[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George H. W. Bush (1991, Book I)]
[May 10, 1991]
[Pages 496-499]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]



Remarks at Dedication Ceremony of the Social Sciences Complex at 
Princeton University in Princeton, New Jersey
May 10, 1991

    Thank you all very much. Thank you. Please be seated. It's a great 
pleasure to be here. President Shapiro, your words were so kind that my 
heart almost went back into fibrillation. [Laughter] I salute you, sir, 
and I thank you for the honor bestowed on me.
    To Governor Florio; and to the Members of the United States Congress 
that are here today; to Mrs. Shapiro, and the board of trustees; to 
Chairman Henderson; Dean Williamson; Associate Dean Morrow. And I'd also 
like to salute Princeton's former Presidents Goheen and Bowen. And I'm 
delighted to help dedicate this impressive complex.
    Though I must say that I'm glad that this is May and not the first 
snowfall. I don't think Barbara would let me take place in your special 
brand of Olympics. [Laughter]
    Seriously, I'm honored to receive an honorary degree from Princeton. 
Imagine: a son of Yale getting a Princeton degree.

[[Page 497]]

``Son of Yale''--you can snicker, but you ought to hear what they call 
me in Washington. [Laughter]
    Governor Florio's comments brought back JFK's words when he said, 
``How lucky I was to have a Princeton degree.'' And I agree with him. 
You remember what JFK said, and I'll paraphrase it--I have the best of 
all worlds: a Princeton degree and a Yale education. [Laughter] I knew 
that would not thrill the band, but you did a great job on ``Hail To The 
Chief.'' Thank you. [Laughter]
    Well, Princeton is a great place. You know, Washington said, ``No 
college has turned out better scholars or more estimable characters.'' 
That includes, of course, our last two Secretaries of State. Both have 
been outstanding public servants. Both love this university. But only 
one has a tattoo to prove it. [Laughter]
    I'll always remember the time that I saw the globe inside the 
Woodrow Wilson School lobby. Anywhere you touch it, you set off 
vibrations across the rest of its surface. I can't think of a more 
appropriate symbol for this nation's role in the world. When we act, we 
do set off tremors across the globe. And Princeton is blessed with real 
expertise in the study of the Presidency.
    And I salute Professor Fred Greenstein, and it is with some 
temerity, therefore, that I give this talk that will touch on the 
Presidency.
    I'd like to talk today about an American achievement that has 
inspired men and women worldwide, most recently, in Eastern Europe. I'm 
speaking of our Constitution. In the interest of brevity, I will focus 
on the roles of the two branches of Government in which I have had the 
honor to serve, the legislative--Congress--and the executive 
departments.
    Consider the President's role. Thomas Jefferson once noted that a 
President commands a view of the whole ground, while Congress 
necessarily adopts the views of its constituents. The President and Vice 
President are the only officials elected to serve the entire Nation. It 
is the President who is responsible for guiding and directing the 
Nation's foreign policy. The executive branch alone may conduct 
international negotiations, appoint ambassadors, and conduct foreign 
policy. Our founders noted the necessity of performing this duty with 
``secrecy and dispatch,'' when necessary. The President also serves as 
Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces, as it was my role to do in the 
Persian Gulf.
    This does not mean that the Executive may conduct foreign business 
in a vacuum. I have a great respect for Congress, and I prefer to work 
cooperatively with it wherever possible. Though I felt after studying 
the question that I had the inherent power to commit our forces to 
battle after the U.N. resolution, I solicited congressional support 
before committing our forces to the Gulf war. So, while a President 
bears special foreign policy obligations, those obligations do not imply 
any liberty to keep Congress unnecessarily in the dark.
    The President's view of the whole ground includes a second 
responsibility: shaping the Nation's domestic agenda. Presidents do this 
by submitting annual budgets to Congress, along with a comprehensive 
legislative program.
    We've had our share of legislative successes. They include a budget 
agreement that reduces our borrowing requirements by nearly $500 billion 
over the next 5 years, a Clean Air Act that invokes the power of the 
marketplace to help America breathe cleaner air, an Americans with 
Disabilities Act--landmark civil rights legislation that enhances the 
dignity of those with disabilities, a child care bill that puts more 
power and choice in the hands of parents when it comes to the care of 
their own children.
    But Presidents may encourage change through means other than 
legislation. Our Points of Light campaign encourages the traditional 
American virtue of private service. Our America 2000 education strategy, 
which has been well-received across the land, involves dramatic reforms 
that don't make dramatic new claims on taxpayers' earnings. It draws on 
people's common frustration with an educational system that simply must 
do better. It encourages people to use their common sense and good old 
American ingenuity in creating better, revolutionary new schools. It 
won't help build a new office building in Washington, but it

[[Page 498]]

