Recent Press Releases



‘Ronald Reagan would have a lot to say about today’s Congress’



Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell delivered the following speech on Wednesday at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif. Below are his remarks as prepared for delivery.



“One of the things that really jumps off the page in the new Reagan Diaries is the love that Ronald Reagan had for his wife. In one entry he writes about calling a popular political cartoonist, who naturally thought the President was calling to complain. But he was really calling, he wrote, because he thought Nancy looked ‘lovely’ in one of the drawings, and he was wondering if he could get an original.



“In another place, Ronald Reagan wrote that ‘of all the ways God has blessed me, giving [Nancy] to me is the greatest, and beyond anything I can ever hope to deserve.’



“They were true partners, and that partnership continues with Mrs. Reagan’s loving care of this magnificent library. From presidential debates to high school proms, you’ve made it a living monument to the purpose and the principles that animated your husband’s remarkable life. So thank you, Mrs. Reagan. You carry on your husband’s legacy with great grace. America admires and thanks you for it.



“Soon, we’ll have another opportunity to honor President Reagan’s legacy in Washington, on the centenary of his birth, in February 2011.



“I’m happy to be here to tell you in person, Mrs. Reagan, that I’ll soon sponsor a bill in the Senate establishing the Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission. And you can be sure that there are a lot of us in Washington who will be working hard to make sure this celebration is commensurate with your husband’s achievements.



“I’ll also look forward to working with those who want to bring President Reagan’s statue to the U.S. Capitol. There could be no more fitting recognition than to welcome his likeness to the halls of Congress.”



***



“The last words Ronald Reagan spoke to the American People from the Oval office came on a Friday night in early January in 1989. It had been a remarkable eight years, and he wanted to remind us of what we’d accomplished.



“He talked about the great economic recovery, about the effectiveness of his policy of peace through strength, about the reforms that were just then taking hold in Russia, and which we now know were the first stirrings of communism’s collapse, and he talked to us about the resurgence of our national pride.



“It was on this last point, which I think was his proudest achievement as president, that President Reagan issued the traditional farewell warning. The President said he worried about future generations of Americans forgetting the glories of our past.



“And then, speaking directly to the young people of America, he said: ‘If your parents haven’t been teaching you what it means to be an American, let ‘em know and nail ‘em on it. That would be a very American thing to do.’



“It’s in that spirit that I’d like to talk for a few minutes about the ways in which Ronald Reagan’s own legacy is in danger of being forgotten in certain quarters today.



“President Reagan changed the way we thought about government, and his plan for putting his vision into practice had a profound impact on the nation and the world. Yet many of my colleagues on the other side seem to have come down with a serious case of amnesia about all this. This brief talk is my small effort at diagnosing the problem and pointing to a cure. I’ll be brief, and I will use a few figures, but just enough to make a point. And then I’ll open it up for some questions. I should say at the outset that my early reflections on the rise of conservatism and Ronald Reagan owe a great deal to the book Right Nation, which came out a few years ago and which brings together a lot of the different threads of modern political life.”



***



“It’s hardly a news flash to point out that when Ronald Reagan took office in January of 1981, America was in rough shape. The Great Society programs of the ‘60s and ‘70s had bloated the government and helped lead to an almost unheard of situation of high inflation and stagnant growth. Newsweek summed up the national mood when it said that Reagan was inheriting the ‘most dangerous economic crisis since Franklin Roosevelt took office nearly 50 years earlier.’ It was referring, of course, to the Great Depression, and it wasn’t far off the mark.



“When Reagan took office, inflation and jobless rates were climbing steadily. Interest rates on home mortgages were as high as 20 percent, which is hardly even imaginable today. Marginal income tax rates were 70 percent and 48 percent. And the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which just last month climbed above 14,000 for the first time, was hovering around 800.



“Jimmy Carter got a lot of heat for talking about a national malaise. And of course it wasn’t helpful for him to highlight the fact without a serious plan to reverse it. But it was a pretty accurate description of the way things were at the time.



