    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1995, Book I)]
    [January 27, 1995]
    [Pages 104-108]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    Remarks to the U.S. Conference of Mayors
    January 27, 1995

        Thank you very much. I'm delighted to be here. I see that half of
    the Cabinet is here. I guess they've already answered all your
    questions, solved all your problems. Now they can come solve ours.
    [Laughter]
        Mayor Ashe and distinguished members of the organization, I'm
    delighted to see all of you. Is Mayor Grant from East Providence here?
    Your wife told me this was your birthday. Happy birthday, happy
    birthday. Just wanted you to know I was checking up on you. [Laughter]
        Let me begin by saying congratulations to all of you on the
    overwhelming passage of the unfunded mandate legislation by the Senate
    today, 86 to 10 the bill passed. I have not had a chance to look at the
    final version of the Senate bill. It just passed a little while ago. But
    I know some very good amendments were added, and I want to congratulate
    Senator Glenn and Senator Kempthorne. We worked very hard on this bill
    last year, and I was sorry we didn't pass it then. Both of them did
    very, very good work. And I believe the bill is a very strong one as it
    goes to the House. But I have not seen its final form, but I heard it
    was in good shape. And it must have been pretty good if it passed 86 to
    10. And I think that should be reassuring to you; it certainly is to me.
        I want to thank you for the resolution you passed on the baseball
    strike and the action

    [[Page 105]]

    we are taking. We will work very hard on that. I know how important it
    is to you. I sometimes think that the full economic implications of this
    whole thing have not been evaluated, not just for the cities that have
    major league teams but also for the cities that host spring training.
    This is a big deal, and we're working on it.
        I want to thank your international committee for the vote you took
    on the Mexican stabilization package that we have offered. As you know,
    this is not the most popular issue in America today, but it's important.
    And I thank you for your support. It's in the interest of our working
    people and our economy. And it's not a gift; it's not foreign aid; it's
    not even a loan. It's cosigning a note with good collateral. So it's in
    our interests, and I thank you for that.
        When I came here 2 years ago with a mission to restore the American
    dream for all of the people of this country and to make sure we moved to
    the next century still the strongest force in the world for freedom and
    democracy and peace and prosperity, I said then and had said all during
    my campaign that I wanted a new partnership for the American people. I
    called it a New Covenant of more opportunity and more responsibility,
    recognizing that unless we had more of both, we could not hope to do the
    things that have to be done.
        I have sought to essentially focus on three things that I think are
    critical to making sure we succeed in this new economy: empowering our
    people to make the most of their own lives, expanding opportunity but
    shrinking the Federal Government bureaucracy, giving more authority to
    State and local governments and to the private sector. And I have sought
    to enhance the security of our people at home and abroad. In all those
    things you have been very helpful and supportive, both of the specific
    initiatives of this administration and of your own efforts which fit so
    well into that framework.
        As all of you know, in the last 2 years we've had a lot of
    successes. We now have the figures in on 1994's growth rate. We know it
    was the best economic year our country had since 1984. We know that the
    combined rates of unemployment and inflation are the lowest they have
    been in 30 years. We know that we have inflation at a 30-year low. We
    know that, among other things, the African-American unemployment rate
    went into single digits for the first time in 20 years.
        So there is a lot--[applause]--we've tried to expand more authority
    to our States and to our cities, and we're bringing the Federal
    Government down in size and reach where it's appropriate. We already
    have 100,000 fewer people working for the National Government than we
    did when I became President. And if nothing else is done, it will shrink
    by another 170,000. And of course, in terms of security, the most
    important things we did were to pass the Brady bill and the crime bill,
    which you were active in and supportive of, and I thank you for all
    that.
        As we look ahead in this year, which promises to be somewhat
    unpredictable but exciting and I think could be very productive for our
    country--and I must say this passage of this bill today and the
    reasonable deliberation in the Senate and the way the amendments were
    debated in good faith is quite encouraging to me--there are some things
    that I think we have to do. In terms of empowering our people to meet
    the challenges of this age, we have to realize our job is still to
    expand the middle class and to shrink the under class. And the two main
    initiatives our administration has this year are the middle class bill
    of rights and raising the minimum wage.
        We want to pass this middle class bill of rights, not only to give
    tax relief to middle class people who have been working harder for lower
    wages, or for at least no wage increases, but to do it in a way that
    will raise incomes in the short term and in the long term. That's why
    the focus is on a tax deduction for all educational expenses after high
    school and an IRA with tax-free withdrawal for education expenses or for
    health care expenses or for the care of a parent or purchasing a first-
    time home, and why we seek to consolidate the 70 various training
    programs into one huge block and let people get directly a voucher that
    they can use if they're unemployed or, if they have a low-wage job and
    they're eligible for training, to take to the local community college or
    wherever else they wish to take it to get the education and training of
    their choice.
        I think it's important to raise the minimum wage because if we
    don't, next year the buying power of the minimum wage will be at a 40-
    year low. And the evidence is clear that if you raise the minimum wage a
    modest amount, it doesn't cause increased unemployed and indeed may
    bring people back into the job market who