very well may inspire people to build a better future for themselves and 
their children, school by school, community by community.
    Elsewhere, we've proposed turning programs back to States and 
localities. This enables people to craft the most appropriate solution 
for the problems that they confront in this diverse land of ours.
    The point is simple: You don't always need to propose a new program 
to pursue a national goal. Often a President can lead by encouraging the 
values of service, by helping foster a national spirit of commitment and 
responsibility.
    For too long, pundits and special interests have equated vision with 
bureaucracy. I hope one of the hallmarks of our administration will be 
its ability to encourage not just good government but also a good 
society, one that draws upon and encourages the best instincts and 
ambitions and values of the American people.
    The common thread of commitment, individual commitment, runs through 
all successful efforts to solve our most intractable problems. The 
individual who cares, who is determined to change things for the better, 
can make a difference. And all of us Americans ought to dedicate 
ourselves to making a difference.
    While a President must take on today's problems and tomorrow's 
challenges, he also has an obligation to ``preserve, protect, and 
defend'' a 200-year-old system of constitutional government. The most 
common challenge to Presidential powers comes from a predictable source, 
represented here by several able Members of the United States Congress.
    Although our founders never envisioned a Congress that would churn 
out hundreds of thousands of pages worth of reports and hearings and 
documents and laws every year, they did understand that legislators 
would try to accumulate power. James Madison, your son--Princeton's 
son--warned that ``The legislative department is everywhere extending 
the sphere of its activity, and drawing all power into its impetuous 
vortex.'' That was Mr. Madison speaking, not President Bush speaking.
    Sometimes this sort of competition falls entirely within the bounds 
of the Constitution. But consider the unnecessary requests and 
requirements that can waste the time and energy of the Executive.
    Thirty years ago, we devoted nearly 9.5 percent of our gross 
national product to defense expenditures. And today, defense spending 
accounts for only 5.3 percent of our GNP. But congressional oversight 
has grown exponentially. One hundred and seven committees and 
subcommittees--107--oversee defense programs and spending. For fiscal 
year 1989, the Pentagon devoted 500 man-years and over $50 million just 
to write reports responding to congressional queries on such items as 
plans for manning tugboats and accounting for the number of bands.
     Defense staff has to respond yearly to more than 750,000 
congressional staff inquiries. Other executive agencies exhaust their 
time and energy, often giving identical testimony to a whole battery of 
subcommittees and committees.
    Oversight, when properly exercised, helps keep the Executive 
accountable. But when it proliferates wildly, it can confuse the public 
and make it more difficult for Congress and the President to do their 
jobs properly.
    The Chief Executive also preserves, protects, and defends the 
Constitution through the use of the veto power. Six times in my 
Presidency, I have vetoed bills that would have weakened Presidential 
powers. In one case, for instance, Congress wanted to make the President 
disclose a wide variety of sensitive diplomatic contacts and 
discussions--as well as private discussions with the executive branch--
and would have threatened to impose criminal sanctions on a wide range 
of normal diplomatic activities. I noted in my veto message that: ``The 
result would be a dangerous timidity and disarray in the conduct of U.S. 
foreign policy. Such a result is wholly contrary to the allocation of 
powers under the Constitution.''
    Elsewhere, Congress has also taken aggressive action against 
specific Presidential powers, including the power to appoint or remove 
employees who serve at the President's pleasure. It sometimes tries to 
manage executive branch--micromanage the 
executive branch--by writing too-spe-

[[Page 499]]

cific directions for carrying out a particular law. And when this 
happens, the President has a constitutional obligation to protect his 
Office and to veto the legislation. In addition, on many occasions 
during my Presidency, I have stated that statutory provisions that 
violate the Constitution have no binding legal force.
    But there's another, often overlooked side of the veto power. Often 
vetoes encourage the Legislature to reconsider its actions. When I 
vetoed a minimum wage bill--and it wasn't an easy thing to do--I sought 
to persuade Congress that a slightly lower rate would best serve the 
public interest. And in time Congress agreed. And when Congress bundles 
up a series of unrelated measures and calls it a single bill, it 
frustrates the President's constitutional role in resisting the 
influence of special interests. It is often impractical to veto a 
tremendous bill, a major bill, especially an appropriations bill because 
of unrelated riders that would never stand a chance on their own.
    Bills of this sort can pose as much of a threat to Congress as to 
the President. And it has become an annual sport for reporters to pull 
peculiarities out of the vast spending bills, such as a Federal grant to 
study cow belches, or a Lawrence Welk Museum, and ask Congress to defend 
them. Quite often because of the added riders and the complexity of the 
whole bill, Members don't even know what they've voted for. They're so 
complex; things are added in the dark of the night.
    I have sought, and will continue to seek, a line-item veto to 
prevent such embarrassments and protect the American people from 
injudicious appropriation. Right now 43 Governors have such a power. It 
works. The President ought to have that power, too. Some believe that I 
already have that power under the Constitution.
    In closing, let me try to summarize my view of the Presidency. 
Presidents define themselves through their exercise of Presidential 
power. They must use their special authority to serve the whole Nation 
in matters of foreign and domestic policy. They must set a tone for 
governance, at once leading the people, yet following their desires. 
They must preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. And they must 
encourage deliberative behavior on the part of Congress.
    But the real power of the Presidency lies in a President's ability 
to frame, through action, through example, through encouragement, what 
we as a nation must do, what is required of communities and 
institutions, large and small, in schools and factories and the hundreds 
of daily acts of individuals.
    The great joy and challenge of the Office I occupy--and believe me, 
I am honored every single day I walk into that Oval Office by the 
privilege of being President--the great joy is that the President serves 
not just as the unitary Executive but hopefully as a unifying Executive.
    As President, I feel honor-bound to strengthen the marvelous system 
of government bequeathed to us so that we may remain the freest, the 
most decent, the most prosperous, caring nation in the history of the 
world.
    Thank you, and may God bless each and every one of you. And thank 
you for the honor you've bestowed on me.

                    Note: The President spoke at 11:25 a.m. In his 
                        remarks, he referred to Harold Shapiro, 
                        president of the university, and his wife, 
                        Vivian; Gov. James Florio of New Jersey; James 
                        Henderson, chairman of the executive committee 
                        of the board of directors of the university; 
                        Joseph Williamson, dean of the chapel; Sue Anne 
                        Steffey Morrow, associate dean of the chapel; 
                        Robert F. Goheen and William G. Bowen, former 
                        presidents of the university; Secretary of State 
                        James A. Baker III; former Secretary of State 
                        George P. Shultz; and Fred I. Greenstein, 
                        professor of politics and director of the 
                        research program in leadership studies. A tape 
                        was not available for verification of the 
                        content of these remarks.