The mailing says consistent with its policy of clinging to "constructive engagement," and attempting to block any economic actions against the white minority regime in South Africa, the Reagan administration has for many years stood in opposition to state and local anti-apartheid actions, the administration's rationalization for this position has been that these laws infringe upon the Federal government's exclusive powers to formulate U.S. foreign policy, some members of Congress, with Administration support, have recently attempted to use the passage of national sanctions legislation to freeze state and local anti-apartheid action. The mailing says in a separate but related action earlier...
The mailing says consistent with its policy of clinging to "constructive engagement," and attempting to block any economic actions against the white minority regime in South Africa, the Reagan administration has for many years stood in opposition to state and local anti-apartheid actions, the administration's rationalization for this position has been that these laws infringe upon the Federal government's exclusive powers to formulate U.S. foreign policy, some members of Congress, with Administration support, have recently attempted to use the passage of national sanctions legislation to freeze state and local anti-apartheid action. The mailing says in a separate but related action earlier this year, the Administration began to use Federal competitive bidding laws to attack local anti-apartheid selective purchasing legislation; in April, the Federal Department of Transportation (DOT) notified New York City that its anti-apartheid selective purchasing law violated Federal competitive bidding guidelines when applied to Federally funded contracts. The mailing discusses Rob Jones and Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar. • THREAT IN THE SANCTIONS BILL • SELECTIVE PURCHASING MEASURES UNDER ATTACK • HOW CAN WE RESPOND TO THIS THREAT?