    [[Page 106]]

    otherwise are not willing to come in and go to work. So I would hope you
    would support both of those things.
        In the area of expanding opportunity and shrinking the bureaucracy,
    we're coming back with a second round of reinventing Government
    proposals--and perhaps Secretary Cisneros has already talked to you
    about what we're proposing for HUD--to collapse the 60 programs into 3.
    I want to emphasize that we're doing this to strengthen the mission of
    HUD and to strengthen the partnership that we have with the cities of
    this country, not to gut the Department's partnership or its capacity to
    help you do your job. And so I hope that you will help us as we debate
    this on both parts, say that you want to support a reduction in the size
    of the Federal bureaucracy but you do not want to see the mission of HUD
    as carried out by the mayors of this country undermined and weakened
    because you have a job to do.
        Finally, let me say some things about the crime bill. I very much
    hope that we will be able to work through, in this session of Congress,
    a good faith carrying forward of the crime bill that was passed last
    year. It became unfortunately embroiled in politics; you know that
    better than I do. And I think you also know that the prevention programs
    that were passed were programs that were recommended to us in the
    strongest possible terms not only by mayors, not only by community
    leaders but by the leaders of the law enforcement community and that a
    lot of those prevention programs that were later labeled as pork were
    cosponsored, the first time they came up, by people who later said they
    were pork.
        Well, all that's behind us now, and the only thing that matters now
    is, what is the best thing for the people of this country? What will
    keep our streets safer? What will reduce the crime rate more? What is
    the most likely approach to actually make the American people feel more
    secure? We must enhance our security at home. At the end of the cold
    war, I think it's fair to say that most Americans put their children to
    bed at night more worried about their security concerns at home than
    abroad.
        So what we should seek to do, without regard to party or region of
    the country, is that which is most likely to make us most safe and to
    lower the crime rate. Many of you--I'll bet even a majority of you
    here--have recorded declines in the crime rate in the last year or so
    because of the strategies that mayors are adopting with community
    policing, with prevention programs, with using citizens to work with law
    enforcement to do things that will reach people in ways that will
    prevent crime as well as catch criminals more quickly. We have to take
    these lessons into account.
        So as we enter into a second round of debate about the crime bill, I
    would say there are two or three things that we ought to keep in mind.
    First, as I said in my State of the Union Address, we should not repeal
    the assault weapons ban. We should not do that. [Applause] This issue,
    as you can hear from the response, is not a Republican-Democratic issue,
    it is not a liberal-conservative issue, it is overwhelmingly an urban-
    nonurban issue. And what we have to do is to convince all the people I
    grew up with--[laughter]--that we don't--we don't want to fool with
    anybody's hunting rifles. We don't want to stop anybody from going to
    shooting contests. We don't want to interfere with anybody's legitimate
    pursuit of happiness in the exercise of their right to keep and bear
    arms. But there is nothing in the Constitution that prevents us from
    exercising common sense. And people who live in urban settings know that
    the mortality rate in the emergency rooms of urban hospitals from
    gunshot wounds has gone up dramatically in the last 15 years because the
    average body has more bullets in it when it's wheeled into the emergency
    room. You do not have to be a genius to figure out what's happening.
        And so I hope that we can put an end to this war. This is a phony
    war among the American people. And those of us that respect people's
    right to hunt and to engage in other appropriate conduct, those of us
    that enjoy it ourselves, we ought to be able to ask each other again:
    What's best for America? And what good is it to pretend that it's a
    matter of principle to maintain the right of a bunch of teenagers to
    have Uzis on the streets of our cities.
        So I hope you will talk about this in a nonpartisan, nonpolitical
    way and realize this is one of those cultural problems that's gripping
    America. We got too many of them. They're keeping us apart. But we need
    to say to the nonurban folks in our society, this is something that--
    we've got to work this out. This is a fair deal. This is a balanced
    bill. There are 650 weapons enumerated in this bill that cannot be
    infringed on by the Government in any way, shape, or

