 I'm so happy to greet you because I think one of the few leaders in the coalition will elect you and never attack you and do not intend to and we're so happy to have you as our president and I want to do everything I can to see even that you are re-elected and everybody else is in charge of you. Well, bless you. I was going to say to you that you have not waited. Now see me and any of those groups of people attacking you. And I know you're pressed for time and so I throw along a little memo to say what I have to say, because we want to work for your re-election and the election of all the Republicans and I think we did a lot of good work with the nuclear foods referendum recently and we're going to continue to work on that especially with women and but I want to help you get rid of this ERA problem and make it go away and so page one is some of my notes but if you turn over to page two, what I want to offer to you is not a strategy for defeating ERA because I think it's already been defeated and we have proved that your position was right and that the states and the people don't want it but it is a strategy against Republicans. It is basically today something to hit Republicans with and their purpose is to defeat Republicans. They want to use it as a fundraising mechanism and they want to keep us busy playing on their ball field instead of doing constructive things like working on your agenda. So I feel that there are several things we should not do. We should not let the Democratic leadership dictate the timing and the agenda and fight over the old battles and play by their rules and I think that if the administration does nothing, we are exceeding to their timing and their rules. So over on the next page, I want to help you recapture the initiative that is avoiding the whipping boy of the Tipo Niels and therefore I would propose that you might send a letter to Bob Michael urging that ERA, if it's considered by the House, be used as a constitutional vehicle to force consideration of the amendments that you want and that the people have asked for and without mentioning ERA, who don't want to involve you in the ERA battle, you raise the specter of Republicans offering as amendments to ERA. Your amendments, the school prayer amendment, the busing amendment, the right to life amendment, prayer amendment and therefore you send the Democrats a clear signal that if they force ERA to a vote that they're also going to have to deal with all these other issues on your agenda. And it is a way for you to redefine the issue in your terms which is the term of basic fairness. The argument is ERA had 10 years and two chances considered the unfair extension and the people have never had a chance to vote on the school prayer amendment which we've been wanting to vote on for 20 years since the Supreme Court decision or a right to life amendment which we've been wanting for 10 years or a balanced budget amendment and Tip O'Neill has to understand that if he's going to force an ERA vote he's also going to have to vote on these other issues too. The way he plays with the rules, the only way we have to force the other constitutional amendments in the House is to play with them on a constitutional amendment and otherwise they've cost us a lemon we're going to make a lemonade out of it. I know I'll switch seats. I would like to tell them I don't know when they're going to call back or if. I ask to see you about two topics. Photo op. I must say it was he did the same thing that he always does. Actually the Rating Committee had a little beauty search here with the good-looking fellows on this side. It shows what trouble we're in. Well, I won't waste any time talking about the first day of spring or anything like that except that I think our friends up there on the other side of the aisle embarked on the last bitch effort to turn the clock back instead of as we will shortly be doing turning it forward and I'm referring to their budget plan. Fine I think goes right backward. I think all of us have some feeling that they have no intention of really getting that as a budget but maybe laying the grounds for being able to woo their people by saying here is a sample of traditional democracy or a democratic policy but you know and I know it throws everything out the window that we've achieved in these last two years and now with the report that I just gave on the economy and there are other signs that are justice promising but I think they've picked the wrong timing for it. Their plan is, I understand it calls for a $27 billion increase in taxes, this is just for the one year, a $10 billion cut in defense, $8 billion increase in the two-year deficit and all of this so they can wind up with a $45 billion increase in domestic spending over to what we've proposed and that's just the short run proposal. If you multiply those out into the five-year projections I don't like the thing but it would raise taxes by $316 billion over five years. That canceled 42% of the net tax cut that we'd given to the American people. We've got the defense rebuilding program by slashing $206 billion from our request over the same period. It would repeal many of the overdue welfare reforms we've already enacted throwing away billions of dollars in savings and in name of fairness would add an incredible $181 billion in five years of domestic spending to the high levels already proposed and they call that a fairness budget and actually I think it's cruelty to the taxpayers and face new huge burdens to consumers who would be threatened again with inflation going up and to the jobless who had no hope of economic recovery and if any peace-loving citizen would have to figure what it does to us but we already want to secure it. So I think that this is when we go to the matter as I say I think we're going to do that. I've already talked to one group