“It took a lot of effort on the part of a lot of people to reverse course. But the shift in thinking is what came first. It had been underway for some time. But no one had ever communicated it the way Ronald Reagan did.



“Reagan first earned national notice for this gift after a televised speech he gave on behalf of Barry Goldwater in October 1964. The message he delivered that night was pretty much the same one he would bring to the White House 17 years later. And the first thing to say about it was that it was funny. Like when he said that ‘a government agency is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever have on this earth.’



“Or when he talked about the size of government. He didn’t throw numbers at you, he gave people an image they could take home with them, and one they could all relate to and laugh about. ‘There are two and a half million federal employees,’ Reagan said. ‘No one knows what they all do. One Congressman found out what one of them does. This man sits at a desk in Washington. Documents come to him each morning. He reads them, initials them, passes them on to the proper agency. One day a document arrived that he wasn’t supposed to read. But he read it, initialed it, and passed it on. Twenty-four hours later, it arrived back at his desk with a memo attached that said, ‘You weren’t supposed to read this. Erase your initials, and initial the erasure.’



“Later, as governor of California, Reagan impressed people with the same disarming style. At a time when a lot of people were alarmed and even scared about violent, countercultural protests on college campuses, Reagan once began a speech by saying he’d had a terrible nightmare the night before: ‘I dreamt,’ he said, ‘that I had inherited a laundromat in Berkeley.’



“I should say at this point that before I won my first election, as County Executive in Louisville, that I had worked in President Ford’s Justice Department in Washington. And nothing — I mean nothing — confirmed me more in my Republican skepticism about big government than that early confrontation with an unmovable federal bureaucracy. Reagan really nailed it on the head in that 1964 speech.



“So the first thing Reagan did was start to change the way we thought about government. And he was effective in a way that conservatives like Goldwater or think-tank types had never really been before. Primarily, because he did it with humor, and everyman common-sense, and because he was cheerful.



“He wasn’t an eat-your-spinach kind of conservative like so many of the others, who were often either unpleasant or alarmist, or a little too bookish to have broad appeal, or nostalgic to a fault. Not Reagan. He was always looking forward, ahead — even at the end. Indeed, the last thing he wrote in his White House diary, as he prepared to return to California, at age 77, was this: ‘Then home, and start a new life.’



“Reagan communicated his philosophy with a smile, and that was much of his secret. He made many of us feel for the first time in our lives that it was okay to be a conservative, that being conservative was cool. And when he put his philosophy into action, we soon found out that having conservative views was more than just okay. As a matter of policy, it was tremendously effective.



“He told a story in that farewell address from the Oval Office that really captures, I think, the impact of the reforms. Recalling his first international economic summit, in Canada, in 1981, he said that when he showed up everyone was on a first-name basis. ‘It was all ‘Helmut this and Francois that,”’ he said. He told us that he felt like the new kid at school. And at one point he just leaned in and said, ‘Hi, my name’s Ron.’



“Well, two years later, he went to another economic summit, and the same group of leaders was there. At some point at the opening event, he noticed everybody looking at him, and that it was quiet and a little awkward. And then, one of them broke the silence, and said … ‘Tell us about the American miracle.’



“Remember: as the Reagan Revolution began, the socialist hold on Europe was still growing tighter. The year Reagan took office, Mitterand’s government nationalized French banks and many of its biggest companies. It dramatically increased spending on social services and hired about 100,000 new government workers. The U.S. had been trending toward socialism for years. But Europe was already there.



“Meanwhile, by slashing the marginal rate and cutting the tax on dividends in half, Reagan had ignited the greatest peacetime expansion in American history. The boom reached into every corner of our economy — creating more than 40 million new jobs between 1981 and 2005 and a massive increase in living standards and national wealth.



“Yet even if the Europeans were on some level intrigued by Reagan’s success, they were slow to copy it. And they’d suffer as a result. The burden of government in most of Old Europe today is staggering. Government spending consumes more than 50 percent of the entire gross national product of France and Sweden and more than 45 percent in Germany and Italy.



