inflation -- or the interest rates have not come down to where we want them, they're
down about 20 percent. We reversed -- oh, incidentally, spending -- government spending was
increasing at the rate of 17 percent a year. The budget we've presented for next year will only
represent about a 6.8-percent increase in spending. And we're aiming at even a lower rate of
increase, to where the budget will finally -- or the cost of government will be increasing no faster
than the general increase that comes with growth in our tax revenues. And then we will be back
where we should have been a lot of years ago.
Q. A shorter answer to that young lady's question is the fact that you're the President.
The President. What?
Q. A shorter answer would be that you're the President.
The President. I'm even -- I know that everybody didn't hear that, and I'm a little hesitant to even
-- [laughter] -- repeat it. I'll let somebody else tell them.
Yes?
Unemployment
Q. Mr. President, in light of Philadelphia's 11-percent unemployment factor, what can be done to
bring more defense business into this city?
The President. Well, we do have your Navy shipyard pretty busy right now. I couldn't tell you,
with regard to all the defense contracts that can be let and will be let, where they're going to go. I
must say that, however, the first priority is going to be where the job can be done the most
economically and, at the same time, do it the way it's necessary for our national security. I also
can say that if there's ever a place where everything else is equal, then I would -- and it was a
choice, then I would think that you'd choose those places where it could also help the
economy.
But let me say about your unemployment here, the most necessary thing that has to be done, the
Senate just recently passed out of the Budget Committee, the Senate Republicans, passed out a
budget program for 1983. I have been meeting in the last week or so with business leaders, chief
executives, with the leaders of the small business community -- which is the one that produces
about 80 percent of our new jobs -- heads of farm organizations, trade organizations, and with the
money world -- bankers and financiers and investment trusts and so forth. All of them have one
thing to say, and if I don't say it first, they say it back to me -- that is, interest rates, which are the
big block to faster recovery, will come down if and when the Congress passes this budget and
guarantees that for the second year in a row we're continuing on the path of reducing government
spending, then the rates will come down.
They tell me that the one thing that's keeping them up is simply having been burned in the seven
or eight recessions that have taken place since World War II, where the government turned to a
quick fix, flooded the money market, artificially stimulated to make the economy look as if it was
getting well -- this morning I described that as trying to cure a fever by eating the thermometer --
[laughter] -- and then up came inflation again. And if they had loaned money on the basis of lower
inflation, they would be stuck with these long-term loans at a rate that was too low to match the
depreciating value of their money.
And we now have inflation -- I didn't add this, with what we've done -- we have inflation down
from that 12.4 percent to where for 6 months it's averaged 3.2 percent. And last month, for the
first time in 17 years, it went below zero. The prices actually were going down, not just not
increasing as fast in price. That is enough, if they have the confidence that we're going to continue
and that we're not going to do that other quick-fix thing.
So, anything you can do to pressure and make sure that the Congress will give us those additional
cuts -- and may I also say -- I'm taking too much time on this answer -- all this talk of budget cuts,
all this talk of -- that we're doing something to the needy and the poor and we're not taking care
of the people who must have help from the rest of us. There have been no budget cuts; all we've
cut is the projected increase by the big spenders, the amount they want to increase the budget.
The '81 budget, which we inherited, which was already there -- and we managed to reduce by
about $13 billion, even though we only had a few months left of the year to do it in -- that budget
was bigger than the 1980, the present '82 budget is bigger than '81, and the '83 budget we've
submitted will represent about a 6.8-percent increase over the present budget. But where it comes
to the poor, the poor and the needy and all the people that, as I say, must have help -- and I've
said that we'd preserve a safety net.
In 1980, in the last Carter budget, $195 billion was Dick Schweiker -- was the Health and Human
Services budget. Now Dick Schweiker, who's Secretary of that and doing a great job with that --
Dick's budget for '83 will be -- remember 195 and a fraction in 1980 -- his budget for '83 will be
274 billion and a fraction. And that is a bigger percentage of the entire budget than the Carter
budget for humanitarian affairs was. And it happens to be the third largest budget in the world.
The only two budgets greater is the entire budget for the United States and the entire budget for
the Soviet Union.
So, we are keeping the safety net, and yet, at the same time, we're making the savings that can
bring back the economy.
Small Business
Q. Mr. President, you were elected President by the majority of people that cared enough to go
out and vote. You said that you wanted to get government off the backs of the people and that
you were a strong believer in free enterprise in the private sector. I also feel this way. So, my
question to you is, what are you doing or what would you like to do in regards to breaking up
some of the monopolistic structures in this country, whether they be private or governmental, so
that the small guy could have an opportunity to break into the free enterprise system?
The President. Well, this is what we are doing with regard to monopolies and to give the smaller
man a chance to get started. Actually, I think that our very tax program, for one thing, is of great
benefit to independent business. The overwhelming majority of them pay the personal tax, not the
corporate tax.
