Leading Montana Forward , State Convention of the Montana Association of Letter Carrier

Baucus, Max S.

English

University of Montana

University of MontanaScholarWorks at University of MontanaMax S. Baucus Speeches Archives and Special Collections6-23-1984"Leading Montana Forward", State Convention ofthe Montana Association of Letter CarriersMax S. BaucusLet us know how access to this document benefits you.Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/baucus_speechesThis Speech is brought to you for free and open access by the Archives and Special Collections at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has beenaccepted for inclusion in Max S. Baucus Speeches by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information,please contact scholarworks@mso.umt.edu.Recommended CitationBaucus, Max S., ""Leading Montana Forward", State Convention of the Montana Association of Letter Carriers" ( June 23, 1984). MaxS. Baucus Speeches. 311.https://scholarworks.umt.edu/baucus_speeches/311Printing, Graphics & Direct MailONBASE SYSTEMIndexing FormSenator * or Department*: BAUCUSInstructions:Prepare one form for insertion at the beginning of each record series.Prepare and insert additional forms at points that you want to index.For example: at the beginning of a new folder, briefing book, topic, project, or date sequence.Record Type*: Speeches & RemarksMONTH/YEAR of Records*: June-1984(Example: JANUARY-2003)(1) Subject*: Postal Service(select subject from controlled vocabulary, if your office has one)(2) Subject* State Convention of MT Association of Letter Carriers "Leading MT Forward"DOCUMENT DATE*: 06/23/1984(Example: 01/12/1966)* "required information"BAUCUSLETCiAR . PRM 22-J I JN-84I ].*'I. : L 3 Nko, I"Th~t~M4 ~~tQ(AlREMARKS OF SENATOR MAX BAUCUSSTATE CONVENTION OF THE ,MONTANA ASSOCIATIONOF LETTER CARRIERSLEWISTOWN, MONTANAJUNE 23, 1984"LEADING MONTANA FORWARD"THANK YOU* ITHIS EVENING,AM PLEASED TO JOIN YOU THIS EVENING-I WANT TO REFLECT UPON THE CHOICE FACING THEPEOPLE OF MONTANA*THF CHAllFNGE OF THE 1980'SEACH GENERATION BELIEVES IT HAS A RENDEZVOUS WITH DESTINY.EACH GENERATION BELIEVES IT IS LIVING AT THE CRITICAL MOMENTIN HISTORY .THERE'S A CERTAIN ARROGANCE IN THAT VIEW.I DON'T KNOW IF WE ARE LIVING AT THE CRITICAL MOMENT.BUT I DO KNOW WE ARE NOW AT A CRITICAL MOMENT*SOME OF YOU MAY BE SURPRISED TO HEAR THIS*WE ARE NOT AT WAR.2WE ARE NOT IN THE DEPTHS OF A NATIONWIDE DEPRESSION.OUR CITIES AREN'T BURNING*THERE ARE FEW OVERT SIGNS OF DISRUPTION*BUT AS AMERICAN HISTORIAN WILLIAM WOODWARD HAS OBSERVED:"THE TURNING POINTS OF LIVES ARE NOT THE GREAT MOMENTS-THE REAL CRISES ARE OFTEN CONCEALED IN OCCURRENCES SO TRIVIALIN APPEARANCE THAT THEY PASS UNOBSERVED*"WE ARE AT SUCH A TURNING POINT TODAY.WE ARE BEING QUIETLY, BUT SERIOUSLY CHALLENGED.*.**CHALLENGED BY PROBLEM' S WE'VE BEEN RELUCTANT TO FACE:0 OUR FARMERS, RANCHERS, BUSINESSES, AND WORKING PEOPLE ARECHALLENGED BY INTOLERABLY HIGH INTEREST RATES THAT ONCE AGAIN ARECREEPING UPWARDS.O OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS CHALLENGED BY A BUDGET THAT ISOUT OF CONTROL.0 OUR COUNTRY'S POSITION IN INTERNATIONAL .MARKETS ISCHALLFNGED BY FIERCE FORE IGN COMPETITION.3NI)IT'S U)P TO US.INTEREST RATES AND THE BUDGET DEFICITNOWHERE IS THIS CHOICE MORE CLEAR THAN WHEN WE LOOK AT THEPROBLEM OF INTEREST RATES-THE FEDERAL RIJDGET DEFICIT IS GROWING BY $22 MILLION AN-HOUR*0 OUR NATION'S ELDERLY ARE CHALLENGED BY SKYROCKETINGHEALTH COSTS*0 OUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN ARE .HALLENGED BY ANUCLEAR ARMS RACE THAT SHOWS NO SIGNS OF SLOWING DOWN.THESE ARE SERIOUS CHALLENGES*AND THE CENTRAL CHOICE WE FACE IN 1984 IS WHETHER WE TAKETHEM ON...