Remarks at a Republican
Party Campaign Fundraiser in
Thank
you all, and thank you, Governor Ashcroft. And a special thank you to Senator
Kit Bond and Senator Jack Danforth; Congressman Jack Buechner; our new State chairman, Tom Fowler --
congratulations, Tom -- and our outgoing State chairman, Hillard
Selka. And congratulations to you, Hillard, for having done such a great job. And let
me also say that a friend of mine asked me to pass on a hello to his brother,
``Bucky'' Bush. [Laughter] But I'm pleased to be here
today to speak for a great team, our Republican candidates running here in
In
the last 8 years, as our administration cut interest rates to half of what they
were and inflation to a third, as we set America on the path of the longest
peacetime expansion in our history, and as we negotiated the first real
reduction in Soviet and U.S. nuclear missiles in world history -- as we did all
this, no one has been a better ally in the Senate than Kit Bond and Jack Danforth. And as we've worked to restore a respect for
basics in American education -- mastery of fundamental skills, respect for
bedrock moral values, an emphasis on achievement -- no Governor has done more
to blaze the trail than Governor John Ashcroft. And as we've fought a liberal
mentality that said there was safety in weakness, as we've worked to restore
Yes,
we've come a long way; and yet, my friends, I must tell you that everything
we've done these last 8 years, everything, could be lost faster than you can
say the Pledge of Allegiance. [Laughter] Our opponents this year are the masked
marvels of American politics. Their every word covers the extreme liberal face
of their agenda. When they say ``opportunity,'' they mean ``subsidies.'' When
they say ``closing the deficit,'' they mean ``raising taxes.'' When they talk
about a ``strong defense,'' they mean ``cutting defense spending.'' Yes, and
yet hard as they try to hide, the liberals give themselves away when they say
that if they're elected, ``the Reagan era will be over.''
What
do you suppose they mean? [Laughter] When we took office 8 years ago,
And
yet our opponents say it's time for this era to be over. When we talk about
rising real family income, they reply that family income is no higher now than
it was in 1968. Well, first, they're wrong about that. By our best measurement
it's 18 percent higher today than it was 20 years ago. But still, it's a
strange thing for them to bring up. After all, do they really want us to remind
people that between 1977 and 1981 -- I don't know why I picked those years --
[laughter] -- the after-inflation income of the typical American family fell by
almost 7 percent, or that since then it's risen by more than 10 percent?
They
dismiss our accomplishments in education. And again, that's strange. Do they
really want to remind Americans that when they last controlled the House, the
Senate, and the White House, the SAT scores -- those scores for proving
qualification to get into college -- fell steadily, or that since our
back-to-basics campaign got rolling around the country, those SAT scores, as
they're called, have begun to rise again? And let me add, we won't be satisfied
until they're back where they were at their peak and still going up.
They
deride our war on drugs -- stranger still. You wouldn't think they'd want us to
remember that during the last liberal administration the Justice Department
started to lose interest in narcotics cases. Each year it brought fewer cases, and
convictions were down by one-third in their last year in office. Well, since we
took charge, Federal narcotics convictions have more than doubled. And while
the number of drug users soared during the last administration, it's dropping
now. And earlier this year we got the best news of all: High school students
are saying no to drugs, including cocaine, as never before. But
as a certain lovely lady keeps reminding me, as long as even one American uses
illegal drugs, that number will still be too high.
Incidentally,
maybe I can tell you a little story that you might not know. That whole
movement of Just Say No to Drugs -- that started when Nancy was speaking to a
group of schoolchildren out in Oakland, California, and a little girl stood up
and said: ``Well, what do we do? What do we say when someone offers us drugs?''
Well,
Our
opponents talk about the courts. But do they really want to remind the Nation
of the kind of judges they have appointed in the past -- or that we have worked
to place on the bench judges and justices who are not just concerned about the
rights of criminals but also about those of the victims of crime?
And
our opponents talk about competitiveness. Do they want to remind people that
when they were last in office, manufacturing productivity increases slowed to a
crawl -- or that since we came to office, productivity is up sharply, by over
30 percent, and that
As
I announced earlier today, the Department of Commerce released the latest trade
figures early this morning. I know that they've made Jack Danforth,
who's been one of the Senate's leaders in helping us open up international
markets, very happy. Yes, in July the trade imbalance dropped like a stone. So
far this year it's down nearly one-fifth from the same period last year.
