PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSE SUBSEQUENT TO SINE DIE ADJOURNMENT fl 129.150

virtue of the difficulty of defining “children's television programming" in a manner consistent with the Supreme Court's proscription of either overin- elusive or underinclusive regulation of speech and by virtue of the manifest incongruence between the stated pur­ pose of the provision and the means chosen to effectuate it. See Posadas de Puerto Rico Associates v. Tourism Company of Puerto Rico, 106 S. Ct. 2968, 2977 (1986). The bill simply cannot be reconciled with the freedom of expression se­ cured by our Constitution. Moreover, despite its laudable goals, it is likely to be counterproductive. Accordingly, I am compelled to disapprove this measure. No policy concerns can override the requirements of the First Amendment. Ronald Reagan.

The White House, November 5, 1988.

H.R. 4 8 3 3

MEMORANDUM OF DISAPPROVAL

I am withholding my approval of H.R. 4833, the “Nursing Shortage Re­ duction and Education Extension Act of 1988," because I signed its provi­ sions into law on Friday, November 4, 1988, as Title VII of S. 2889, the “Health Omnibus Programs Extension of 1988". Ronald Reagan.

The White House, November 5, 1988.

H.R. 4 4 3 2

MEMORANDUM OF DISAPPROVAL

I am withholding my approval of H.R. 4432, a bill “to amend title 13, United States Code, to require certain detailed tabulations relating to Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in the decennial censuses of population". This bill would also require certain housing-related questions in the 1990 decennial census. My decision not to approve this bill is based on the following reasons. First, the bill would unnecessarily re­ strict the form of the race question in future censuses. Second, it would re­ quire the Census Bureau to use a form of race question that the Bureau has tested and found to be less accurate than the one it plans to use in 1990. Third, it would specifically require questions relating to plumbing facili­ ties and heating and cooling equip­ ment in housing units that would not produce data sufficiently useful to jus­ tify their inclusion. Adequate data on plumbing and heating will continue to be available through the census and other sources. Finally, these changes would increase administrative costs and add to the paperwork burden im­ posed on the public by the census. There are always more questions proposed for the census than can be accommodated. The Administration has proposed a questionnaire that rep­ resents a careful and reasonable bal­ ancing between the Nation’s need for

information and the reporting burden the census places on respondents. Ronald Reagan.

The White House, November 8, 1988.

H.R. 5 04 3

MEMORANDUM OF DISAPPROVAL

Public service is a public trust. It re­ quires a high and exacting standard of conduct, and we should go forward with more clear, far-reaching restric­ tions to ensure that this standard of conduct is always met. But the final provisions of this bill were poorly drafted, would have applied unevenly, and would discourage from Govern­ ment service America’s best talent be­ cause of the unfair burdens it would impose. This bill would not have af­ fected anyone who leaves office with my Administration, but my concern is to secure good government for our country's future. This bill has good provisions, which I support, but on the whole it is flawed, excessive, and dis­ criminatory. I asked 20 Cabinet Mem­ bers and agency heads to review this bill. Not one recommended approval; 16, including the Director of the Office of Government Ethics, specifi­ cally advised that it be vetoed. There­ fore, I am withholding my approval from H.R. 5043, the “Post-Employ­ ment Restrictions Act of 1988". The 100th Congress cobbled togeth­ er the final version of H.R. 5043 in its closing moments. Post-employment re­ strictions are needed if the Nation is to govern itself effectively. They de­ serve careful and thoughtful consider­ ation, but this bill reflected the politi­ cal and other pressures that mount in the closing days of a Congress. In De­ cember, we will have the recommenda­ tions of the nonpartisan Quadrennial Commission on Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Salaries, which is current­ ly considering Federal salaries and re­ lated issues. The President-elect also has indicated that he will have his own initiative next year, and I have encouraged him to do so. This bill would not have taken effect until August of next year, and this interval should be used to craft balanced and comprehensible post-employment leg­ islation. Fair and impartial governance is the hallmark of our constitutional democ­ racy. Current laws concerning the con­ duct of current and former Federal employees were designed to secure that fairness and impartiality. They prohibit conduct that produces con­ flicts of interest between Federal em­ ployees’ official duties and their per­ sonal interests. Specifically, current law is designed to prevent two primary abuses—the misuse of confidential in­ formation or the exercise of improper influence over Government action by former Federal employees and less- than-faithful performance of official functions by current Federal employ­ ees to favor a future employer. While there are some positive as­ pects of the bill, the Post-Employment Restrictions Act would have prohibited conduct of former Federal employ­ ees unrelated to genuine ethical con­ cerns. In effect it would have punished them for their service to the Nation. For example, in certain circumstances, the bill would have prohibited a senior former employee of an agency from communicating with a senior current employee of a different agency with whom he is not personally acquainted to seek assistance his employer or client needs on a matter with which the former employee had absolutely nothing to do while in Federal employ­ ment. The bill would make that com­ munication a Federal crime punish­ able by imprisonment and fines. The law already precludes a former Federal official from representing pri­ vate parties in specific matters in which that official was involved while in Government and also imposes a 1- year cooling-off period during which a former official generally cannot con­ tact his agency on any matter. It is ex­ cessive and unjustifiable also to insist, as this bill would, that former officials not represent any client before any senior Executive official wherever lo­ cated and no matter how unrelated to the former officials’ Government serv­ ice.That kind of unnecessary and dras­ tic criminal prohibition is unfair to those who have served their country. It is already difficult to recruit talent­ ed people into the senior ranks of Gov­ ernment. This bill would have begun to make former senior Federal em­ ployees unemployable in the private sector after their Government service. Many of the most talented might never sign up to serve their country, and the country would be the worse for it. The bill also unreasonably favors the Congress with restrictions lighter than those that would apply to the Executive branch. Under the bill, all Executive branch employees would have been subject to certain prohibi­ tions, but most congressional employ­ ees would have been subject to none. Even for senior congressional person­ nel, the restrictions would have been substantially less rigorous than the re­ strictions placed on Executive branch employees of equivalent responsibility. Members of Congress and senior staff would be subject only to 1-year cool­ ing-off periods of very modest scope and would not be subject to the life­ time and 2-year particular matter bans currently imposed on all Executive branch officials. The Congress’ rela­ tively favorable treatment of itself in imposing restrictions in comparison with its treatment of the Executive branch may indicate some congres­ sional recognition that a number of the bill’s restrictions are overboard and, to the extent of that overbreadth, unfair. In future consideration of post­ employment restrictions legislation, the Congress should determine what restrictions are reasonable and neces­ sary to protect the integrity of Gov­ ernment and then apply them equally

2577