“Compare that to about 20 percent in the U.S, a country that spends much more as a percentage of GDP than all of these countries on defense.



“The effect of all this spending in European capitals has been alarmingly high unemployment rates and economic stagnation for much of Old Europe. Which makes sense: as services increase, people depend on them more. And as people depend on them more, taxes go up. As taxes go up, people have less incentive to work — a dangerous and unsustainable cycle. One Washington economist recently summed up Europe’s economic problems very simply: ‘Europe’s economy is so bad,’ he said, ‘because government is too big.’



“We’ve seen a number of signs that Old Europe is finally beginning to catch on. Ireland, the so-called Celtic Tiger, has experienced the strongest growth in recent years of just about any industrialized nation by doing there exactly what Reagan did here — slashing personal and corporate income taxes and cutting government spending. Other European countries have followed suit: Last summer Sweden’s Social Democrats were ousted after receiving their lowest share of the vote since World War I. The so-called ‘Swedish model,’ which featured a top tax rate of an astonishing 87 percent, turns out to have been a bust.



“We saw it in Germany in 2005 with the election of the Christian Democratic Chancellor Angela Merkel. Canadian conservatives rebounded last year under Stephen Harper after near-extinction. And earlier this summer, we were shocked, but not surprised, to see a tough-minded, pro-American, pro-market conservative elected as President of France. One of Nicolas Sarkozy’s most innovative ideas, that overtime work shouldn’t be taxed, is straight out of Reagan’s playbook. The French just elected the closest thing to Ronald Reagan they could find. And the election wasn’t even close.



“Scared to death by the prospect of total economic collapse, a number of European countries have been slowly moving in the direction of greater economic freedom in recent years. Last year, the average personal income tax for all Western industrialized countries was down to 43 percent, compared to 67 percent in 1980. And corporate rates have followed a similar trend. The Wall Street Journal has referred to all this as the economic counterpart to the fall of the Berlin Wall. And Ronald Reagan pulled out the first, crumbling stones.



“But it’s not at all clear that any of these late-inning reforms will be enough to halt Europe’s deep and possibly irreversible slide into an economic abyss. The cultural forces in most European countries may be simply too strong at this point to counteract. We saw a sign of this last summer when French students came out in droves to protest a mild but necessary effort to regulate France’s notoriously stringent labor laws.



“So that’s Europe, where the legacy of Ronald Reagan seems to be gaining momentum, even if it’s a little late in the game. What about us? Are we acting on the lessons of 1981? Or have we already forgotten them?



“Well, I can tell you that in the Senate it seems as though the other side is still looking to Old Europe for answers. In one of the great political ironies of our time, the new Majority in Congress seems intent on taking America down the path of bigger government and higher taxes just as Europe is frantically trying to steer themselves away from it. These guys want to turn the United States into France when even the French are beginning to have second thoughts.



“Well, as far as I’m concerned, when the French President prides himself on being a tax-cutter, jogs around Paris in an NYPD t-shirt, and spends his summer vacationing on a lake in New Hampshire, it can only mean one thing: we won. But the only people who don’t seem to have gotten the memo just took over the House and the Senate. For the last seven months, Republicans have been fighting off a raft of proposals that seem better suited to The Hague than The Heartland.



“First, there was an effort to regulate grass-roots groups into the ground by forcing them to comply with burdensome new disclosure rules. Think of Sarbanes Oxley for the local pro-life chapter. Then there was a plan to dismantle a wildly successful prescription drug benefit for seniors by modeling it after a price-controlled government model.



“Then there was the union-backed effort to eliminate secret ballot elections from union drives — which even four out of five union members opposed. Then there was a budget blueprint that contemplated a tax hike three times higher than any tax increase in history.



“And then, just last month, the other side unveiled a plan to extend a government insurance program that was created for the uninsured children of low-income parents to the already-insured children of middle-income parents as well.