Exports are up, imports down, and the American worker is tops in the world.
This
year the liberal opposition has fielded candidates who don't know left from
center. [Laughter] Many of them talk about reaching for the center; but on
issues like national defense, as former Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger
wrote recently, too many of their candidates seem to believe that, and in his
words, ``the way to deter war is to be unprepared to respond.'' They would cut
the B - 1 bomber, the Midgetman missile, our
Strategic Defense Initiative, and wipe out two carrier battle groups in our Navy.
In fact, what they plan for the Navy is so bad that by the time they get
through Michael may have to row the boat ashore. [Laughter]
So,
you tell me, when the liberals try to tell the American people they won't raise
taxes, but fail to mention the new spending programs they've promised every
liberal special interest group in Washington, are we going to stand by and let
them get away with it? When the liberal leadership tried to portray themselves
as the newly ordained champions of law and order, but forgets that they have to
mention that they've given a virtual veto power over the Supreme Court
appointments to fellow liberals like the Civil Liberties Union, are we going to
stand by and let them get away with it?
Audience members. No!
The President. When the liberal
leadership tried to tell the American people that they're the party of peace,
but forgets to admit they jeopardized the chance for peace and tried to tie my
hands in arms negotiations by favoring a nuclear freeze, cutting defense, and
gutting SDI, are we going to let them get away with it?
Audience members. No!
The President. I thought you might
object. [Laughter] I wonder how they believe that we got where we've gotten in
the three summit meetings with the General Secretary of the
Yes,
my friends, when our liberal opponents refuse to even whisper the ``L'' word
and insist that ``this election is not about ideology, it's about competence,''
they're just acknowledging that where they want to take
Now,
let me say a word about a Bush administration, and it's very simple. There's
one way that I hope it will be different from ours. If it hadn't been for a
Republican Senate in our first 6 years, we wouldn't have accomplished half of
what we did. If we'd had one these last 2 years, we could have done much more.
But today, with the other party in control of both Houses, we face a
monkey-wrench Congress determined to throw almost anything into the gears of
government to gum up the works.
Some
people say that having both Houses of Congress in the hands of the other party
is a check on the President. But from what I've seen, when both Houses are in
the hands of our opponents, there is very little a President can do to check
them. That's why I've wanted a line-item veto -- to help the President rein in
Congress. But until the President gets such a veto, he must have at least one
House in his own party if he's effectively to check congressional powers.
I
hope that we can make sure that George Bush has more friends on Capitol Hill
than he had on that Pacific island where he was shot down. You know, if you do know some people -- and I know some that really
honestly think that, the Congress being the way it is, that that's a part of
our checks and balances. The people nationwide elect the President -- the only
office, that and Vice President, elected by the entire public. But then they
turn around and let a Congress come in that is pledged not to let the elected
President do the things he said he was going to do and for which he was
elected.
And
if it's checks and balances, isn't it funny that in
the last 56 years, 52 of those years the Congress -- or the House of
Representatives has been Democratic? And 46 of those years, they've had both
Houses of the Congress. I had that 6 that I mentioned. Now, isn't it strange?
The only Republican President in these 56 years who had a Republican Congress
was Eisenhower, for 2 of his 8 years. But the Democrats have had a Democratic
Congress for Democrat Presidents for 34 years out of this period, where if
they've had the Presidency for 34 years, they've had a Democratic Congress for
32. Harry Truman had 2 years of Republicans and never got over it. [Laughter]
Well,
there's no better way to start helping George Bush in the way that I said than
to return Jack Danforth to the United States Senate
and to elect our Republican congressional candidates to the House. Now, nothing
would please me more than for President Bush to have on Inauguration Day a gift
-- a Republican Congress. And I'd also like it if he knew that when he needed a
view from a statehouse he could turn to a reelected Governor John Ashcroft.
Your
slogan here is ``
Thank
you very much, and God bless you all. And now I have to go back to
Note: The President
spoke at