**OR WHETHER WE DON' T.THAT'S THE CHOICE*THE 1980's CAN BECOME THE DECADE OF NEW SOLUTIONS... OR ITCAN BECOME THE DECADE OF LOST OPPORTUNITIES.11IF WE DON T ACT, IN THE NEXT SIX YEARS THE NATIONAL DEBTWILL DOIJBLE.**TO OVER $3 TRILLION*THAT DEBT:0 DRIVES UP INTEREST RATES;O FORCES MORE BANKRUPTCIES;0 PREVENTS AMERICAN RANCHERS AND FARMERS FROM COMPETING INWORLD MARKETS;0 PUTS PEOPLE OUT OF WORK.AND EVERYDAY WE PUT OFF DEALING WITH THE PROBLEM, ITCOMPOUNDS ITSELF*THAT HURTS US, BUT IT ALSO HURTS THE GENERATIONS TO COME.IT WAS THOMAS JEFFERSON WHO WROTE:"THE QUESTION WHETHER ONE GENERATION HAS THE RIGHT TOHIND ANOTHER BY THE IDEFICIT IT IMPOSES IS A QUESTION OF SUCHCONSEQUENCE AS TO PLACE IT AMONG THE FU.NDAMENTAL PRINCIPLESOF GOVERNMENT. WE SHOllLD CONSIDER OURSELVES UNAUTHORIZED TOSADDLF POSTERITY WITH OUR DEBTS, AND MORALLY ROUND TO PAYTHEM OURSELVES*"j)5JEFFERSON WAS RIGHT*WE IN AMERICA BETTER START RESPONDING TO HIS ADMONITION*EACH DAY WE ARE ADDING A BURDEN TO OUR CHILDREN ANDGRANDCHILDREN INSTEAD OF LESSENING IT*EACH DAY WE ARE ALLOWING THE FUTURE TO SLIP AWAY, INSTEAD OFBUILDING IT.THAT'S WRONG.WE KNOW IT'S WRONG*AND WE THINK IT'S ENOUGH TO STARE AT THE PROBLEM AND SHAKEOUR HEADS IN DISAPPROVAL*THAT'S NOT ENOUGH!WE'VE GOT TO BUCKLE DOWN.AND WE HAVE TO DECIDE WE ARE WILLING TO PUT ASIDE OURDIFFERENCES TO GET THE JOR DONE*THE FREEZE PROPOSALTHAT IS WHY I JOINED A RI-PARTISAN GROUP OF SENATORS IN6PROPOSING A ONE-YEAR BUDGET FREEZE ON ALL FEDERAL SPENDING.SENATORs KASSEBAUMJ GRASSLEY, BIDEN AND I GOT TOGETHER ANDDECIDED THAT THESE DEFICITS CRY OUT FOR A UNIQUE SOLUTION:o A SOLUTION THAT TRANSCENDS PARTISAN BICKERING;o A SOLUTION THAT TRANSCENDS THE PLEAS OF SPECIAL INTERESTGROUPS;o A SOLUTION THAT GETS DEFICITS AND INTEREST RATES DOWNNOW, NOT SEVEN YEARS FROM NOW*I'M PROUD OF OUR PROPOSAL*I KNOW THERE ARE SOME WHO THINK THE "FREEZE". IS TOO TOUGH.BUT I'M CONVINCED IT IS THE KIND OF STRONG MEDICINE WE NEED*I KNOW THERE ARE SOME WHO THINK THE "FREEZE" LOCKS IN PLACESPENDING PRIORITIES WE MAY OPPOSE*BUT IN FACT, THIS FREEZE WOULD END THE HEMORRHAGING INDOMESTIC SPENDING*AND IN FACTJ THE FREEZE WOULD STOP OUR "BLANK CHECK"APPROACH TO DEFENSE SPENDING*7THERE ARE SOME WHO WOULD RATHER PROMOTE GIMMICKS.THERE ARE SOME WHO WOULD RATHER HIDE BEHIND SMOKE ANDMIRRORS.BUT I WILL TELL YOU TONIGHT THAT WE WON'T GET THE DEFICITSDOWN UNTIL WE HAVE 51 MEMBERS OF THE SENATE AND 218 MEMBERS OFTHE HOUSE THAT HAVE THE POLITICAL COURAGE IT TAKES TO GET THE JOBDONE. AND I DON'T MIND TELLING YOU THAT IT WOULDN'T BOTHER ME ABIT IF THOSE 51 SENATORS WERE ALL DEMOCRATS...ITS ABOUT TIME WEREGAINED CONTROL OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE.THE DEFICIT REDUCTION CONFERENCEAs MONTANANS WE CAN'T BE SATISFIED WITH JUST GETTING THEDEFICIT DOWN*WE HAVE TO DO SO IN A MANNER THAT IS FAIR TO WORKING MEN ANDWOMEN*AND IN A MANNER THAT IS FAIR TO MONTANA-OTH OF THESE POINTS WERE DRIVEN HOME TO ME THIS PAST WEEKAS I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THE HOUSE-SENATE CONFERENCE ON THEDEFICIT REDUCTION BILL*ONE OF THE IrEMS ON THE TABLE IS MY PROPOSAL TO REDUCE THEGENEROUS TAX BENEFITS ON THE BUSINESS USE OF LUXURY CARS-. 