Jeffers v. Clinton Complaint

Working File
January 27, 1989

Jeffers v. Clinton Complaint preview

Also includes fax transmission form from Ifill to Hair. Date is based on Complaint filing date.

Cite this item

  • Case Files, Bozeman v. Pickens County Board of Education. Jeffers v. Clinton Complaint, 1989. 77e089ba-f192-ee11-be37-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/0b77827c-696f-45f3-b340-44dc7756182c/jeffers-v-clinton-complaint. Accessed April 06, 2025.

    Copied!

    I 
I 

THE N E W YORK TIMBS, SUNDAY, JULY 21, 1985 E21 

· WASHINGTC)N lJB.mes Reston 
·, 

Presidents, DoctOrs, Reporters ···· 
r. 

. -. WASHINGTON the popular. idea that the cpnfidential found a polyp in his eolon that was nqt 

The President is back at ·the ~lationship between doctor and pa- . malignant but a warning sign. ' 
White House, to everyone's re- tient also applies when the patient is . The' White House dOctor then was Th. e' 'pu' blt"c's' 
lief, buthisaidesar~stillsoreat •President of the United States. Daniel Ruge. We don't know what ·. · · . 

the press for asking all those ques- The health of a President is nor what Dr. Ruge's advice was ·at that~ . • ht 
tions about his .medical record. They merely a private but a public con- time; but ·Lahy S~kes·, the White rtg . 
say it's "distasteful" io intrude into cern, as Mr. Reagan ·recognized l)y House spokesman, whose manners t kn. 
the pri,vate relations between adoctor authorizing the disclosure of the most are no better than his 111emories of - 0 0 W 
and his patient.· intimate-details of his cancer opera- history, said -he-would not make Dr: 

Maybe so. The only trouble is that tion. ~ut there are two problems. Ruge "available for questioning/' 
this is precisely what the White House . · The first is that the people get almost again on the grotind of confidential · 
said when they were covering up the too many medical facts about a Presi- doctor-patient relations. . _ issue of his age, which was the . one 
illnesses of WOOdrow Wilson and dent's .illness in the White House, and In any event, nothing was done about thing he feared the mos~.. . . . 
Franklin Roosevelt. too few flbout the state of his health be- · thai first medical . warning, and there. So what? Was it a medical decision 

All would be well, they said. Besides, fore he gets there. And the second is are two theories here about that. or a political decision? Nobody but 
the questions were not only "distaste- that they seem indifferent to ~he health The firs( is that Mr. Reagan didn't the PreSident really knows. ( 
ful" but painful. Since then, the histo- of Presidential candidates during the take the news -all tha,t seriously, and What we do know is that the White 
rians, With good reason, have con- election campaign. · didn't really want to think about it. The · House is now saying- and you can't 
demned the press for · misleading the The facts in :president Reagan's second is th;:tt he thought vaguely abOut ' blame them at this late date - that 
people~ · · case. are not in dispute. Everybody it, but decided it was no big deat. Aild if there was never really any discussion 

The intention here is not to s\lggest knew he-was no spring chicken, His he went- into the hospital to have it re- in 1984 of the President's health in 
that. President Reagan's illnesS is as doctors told him in March of 1984, at moved, even if ·the doctors found noth- relatiQn to the re-election campaign, 
serious as Wilson's in 1919 or Roose- the beginning of the last Presidential i ing else, it would be front-Jiage news . which . is propably true. But I why 

, velt's)~ 1944, but merely to question ___ ~lection· campaigil, that tl_ley had_ . and raise in U,e election campaigri the wasn~t the ma~er discussed? This is 
~:~ ' -

l • 

one of many . unanswered questions. term, inCluding Mamie, who told him~ 
It's interesting to compare all this his health would be cared for better in' 

with how President Eisenhower dealt ·th-e White House than anyplace else; 
with the health-and~age issue after he all except his brother Milton, who in-­
had a heart attack and before he de- sisted to the end, and lost, that . Ike -
cided to run for a second term. shoultl quit While he was ahead. 

On Jan. 13,- 1956, he invitCd several '. Again, ·. personal and historical 
members of his Cabinet to dinner at the analogies are reckless if not treacher-~ 

. White House. Among them were Secre- ous. But at least Ike tried to make a 
tary of State Dulles and, Secretary ·of · rational and orderly tranSition of , 
J;he Treasury Humphrey; his chief of ·Presidential-power and, wondered, _as 
staff, She:rm~ Adam$.; Henry Cabot he tolp me one night, that ma~be 

_ Lodge, Jim Hagerty, his press sec~e- - th-ere should be some outside panel of 
. tary, and his brother Milton. doctors that could consider or COJi,. 

The President placed before them ·. firm the health problems of Pre5iden­
the detail¢<~ medical repOrts ot his tial candidates before it was too late _. · 
dQCtors, and asked some hard ques- Anybody who's interested in ·ii.he;' 
tions·: What if _he died during the <:am- problem of Presidential illness, ~d 
paign, or shortly after. the election if how to deal with it while the Presi~ 
he won? Who would be left behind? dent is recovering, should read Ste­
lle mentioned· some possible succes- phen Ambrose's excellent biograpb.y-

. ;sors. He went round the table asking . of "Eisenhower- The President.!'-It 
each one what he should do. makes you think, which is not n~: 

.~1 said he should go for a seCond sarily a bad idea. d :p -
. ~ · ·-:..: .. 

Reag:an'sinflate~the-Deficit Game 
\ ' ... ' ·• . ~ . .. '\ ' . 