There is no relaxing of -- in the field of antitrust or antimonopoly -- on the part of our government
at this time nor will there be. And so, all I could tell you is that that is still part of it.
At the same time, however, for all business, big and little, but particularly the small businessmen,
George Bush is heading up a task force aimed at something else we promised. And that is the
blizzard of paperwork that is imposed on the private sector today and on local and State
government today by excessive Federal regulations and unnecessary regulations. And he has made
a tremendous cut. There are 23,000 fewer pages in the Federal Register, which lists the Federal
regulations. The actual savings amounts to about -- I won't put it in cash -- amounts to a savings
of about 200 million man-hours of work filling out government paper to comply with government
regulations.
So, I think that the path is as open as it has ever been or better for the entrepreneur, small
business. And we have, in addition to just the simple tax rates, income tax rates, we have done
some other things in which we have increased, and it will be phased in even higher -- eventually
the elimination of the inheritance tax, which will be a great salvation for family-owned businesses
that in the past have had to sell the business in case of death in order to pay the inheritance taxes.
That is one thing that we have done. The regulatory thing -- and there are other things in the tax
brackets the same way of benefit to small business.
Now, I hear a lady's voice, and there hasn't -- yes?
Defense Spending
Q. Mr. President, in light of the budget difficulties you were expressing, would you ever consider
reducing the defense budget?
The President. Reducing the defense budget. The defense budget, incidentally, today is only 29
percent of our budget. Back in the days of President Kennedy, the defense budget was running
about 46 percent of the national budget. But there've been a -- several -- we're trying to make up
for a number of years of starvation.
When I became President, at any given day half of our airplanes couldn't get off the ground for
lack of spare parts. Many of our ships couldn't leave harbor -- Navy vessels -- for the same
reason. We only had a very limited supply of ammunition. And in one of those computerized war
games where you see what would happen if, for example, there was an attack on the NATO line
in Europe and so forth, we lost in 3 weeks.
Now, the bulk of our budget is for maintenance and pay. We also had a volunteer military that
was based on wartime draft wages. And we were losing noncommissioned officers faster than we
could promote them simply because they couldn't afford -- they were actually eligible for welfare
at the time that they were serving in the noncommissioned ranks in our military. So, the bulk of
our budget's going for that. But I do anticipate a time when it won't be as great.
We have asked the Soviet Union, as you know, to sit down with us with regard to not only the
reduction -- reduction, not limitation -- reduction of nuclear arms, but in Vienna we're meeting,
hoping to get reductions in conventional arms. And in Geneva right now we're meeting with
regard to the strategic missiles that they have aimed at Europe from Eastern Europe, and we have
nothing to counter that there -- or our allies don't -- and we're going to provide Pershing missiles.
And when we announced that, the Soviets said they would sit down and talk disarmament with us
-- or arms limitation.
What I think is that we have strengthened our case for getting arms reductions by going forward
with a military buildup. For the last 10 years they've sat opposite us at any table discussing this --
and they're building the greatest military buildup in history -- but they saw us unilaterally
disarming. There wasn't any reason for them to give up and meet us in any kind of
disarmament.
But I can explain it all with a cartoon that I love very much that appeared recently. It was
Brezhnev speaking to a Russian general, and he said, ``I liked the arms race better when we were
the only ones in it.'' [Laughter]
That gentleman behind you there.
Views on the Presidency
Q. Do you enjoy being President more than being a movie actor? [Laughter]
The President. Yeah, because here I get to write the script, too. [Laughter]
Senator Heinz. Mr. President, they want this to be your last -- the last -- --
The President. Oh. Oh, dear.
Oh, they tell me -- --
Monetary Policy
Q. Mr. President, what do you -- --
Q. Excuse me, sir.
Q. Mr. President, has there been an attempt to achieve long-term cooperation and coordination of
the Secretary of the Treasury's department and the Fed in order to make your job easier?
The President. Has there been cooperation -- now, wait a minute.
Q. Has there been any attempt to make long-term cooperation and coordination of the Treasury
Department and the Fed in order to make your job easier?
The President. I think that we have a better relationship than we started out now and largely
thanks to Don Regan, the Secretary of the Treasury. And I must say that the Fed is cooperating,
and there is not, as some people suspect -- that the interest rates are where they are because they
are going too deep in reducing the money supply. No, they are on a steady track that I think is
proper with our growth today. And I believe that they, like those other people I quoted, will be
the first to be willing to bring down the interest rates, the prime rate, the discount rate when we
prove that we can get the Congress to adopt this budget.
So, now, I've just been told by the Senator here that there's only time for one more, and there's a
little lady -- --
The Middle East
Q. Mr. President, this was my third chance.
The President. Well, I'll take two more then. [Laughter] I'll make the answer shorter. All right,
okay -- all right.