8THERE'S NO DOUBT THAT FOR MANY AMERICANS THE USE OF THEIRCAR IS A LEGITIMATE.BUSINESS EXPENSE*BUT WHY SHOULD YOU AND I AS TAXPAYERS SUBSIDIZE THE ENTIREPURCHASE OF A $100,000 ROLLS ROYCE OR A $50,000 MERCEDES BENZ?THE ANSWER IS: WE SHOULDN'T-My PROPOSAL WOULD LIMIT THE DEGREE TO WHICH THE TAX CODE CANBE USED TO UNDERWRITE THE PURCHASE OF LUXURY CARS.AM PLEASED IT WAS ADOPTED BY THE CONFERENCE THIS PASTWEEK*I'M GLAD I'M ON THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE SO THAT I COULDPROTECT THAT PROPOSAL*INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDSMORE IMPORTANT, I'M GLAD I'M ON THE CONFERENCE SO THAT I CANFIGHT TO PROTECT MONTANA.THERE IS A PROVISION IN THE DEFICIT REDUCTION RILL THATWOULD SUBSTANTIALLY LIMIT MONTANA'S ABILITY TO ISSUE INDUSTRIALDEVELOPMENT BONDS-THOSE BONDS ARE AN IMPORTANT PART OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN9MONTANA*THEY ARE AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE "BUILD MONTANA" PROGRAM*UNDER A PROPOSAL AUTHORED BY CONGRESSMAN ROSTENKOWSKI, A CAPWOULD BE PLACED ON THE AMOUNT OF BONDS A STATE CAN. ISSUE*THE ROSTENKOWSKI CAP IS BLATANTLY UNFAIR* IT WOULD PERMITSTATES TO ISSUE BONDS BASED ON THEIR POPULATION. BIG STATES --LIKE CALIFORNIA -- WOULDN'T BE AFFECTED*BUT NEW INVESTMENT IN MONTANA WOULD BE CRUSHED:o LAST YEAR MONTANA ISSUED $201 MILLION OF BONDS*o THE CAP WOULD LIMIT THAT AMOUNT TO $121 MILLION.O THE CAP WOULD SLASH MONTANA'S BOND CAPACITY BY 40%!o THE SENATE CONFERENCE IS CONSIDERING MY AMENDMENT TO THEROSTENKOWSKI CAP TO PERMIT ALL STATES TO ISSUE AT LEAST $300MI LL I ON IN NEW 1ONDS EVERY YEAR*UNDER MY PROPOSAL, ROSTENKOWSKI 'S CAP WOULD STILL RAISE SOMENEEDED REVENUE, BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF THE LEAST POPULOISSTATES*MONTANA WOlLD BE PERMITTED TO RAISE THE MONEY WE NEED FORNFW JOBS AND NEW BUSINESSES*I ASSURE YOU I WILL DO EVERYTHING IN MY POWER TO GET THISIMPORTANT PROVISION ADOPTED.I AM PROUD TO BE IN A POSITION TO DEFEND MONTANA'SINTERESTS.CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENTTHE CONFERENCE IS ALSO CONSIDERING A PROPOSAL TO CHANGECIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT. THE FEDERAL BUDGET CONTAINS TWO KINDSOF SPENDING: ENTITLEMENTS WHICH ARE EXPENDITURES OBLIGATED RYLAW AND DISCRETIONARY SPENDING.HOWEVER, ENTITLEMENTS WHICH INCLUDE SOCIAL SECURITY,MEDICARE AND CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT NOW COMPOSE A HUGE PART OFTHE BUDGET*JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF HOW MUCH IS INVOLVED, SOCIALSECURITY AND MEDICARE ALONE COMPOSE 28% OF ALL FEDERAL SPENDINGINTH11E PRES iENT' S 1985 RUDGFliT PLAN.THAT'S OVER $250 RILLLiN.AND AS LONG AS THERE IS A BUDGET DEFICIT, ENTITLEMENTPROGRAMS WILL CONTINUE TO SHOW UP ON SOMEBODY'S LIST OF POTENTIALBUDGET CUTS.11IN THE CONFERENCE, A TENTATIVE AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REACHED TOELIMINATE THE REDUCED ANNUITIES FOR RETIREES UNDER AGE 62 ADOPTEDBY CONGRESS IN 1982. THE AGREEMENT INCLUDES ELIMINATING PAYREDUCTIONS FOR MILITARY RETIREES WHO GO BACK TO THE FEDERALGOVERNMENT TO WORK.BUT THESE CHANGES WON'T STOP THERE. THE NEXT CONGRESS