of your colleagues and I'm going to be talking more but to talk to you about I think they've given us really something to tee off on. Here is they want a flat comparison of what their belief is and what they want to go as in contrast to what we're trying to do and a few months ago it made more headway when things were looking as bad as they are but with all the economic science that they have I think that we can stand back and say what we've been doing is beginning to work and I just hope that we can mobilize not only all our forces but get enough responsible thinking Democrats to join us in just flatly not trying to deal with this or bargain with it but just flatly vote it down as being in the wrong direction to go and I'll start talking now and get it up there. That's in particular The University is something of that nature but how do you put it back in these works but people will go home and find out some of these manuscripts are something of that nature and establish a fair amount of value about it but if you give a you run a regular but then if you try to sell it in the open market that somebody pay a million dollars for it but if you gave it to the University of Southern California to declare a million dollars and get that off the taxes I'm not going to get dollars That's what I'm talking about Sit down He's scheduled on his schedule he says he's going to come This is your economic briefing which consists of two parts one for the year of 1983 Carolina year and then again to the international situation as far as what's going on with some of these less developed countries and now the shift as to where the problem children are in the world of comedy and what we may or may not be thinking of doing so Marty's going to take you through the first part and I'll take you through the second part Well at first when we talked about this meeting we thought we might talk about some more specific things like monetary policy or the international trade song that we decided we'd better come back to those at such a time and focus on an overview of the region last year but as recently as six weeks ago we had no clear evidence of an actual upturn in economic activity and then by early February we began to get the statistics for January we had employment going up earnings going up industrial production going up it really saw a broad based upturn in the economy and I wrote to you at that time and said I thought I'd be pretty free Super Get the meeting underway and I don't want to remain a model of this going to be dialogue when we get going but the subject to the meeting is the budget which was passed on a straight part of the basis of the Democrat Committee their version of the budget which they have declared is a restatement of Democratic tradition and I'm afraid it is but I don't see any way that we can with our own proposal of a budget there could be any effort to compromise or find a meeting around this budget in the sense that most by then must be the the this proposal calls for increasing taxes over the next five years by about $315 billion it calls for canceling most of the gains and the savings that we've made in the title of the program so forth over the last two years it increases over that same period of time and that's expending by I believe David I write about $181 billion increasing that spending that much increasing the taxes that much it also will reduce the defense budget down to a point that it's $31 billion below the defense budget that have been planned by President Carter and which we're trying to recognize and get our defenses to recover from but when all that is done they will have wound up with an $8 billion addition to the deficit for the years 83-84 in other words all of this will be done to simply achieve tens of billions of dollars of new spending as a matter of fact they have introduced some 10 new social domestic programs in addition to reducing all of the remaining savings that we've made now the taxes that they're going to increase calls for canceling the third year of the income tax cut and canceling index the truth of the matter is that in both of these taxes the both 72% of one the third year cut and 78% of the index the savings there goes to people below the $50,000 mark middle income and lower middle income are the ones that will pay the bulk of that tax obviously indexing is strictly for the working man and woman in this country because they're the ones that when they get a cost of living pay raise are moved up into a higher tax bracket well it can't be a benefit to the rich because they're already in the process that's where it puts that and I just feel that this thing is such a throwback that we have to make it plain to the people what this would result in this is going back to the types of government programs that cause the problems that we're facing today the main thing is we're in a recovery there's no question about it because the word came out yesterday in regard to the growth in the gross national product and to do things of this kind the taxes would be almost 30 billion dollars in the first year the tax increase that's no way to keep a recovery going that is going to cut off the recovery I'll make one last point and then we will turn to this conversation here into a more detailed one but when we went for this increase that we did a year or so ago and many of us as we said then it was so hard to do it we did that in a kind of bipartisan agreement that we were going to get 3 dollars in spending that's for every 1 dollar of increase in taxes and this is a complete recudiation of that agreement but now turn around and also this kind of a proposal so again as I say I know we're outnumbered but our job is to find those Democrats that are sure there who are responsible and who will go along with repudiating the proposals of this kind and the state of mind