“If you’re anything like me, you’re scratching your head and saying, ‘I thought we already tried that.’ We did. We called it Hillarycare. And when we learned that it would have federalized about one seventh of our national economy, we rebelled. As P.J. O’Rourke put it: ‘If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it’s free.’



“So just when Europe seems to have woken up to the wisdom of Reagan’s policies, the current Congress is getting nostalgic. And when I say nostalgic, I mean it quite literally. Because many of the people who have assumed leadership roles in Congress since the last election are the Old Guard, the senior members of the party who cut their teeth as lawmakers during the era of the Great Society, well before Reagan’s policies put us on a glide path to prosperity.



“These are the people drafting the laws that are coming out of Congress these days, the heirs of the Lyndon Johnson era. And they don’t seem to have learned much in the interim.



“The Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, David Obey, has been in Congress since 1969, the same year Lyndon Johnson left office. John Dingell, Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee arrived in 1955. The Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, Charlie Rangel, has been there since 1970.



“We could say the same thing about the Senate. The idea here isn’t that seniority is bad, but that Congress today seems intent on applying solutions that didn’t even work when they were fresh, to new challenges.



“One of the surest signs of this is the new prominence of Labor Unions in Washington. I already mentioned the effort to eliminate the Secret Ballot in union drives. The background here is that union membership has fallen off precipitously, so Big Labor came up with what they thought was a clever way to reverse the trend: do away with the traditional secret ballot, and make employees state publicly whether they want to form a union or not.



“I mean, who wouldn’t say yes with a union boss standing over his or her shoulder, and who wouldn’t say no with his or her boss watching the vote. Well, we stopped that one.



“The House of Representative gave another gift to Big Labor this month when it went into the August recess without acting on free trade agreements with Panama and Peru.



“It’s pretty clear that the new Congress has embraced big tax hikes, Big Labor, and big government with new gusto. And the results, if these policies are enacted, should be predictable to anyone who lived through the ‘70s. Samuel Johnson once described marriage as the triumph of hope over experience. Given the economic lessons of the last 25 years, he might as well have been talking about the policy proposals of the new Congress.



“So Ronald Reagan would have a lot to say about today’s Congress. And he would say all of it with charm, great common sense, and good humor. He had seen the same mistaken approach to government before, and he laid out a plan for correcting the problems it created in a way that inspired and, more importantly, mobilized a nation. He made people feel like they were part of something great, and that this something was great precisely because it was American. This nation had been proud, he told us, and he restored that pride and that idealism. And we loved him for it.



“Reagan’s biographer, Lou Cannon, liked to say that a lot of Ronald Reagan’s success lay in the fact that he spoke about the future in the accents of the past. And if I were to offer an assessment of the new Majority in Congress, I would say something similar. I would say their ultimate undoing will be the fact that they speak about the past in the accents of the future. New problems, failed solutions.



“Republicans can still learn from Reagan, too. Just as our friends on the other side seem to have embraced a vision that he proved had run its course, so too should we be wary of an approach that doomed people like Barry Goldwater. Ronald Reagan ultimately outshined his conservative forbears because he articulated conservative principles with optimism and an openness to others and the world. And he would lead the party of Goldwater to victory with that same openness and optimism in 1980.



“One of the first official signs of that optimism was at Reagan’s inauguration, which took place for the first time on the West side of the Capitol. By facing out from the old end of the country to the new, to these hills around us, Reagan was telling us that his administration was going to be one of openness and adventurousness and ideals as big and as wide and as promising as the country itself.



“He had that same spirit the day he left office. And we who learned so much from Ronald Reagan, who owe so much to this wonderful man, should do our part too.”



###





‘This enhanced commitment to cracking down on illegal immigration is a necessary step toward securing our nation—and living up to the expectations of our constituents.’



Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following statement Friday regarding the administration’s announcement on improved border security, immigration and worksite enforcement measures:



“During the immigration debate, and ever since, countless well-informed Americans spoke up about the need to enforce our borders and our laws. Their voice was heard in the Capitol and the White House. The billions we’ve added to the homeland security funding bill for border security and interior enforcement, and the administration’s enhanced commitment to cracking down on illegal immigration are necessary steps toward securing our nation—and living up to the expectations of our constituents.”