WILLHAVE A FULL. AGENDA OF ADMINISTRATION PROPOSED "REFORMS*1 ITHE ADMINISTRATION WANTS TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT FEDERAL ANDPOSTAL WORKERS CONTRIBUTE TO RETIREMENT. THEY WILL PROBABLY ASKCONGRESS NEXT JANUARY TO INCREASE THAT TO 8% IN THE FIRST YEARAFTER ADOPTION AND TO 9% THE NEXT YEAR*THE OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT ALSO WANTS TO LIMIT FULLCOST-OFLIVING ADJUSTMENTS TO THE COVER ONLY THE FIRST $10,000 OFANNUITY. ANNUITY AMOUNT OVER $10,000 WOULD GET A COLA EQUAL TO55% OF THE CHANGE IN THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX.OPM ALSO PROPOSIES THIAT FUTI.RE ANNIllTIrIES 13E HAS E) ON THEYEAR AVERAGE OF SALARIES RATHER THAN THE CURRENT 3 YEARS*THESE ARE CHANGES WHICH WILL PROBABLY NOT BE TAKEN UP UNTILTHE NEXT CONGRESS CONVENES- HOWEVER SINCE CONGRESS MUST ENACTLEGISLATION TO CREATE THE SUPPLEMENTAL RETIREMENT FOR THOSE HIREDAFTER JANUARY, 19814,. THE ADMINISTRATION S SUPPORTERS MIGHT TRY TO1.2SLIP THESE CHANGES INTO THE SAME PACKAGE*I BELIEVE CONGRESS SHOULD LOOK LONG AND HARD AT ALL OF THESEPROPOSALS. THEY SHOULD BE DEBATED ON THEIR MERITS, IF ANY. THEYSHOULD NOT BE ADOPTED WITHOUT HEARINGS AND DEBATE..CONCLU SION198L1 IS A PIVOTAL YEAR.NOT BECAUSE WE ARE STARING CATASTROPHE IN THE FACEWE AREN'T*BUT THIS STATE AND THIS COUNTRY ARE POISED AT THE EDGE OF ANIMPORTANT WATERSHED*WE ARE FACED WITH IMPORTANT CHOICES..... AND WITHIN THOSE CHOICES LIE AS EXCITING A SET OFOPPORTUNITIES AS ANY GENERATION-OF AMERICANS HAS HAD*TONIGHT, I ASK YOU TO JOIN ME IN A COMMITMENT TO SEIZE THOSEOPPORTUNITIES.To CAPTURE THEM AND RIDE THEM AS FAR AS THEY WILL TAKE IIS.IT WAS FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT WHO URGED US:13"LET US MOVE FORWARD WITH STRdNG AND ACTIVE FAITH*LET US HEED HIS WORDS*LET US NOT LOOK TO IDEOLOGY*LET US NOT LOOK TO DOGMATISM.LET US LOOK TO THE FJTIJRE*AND LET US WORK TOGETHER TO LEAD MONTANA FORWARD.THANK YOU**MEMORANDUMTo: Max, Ken, PeteFrom: JoseRe: Letter Carriers Speech (June 23)Date: 6/19/84I called several people to learn more about this weekend'sspeech and issues which concern the Letter Carriers.You are to address 150 people at the banquet dinner forthe state convention of National Association of Letter Carriers(AFL-CIO). The dinner starts at 7 p.m. and goes until 9 p.m.During the evening, you are expected to give a ten minutespeech and then 20 minutes of questions and answers. At somepoint, they will also have the swearing in of new officers.Ernie Coppedge, a Lewistown letter carrier is theorganization officer working with Sharon on this. He suggeststhat retirement preservation is a main concern.The deficit reduction package now in conference containsseveral proposals of concern to federal and postal retirees.The Senate language is more generous to retirees. The Houselanguage is more generous to current federal employees.RETIREMENT (Civil Service Annuities Are Not Pensions)Federal and Postal employees and retirees feel verystrongly that the distinction between their retirement programand others should not be confused. The Civil ServiceRetirement fund pays retirees an annuity which should not beconfused with a pension. Annuities are based on the employeecontribution of salary and an employer contribution.Pensions are based on employer contributions. There is also adifference