Q. In light of our country's participation in and support of Camp David accords, how do you
justify the projected sale of extremely advanced jet fighters to Jordan and the hand-held
heat-seeking missiles?
The President. How do we justify selling weapons to Jordan, high-level fighters and so forth at
the same time in our agreement with and our alliance with Israel. Well, first of all, there has been
no request as yet -- there's been a lot of talk that I've read about it also -- there's been no formal
request from Jordan. But, on the other hand, it is -- whatever is done, I want you to know what
our policy is and what we're trying to accomplish. And Prime Minister Begin knows this.
Menachem and I exchange letters all the time on these subjects. [Laughter] We think one of the --
and, yes, we're on a first-name basis now. [Laughter] That's kind of a shock to the striped-pants
fellows over in the State Department that we call each other by the first name, but we do. And he
knows that I meant it when I pledged to him that we will never allow them to -- their qualitative
and quantitative military advantage to be done away with, but that what we're trying to do with
the more moderate Arab States is persuade them to become additional Egypts, to do as Egypt
did.
The greatest thing that we can do for Israel is to bring peace to the Middle East. And if we're to
be a believable broker, we can't impose that peace, of course. But if we are to be believable, then
those moderate Arab States -- and I've met with King Hussein and must say that I was greatly
impressed by his whole approach and his views toward the Middle East. If we can persuade them
to acknowledge the right of Israel to exist as a nation and enter into negotiations in that Camp
David framework as Egypt did, that will be the greatest thing we can do. And in order to do that
we have to show them that we're willing to be a friend other than just talking about it.
But, as I say, the Prime Minister knows that we are pledged and, I believe, morally bound in a
commitment to the preservation of the state of Israel, that it must continue to exist.
Now then, this one has to be the last one, they tell me.
Latin America
Q. It's an historic pleasure to speak to you as President of the United States. I would like to have
your response to this statement with reference to the Western Hemisphere. Now we are involved
not only with a war in this hemisphere but with the South Central America. And it seems to me
that we must now consider uniting with the Free Americas in order for us to have a more viable
defense. And I'm wondering, is anything being done like you did to Jamaica, in helping them to
develop their trade, so that they can be economically independent by exporting and
importing?
The President. This is about our alliance with our neighbors to the south and the other continent
and my statements about an accord, in which the full strength and the development can go
forward, of North and South America. And we did -- I think we have established better relations
on the North American continent now than we've ever had -- with Mexico and Canada. But -- and
I have just seen the President of Brazil off, who has been visiting in Washington with us. And, as
you know, there has been some -- quite some ill feeling between Brazil and the United States for
some time. I think I can safely say they realize there's a whole new relationship now there.
The tragedy of the Falkland Islands -- the quarrel that's going on there -- I'm worried as perhaps --
and I hope only temporarily slowed what we intend to be a real relationship and an accord with
our neighbors to the south. We've done our best and are continuing to do everything we can to,
again, broker a peace down there.
At the same time, we can't ignore the fact that the aggressor was our neighbor here in these
continents, Argentina, who, with military force, invaded the Falklands and took over. And if we --
we must establish that that cannot happen in the world -- that the rule of law prevails, not the rule
of force. Where would we draw the line if we say, ``Well, it's all right there''? Then how many
other places are there in the world where there are boundary disputes? And do we literally say,
``Well, it's all right for the one that thinks they're strong enough to do it, to go grab the
territory''?
And we've been trying, as I say, and it's been very frustrating. We sometimes come where it seems
as if we're almost to agreement, and then there still seems to be one hitching point. But we're
going to keep on trying to bring that peace.
And then I recognize that because of our long-time friendship for Britain, that there are probably
those in Latin America who have now drawn back and who feel that maybe we weren't sincere in
our overtures to them. But we're going to go right back at that, because a dream that I nurse
above all is that if you look at the potential of these two continents, linked by Central America --
600 million people here in these two continents, probably a wealth of resources of virtually
everything that you need for an industrial society -- so much of it still underdeveloped -- and all of
us bound together by the common heritage that we were all once colonies, and we now are all
independent.
We want freedom for ourselves, and I think the rest of the world would really have to look on in
awe if they saw us with our democratic ideals, banded together here, not giving up our national
sovereignty or our culture or our customs or languages, but friendly allies bound together in the
Western Hemisphere. And this is our dream, and we'll have at it again if we can just finish off this
little business that's going on down there right now.
Thank you all very much. Thank you.
And the ``thank you'' that I have just said several times for your warmth of welcome and your
kindness is only a fraction of what the ``thank you'' will be if, in November, you've told me that
you're sending John Heinz back to Washington.
Note: The President spoke at 4:40 p.m. in the Dominion Ballroom at the Franklin Plaza Hotel.
Following his appearance at the reception, he attended another reception for Senator Heinz and
then returned to Washington, D.C.