###







‘The lesson that has emerged is clear: politics yields headlines, cooperation yields results’



Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell spoke on the Senate floor Friday regarding the first seven months of the 110th Congress.  The following are his remarks:



“Seven months ago I opened this session by reminding myself and my colleagues that the work we do and the way we do it will be judged not only by the voters but by history. Future generations aren’t likely to remember our names, but they will inherit the laws we pass, the problems we ignore, and the institution we leave behind. So I rise today to take stock of how we’ve done. To offer an honest assessment of our work and to propose a course correction.



 “When the gavel fell in January, a new party had taken over. It had a simple six-point plan of action involving a list of items that were thought to have popular support. As the Majority Whip put it last fall, Democrats didn’t want to overpromise, so they came up with a list that was ‘concise, understandable, and attainable.’ He added that if the Democrats were fortunate enough to win the majority, they’d be ‘judged’ primarily on their ability to deliver on these six legislative goals.



“So, by the Majority’s own standards, our report card should begin with the so-called ‘Six for ’06.’ They’ve had more than half a year to enact them. It’s fair to ask: How have they done?



“We started with Lobby reform. As an early gesture of the bipartisanship that I had hoped would mark this session, I co-sponsored this bill with the Majority Leader. But then, less than two weeks into the session, the Majority decided to cut off debate. It forced an early vote on an unfinished bill, and it failed. After Republicans were allowed to add a vital amendment that protected grass roots organizations from burdensome oversight, we voted again, and the bill passed easily, 96-2.



“Minimum wage was next. Republicans supported an increase that included tax relief for the business owners who would have to pay for it. At first, the Majority balked. They wanted a bill without any tax relief, without any Republican input. It failed. But when they finally agreed to cooperate by including tax relief for small businesses, the bill sailed through by a vote of 94-3.



“Four weeks, two accomplishments. Good start.



“Then we turned to the 9/11 bill. And here the tide began to turn. Republicans supported this bill from the start. We saw it as a welcome opportunity to strengthen security. But the majority rejected our efforts to improve it with amendments, and then weakened the bill by inserting a dangerous provision at the insistence of their labor union supporters. They wanted to give airport security workers at U.S. airports veto power over the government’s rapid response plan to a terrorist attack.



“It was an absurd request: Congress rejected a similar provision five years earlier on the grounds that it threatened national security, and the President promised to veto it this time around. The bill ended up passing the Senate, and the provision was ultimately stripped in conference.



“But by refusing Republican input at the start, both parties would have to wait until just last week to finish this important bill. And the centerpiece of the Democrats’ plan for improving national security would sit on the shelf for months.



“There’s a pattern here: When the Majority has agreed to let Republicans participate and shape legislation, we’ve achieved good, bipartisan results. When they’ve blocked that cooperation, they’ve failed. But just like a fly that keeps slamming its head into the same windowpane trying get outside, the Democratic Majority has spent most of the year since those small, early gestures at cooperation trying and failing to advance its agenda by insisting on the path of political advantage.



“The problem took root early on. Soon after the 9/11 Bill came the first attempt to set a timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq. The Democrats knew it had no chance of passing the Senate, let alone being signed into law. Two weeks earlier they had forced a vote on the Petraeus Plan for securing Baghdad, and lost. The President had made clear his opposition to timelines. And Republicans insisted that Congress should not be in the business of micromanaging a war.



“Yet they persisted anyway. The first timeline vote failed. It was followed by fourteen more political messaging votes on the war, votes that promised to have no practical impact on our military conduct. The Senate would spend two months debating legislation that in every case was bound to fail. For the entire spring and summer, the Majority insisted on political votes, culminating in the theatrical crescendo of an all-night debate that even Democrats admitted was a stunt.