in payout.Since the Postal Reorganization Act in the 1970's, postalemployees have worked for a quasi governmental, quasi businessorganization. Employees are unionized and have salariesdetermined by collective bargaining. However, since the PostalService used to be part of the federal government, postalemployees and retirees are covered by federal (civil service)retirement and health benefits. These are not included incontract negotiations and are under Congressional control.In the past several years, many changes have been proposedfor reducing or capping the cost of living adjustments (COLAs)of civil service retirement.You have a mixed voting record on the issue. (Your votingpercentage with the Letter Carrier's union in 1983 was 80%, butthat's sounds better that it really is. In 1982, one federalunion gave you a 75% rating, but the retirees group gave youonly a 50%. You have, in general, supported cuts and caps inCOLAs.)The main issues on civil service retirement changes are:1/ Preserving cost of living adjustments. Theadministration has proposed delays in the annual COLAs.This past April, Congress approved the administrationpostponement of the May, 1984 COLA until next January.You opposed the package that contained this proposal.The Senate deficit reduction package contains a proposalto eliminate the cap on COLAs for undisabled retireesunder 62 years old. Current law requires that they getone half of the actual COLA. The House version wouldmaintain the status quo which was adopted as part of theFY 83 Budget Reconciliation in 1982. You supported thisproposal which they didn't like.2/ The administration and the Grace Commission recommendthat the retirement age be raised from 55 to 65. Thisidea has come up many times. A gradual rise seems likelyin the future, but there is no Congressional interest inthe issue this year.3/ A supplemental retirement program for new hires must becreated before January, 1985. Current employees andretirees want to be reassured that the new program willnot diminish the benefits for them under the existingsystem.4/ The current system provides a COLA based on theConsumer Price Index. There are several proposals tochange the formula to a percentage (60 or 70%) of the CPIinstead of 100%. There is also an administration proposalfor a means test limiting full COLAs to the first $10,000of retirement with a 55% of CPI COLA on the amount over$10,000.5/ The administration wants very much to base retirementincome on a highest salary earned by the retiree in hislast five (5) years of employment instead of three (3)years as done now. This would effectively reduce federalretirement outlays. All the federal and postal unionsoppose this.We received about 400 letters on retirement from retireesin the last couple years. There are 12,000 federal employeesand 7000 federal and postal retirees in Montana. I have notfound out how many postal employees are in Montana.Civil Service retirement is an entitlement program. Aslong as there is a budget deficit and so little of the budgetis "controllable" spending, entitlements will be targets forcuts. You can point out what you have been doing for seniorcitizens in controlling health care costs which is a majordrain on them.CURRENT LABOR CONTRACT - STRIKE POSSIBLENegotiations began on April 24 to renegotiate the currentlabor contract