. ...... "' 
..... . )<-~ 

_-2~: 

------~.,....,...-,..------,.... · we run out of voice and breath. ·Or we 
By Daniel Patrick Moynihan can cure their extravagance by sim; 

ply reducing their allowance." 
WASHINGTON' · This statement was noticed by Re-

T
heweek of July 8 began publican conser.va~ives : 'What was 
with the announcement this business of deliberately creating 
that David A. Stock- , ' a Republican deiicit? As it happened, 
man would be leaving a new economics was at hand to show 
as budget director and that this need not happen. Known as 
ended with the Senate "supply-side," it held that cutting 

Judiciary Committee approving two taxeS would increase revenues. A few 
constitutional amendments requiring weeks after the President's speech, a 'balanced budget. This marks the the· Office of ~anagement and 
transition froll;l policy to panic. It sug- Budget issued revised budget projec-
gests we pause for a moment's reflec- tions sho~ taxes going down and 
tion. receipts going up; almost doubling 

First, some definitions. The policy from $520 billion in 1980 to $940 billion 
was -the Administration's deliberate in !986. · 

'i'he driviJ?.g; 
motive· 
has, been . 
to dismantle 
50 years' 
social 
legislation 

decision to create deficits for Strate- , Well) ' of course none of this hap-
gic, political purposes. The panic ,' pened. The budget was not balanced change: "The basic .fact is that we 
arises among those who.think the in 1984 as promised. Rather, by that · are violating badly, even wantonJ.y, 
deficit was caused instead by 'a fail- time, Mr .. Stockman was talking the cardinal rule of sound public fi­
ure of our political sygtem. : 'about $200 billion deficits "as far as naitce: Governments must extract 

The Reagan Administration came 
to office with, at most, a marginal in- the eye can see." from the people in taxes· what they 

There are plenty of reasons the dispense in benefits, services and pro­
terest iii balancing the budget- con- strategy camr to grief, but the least tections . . . indeed, if, the [Securities 
trary to rhetoric, there was no great 
budget problem at the time _ but noticed is tha the budget committees and Exchange Commission] had 
with a very .real interest in disman- just: couldn:t deliver. Successive jurisdiction over the executive and 
tling a fair amount of the social legis- chairmen, especially in the Senate, legislative branches, many of us 
lation of the preceditig 50 years .. The tried to transform the process from a would be in jail." . 
strategy was to induce a deficit and straightforward allocation of funds · This is taking too much blame. It 

_ use that as· gro\m~ for the· disman- · for 19 "budget functionS" into an was ·an honest effort, simply too 
tling. item-by-item decision on everything. clever: A failing, they say, of intellec-

It was a strategy devis~ by young Committee ·meetings became specta- tuals in Government. 
intellectuals of a capacity that Wash- · cles: dazed legislators, swarming The constitutional amendments ar,e 
irigton had not seen for years. They_ · staff, exhausted journalists. another matter. Theyreflectakindof 
were never understood, and as _they . Then it collapsed. Other commit- desperation : Don't let tis do it again. 
depart they leave behiiid an alarming tees stopPed paying any heed. The Which quite misses the point. The 

'• '7 

( . 

incomprehension of the coup they al- Senate Budget Committee itself deficit was· policy, a curious legacy of 
most pulled off. - · broke apart. In 1982, the chairman in the young radicals who came to 

t
. " The key concept was that individ- effect gave up and settled for a party- power in but 

. ua1 Gpve~: p...mgrams ara.rel~eN.ote on.a-0ne-page-budget resolu~oo 
~ ~ tiv:. ely iiiViilnerable_ to dir~t assa~t. tion with about a dozen ilumbe:-> on it The budget is now out of control for 

The Congress, the staff, the constitu- that nobody bothered to examme be- the moment. Debt service was $53 bil: 
ency can usually beat you and always cause by then nobody believed any of lion in 1980; it will ~ $234 billion by 
outwait you. . . it_any ,more. . 1991)._ The debt is compounding; we 

On the other hand, the Budget Act On June 5, 1985, Mr. Stockman told will indeed in time be borrowin8 
of 1974 contained li~le understood the board of the New York Stock -Ex- abroad to pay interest owed 
powers of huge potential. 11b.e budget abroad. · . . · 
committees, assumiilg agreement by . We can do little about this in tlie 
the~ Congress, cpuld require other near-term. It is now, at miilimum, a 
committees to C\1~ back p,rograll?-~· . D. Y·. sfu_nction: 15-year problem." On the bright side, 

. ~ ~er-~cally a · reconcl11- the Social Security Trust Funds begir) 
atlon mstruction - ~ad never been . f th . . to grow rapidly after 1988, reaching .. 
used to the fullest: but .It was there. 0 e an estimated $1 trillion surplus by 

Thus, the pi~. Reduce revenues. polt"tt"cal 1999. The dark prospect is that some 
Create a defiCit. Use the budget pro- d · · t t" · the l990's willaive 
cess to eliminate programs. a mm1s ~a ton m . <>: . 

A hidden strategy? Not. really. On economy up and w1pe out the debt by mflatmg 
Feb. 5, 1981, 16 days in office, the the c~ency. . , 
President in his first television ad- • · t · - But 1f there 1sn t much we can do, 
dress to the nation said: ·~There were lS no a there are things we -~ learn._ Prin~-
always thos'e who told u5 that taxes · t ·. f pally, that the dysfunctiOn of the poht;, 
couldn't be cut until spending was re- . s ym p om 0 ic~l. economy is n?~ a symptom of a 
duced. Well,youknow, wecanlecture a f~t}t" 4-.g - f~thtlg of the poht1cal system. The 
our children about extravagance until c;.u. 11 dtsaster was planned, although not as 

a di~ter. If we can get a truly con-
Daniel Patrick Moynihan, New York 
Democrat, is a member of the Senate 
Budget Committee. 

_SyStem servative Administration into office 
by the 1990's, we can probably restore 
stabilitybytheyear2000. 0

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.


Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Return to top