“What seems to have happened here is that at some point in February, after the minimum wage vote, the political left put a hand on the steering wheel. And the unfortunate result was that nearly five months would pass before a single item on the ‘Six for ’06’ agenda would become law — and even that had to be tacked onto a must-pass emergency war spending bill that the Democrats had been slow-rolling for months.



“It was during those early months that an alternative, harder-edged, ‘Six for 06’ agenda seemed to emerge. Indeed, the biggest Senate fights this year haven’t been over the original ‘Six for ’06’ at all. They’ve revolved around the policy proposals of the far left. Fortunately, Republicans have held together to keep these bad ideas from becoming law.



“They wanted to eliminate secret-ballot elections from union drives.



“They wanted to spend valuable floor time on a non-binding resolution about the Attorney General, despite weeks of print and television interviews on the topic already.



“They wanted to revive the so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” a kind of federal speech code that was abolished more than two decades ago because it violates the First Amendment.



“They even proposed closing the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay and sending the inmates to the states.



“Then there were the politically-motivated investigations which, between the House and Senate, break down to about six hearings a day since the first day of the session.



“Some seemed to see a plot being hatched behind every filing cabinet in Washington. Others seem ready to hold a White House sofa in contempt for bad fabric.



“And, of course, there was the endless political grandstanding on Iraq that I’ve mentioned.



“Predictably, this alternative agenda went nowhere. In the effort to get both, they ended up with neither. Editorial writers started to grumble about the lack of achievement. The public took note too, sending the new Congress’ approval rating to new subterranean lows. The lesson that emerged was clear: politics yields headlines; cooperation yields results.



 “Republicans warned the other side about the consequences of unilateralism early on. We argued for months that the Majority had been engaged in a months-long power play by invoking cloture with astonishing frequency. My staff commissioned a CRS study on the issue and found that the Majority was on pace to shatter the record for cloture filings in a single Congress.



“Yet the cloture stories that started to appear argued that the record cloture filings were somehow our fault — as if we had forced the Majority to cut off debate. This was classic spin, as anyone who’s been in the Senate for more than a week will tell you. The Majority knows that more than 40 cloture votes in six months isn’t a sign of minority obstruction; it’s the sign of a majority that doesn’t like the rules.



“The opportunity costs of this failed strategy have been immense. Because it’s refused to cooperate with the other side, the Majority hasn’t brought a single piece of legislation to the floor that would reduce the income tax burden on working Americans. The Senate hasn’t done a thing to address entitlements, despite a looming financial catastrophe. It’s done nothing to address the rising cost of healthcare. Only one appropriations bill out of 12 has passed the Senate. And none have been signed into law.



“On the first day of the session, the Majority Whip said that the American people had put Democrats in the majority to “find solutions, not to play to a draw with nothing to show for it.” Yet at times over the last seven months those words have seemed quaint. The Democratic Majority had the right idea early on. It made an early mistake in my opinion by succumbing to a round-the-clock political campaign. And, as any sailor knows, a small deviation at the start takes you far off course over time.



“Over the last week we’ve seen some conspicuous acts of bipartisan cooperation, including tonight, when the Majority chose the road of cooperation to fix a gap in our national intelligence before we left for recess.



“Americans are grateful to the Majority for joining us on this critical issue. Under the Leadership of my friend the Majority Leader Congress has just acted on the sound principle that cooperation is a better recipe for success than confrontation and political theater. And all of us should be glad about that.



“We’ve seen that we can accomplish good things by working together and cooperating on legislation that Americans support. Politics has its place. But it doesn’t steer this ship. At least it shouldn’t. There’s simply too much to be done, and we’ve seen the results when it does.



“I won’t offer a grade for this Congress. Others have already done that. But I will say that at the beginning of this session, I staked my party to a pledge: when faced with an urgent issue, we would act; and when faced with a problem, we’d seek solutions, not mere political advantage.



“That pledge still stands. We’ve seen what we can do. We’ve seen it tonight. And we have reason to hope we will see it still.



###