which expires July 20. The Postal Board ofGovernors is dominated by Reagan appointees that the unionconsider "unfriendly."The Postal Service has proposed a contract which theLetter Carriers consider offensive. No compromise has beenreached. The national convention for the organization willmeet in August. At that time, if no settlement has beenreached and arbitration has not worked, it is possible, theymay discuss a strike.The Postal Service has proposed a two tier salary systemwhere new hires will be paid 33% less than current employees.In addition, all salaries would be frozen for the life of thecontract (3 years).This proposed contract also makes changes in work rulescovering base pay, overtime and the payment of COLAs in 3 lumpsum installments instead of adding them to pay checks.The Postal Service has shown remarkable improvements inproductivity, handling more mail with fewer employees andoperating in the black recently. The unions want more moneyand benefits since they made several "concessions" and accepted"givebacks" in the last negotiations.We have received only one constituent letter on this. Sheasked that you support the union.PRIVATE EXPRESS (POSTAL SERVICE MONOPOLY ON IST CLASS MAIL)The Postal Service enjoys a monopoly on delivery of firstclass mail. This was granted by the "Private ExpressStatute." Senator Symms and other conservatives, urban andrural, supported ending the monopoly. Legislation to repealthe private express statute has come before every Congress forabout twenty years, but has never been considered.Most rural Senators have opposed repeal because they fearservice to rural areas will cease to exist. Judging from ourexperience with airline deregulation, you have assured postalemployees that you oppose repeal.Some conservative group tried to start a letter writingcampaign to generate support for repeal, but we got very littlemail on the subject (20 or .so pre-printed postcards).HEALTH BENEFITS VOUCHER SYSTEMThe health insurance program for federal and postalemployees and retirees now guarantees that the federalgovernment will pick most of the cost, regardless of amount,for any approved health insurance program and employees pay aportionThe administration has proposed a "voucher" system whereemployees will continue to choose the health insurance programthey prefer, but the federal government will pay the samedollar amount to all employees regardless of the insurance costthey choose.All of the federal and postal unions oppose this program.This issue is not likely to be considered until the nextCongress.Your only vote on federal employees and health issues wason requiring federal employees to contribute to Medicare. Youvoted against this because it was part of a package youopposed. (Greg Raab would have recommended that you vote forit if it had come up separately.)THE HATCH ACTThere are no major proposals pending before Congress tochange the Hatch Act, but this might be raised. Postal workersare also covered by it.

Leading Montana Forward , State Convention of the Montana Association of Letter Carriers

https://scholarworks.umt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1310&amp;context=baucus_speeches

Leading Montana Forward , State Convention of the Montana Association of Letter Carriers

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Montana