    [[Page 107]]

    form. And so let's let this alone and go on about the business of the
    country.
        I also think we ought to emphasize that at least the Attorney
    General is doing her dead-level best to make sure that the
    administration of the crime bill that passed is nonbureaucratic,
    nonpolitical, and efficient. If you look at what's happened so far, in
    October, not even 2 weeks into the new fiscal year, we had already
    funded 392 policing grants that went unfunded last year. Last month, at
    your recommendation, we gave 631 larger cities the go-ahead to begin
    recruiting and training more than 4,600 new officers. So they know the
    money will be there when their applications are handed in.
        For the smaller cities, we've streamlined the application process,
    allowing them to apply more quickly for police with a simple one-page
    application. I don't know how many one-page applications we've got in
    the Government now, but I know you can ask for an SBA loan or a
    policeman with one page. You ought to be able to do more things with one
    page.
        This COPS program has now helped more than 1,000 communities to put
    more than 10,000 more police officers on the street in all 50 States.
    Within a week, when the announcement is made of the winners of the COPS
    FAST program, that total will be close to 15,000, well on the way to the
    100,000 goal of the crime bill. That would be a 20 percent increase in
    the strength on the streets.
        Now, the crime bills now being considered in Congress have some
    things that I think may be superficially appealing but need to be
    thought through. If you scrap the $8.8 billion COPS initiative, as some
    suggest, and replace it with a $10 billion block grant which also has to
    include prevention programs, the good news is you'll have a block grant.
    The bad news is there'll be a lot less money in it than was provided
    for.
        And keep in mind, to all those who say it wasn't funded, we did not
    raise one red cent in taxes to pay for the crime bill. We did not take
    one red cent away from any other program. We simply dedicated all the
    savings to be gained from reducing the size of the Federal bureaucracy
    to giving it back to local communities to use to fund the crime bill.
    That's what was done.
        Now, to make matters worse, some have suggested that the $10 billion
    block grant to fund police and prevention could only be funded if we
    first fund $10 billion in new prisons. So that's a decision that some
    would make against the unanimous advice of every police officer in the
    country who has testified. If we make that decision, that would be like
    people saying, ``We don't care what lowers crime; we don't care what
    makes people safer; we don't care what people in law enforcement who
    vote Republican and Democrat say. This is what we're going to do. It
    will make us feel better, and we can claim that it was the best thing to
    do.''
        We should not do that. This ought not to become a political issue.
    That crime bill had a balance of police and prevention and prisons. We
    shouldn't take all the prevention money away through the back door and
    put it into prisons. And we shouldn't say that the prisons are more
    important than the police and the prevention. I had no objection to
    getting into the business of helping States with their prison
    construction, even though it was totally unprecedented, but there is no
    evidence that that is the way to lower the crime rate. The American
    people want to be safer at night; they want their kids to be safer on
    the streets and at school. And we ought to be driven by what is best for
    the American people.
        I would also say, just parenthetically, that even last year I was
    concerned when the crime bill passed that the conditions on getting that
    Federal money for prison construction were so restrictive and required
    such a large State match that a lot of that money might never be used.
    We cannot permit a cruel hoax to then be written into the law saying,
    well, you can get this block grant for police and prevention but only
    after the prison money is spent and then have conditions on spending the
    prison money so strict that it will never be spent in the first place.
        So I urge you to just go up there without regard to your party or
    region and say, look, let's do what will lower the crime rate; let's do
    what will keep people safer. The American people will figure that out.
    They will trust their local leaders; they will trust their local law
    enforcement people; they will trust them. We can share responsibility
    now. There need be no characterization that is negative when this
    process is over. There need be no name-calling. There needs to be no
    anything. We just need to do what is right to lower the crime rate. And
    all of us have worked so hard on this.
        Again, I would say this is like the assault weapons issue. We've got
    big issues to deal with.

    [[Page 108]]

    This unfunded mandates is one. Welfare reform is another. How we're
    going to lower the deficit and provide tax relief is another. There are
    major positive issues that we're going to have to face. We don't need to
    reopen an issue and make it worse. So I ask you to help us on that.
        Now, let me say one final thing about the baseball strike, if I
    might. I asked Bill Usery, the Federal mediator, to get the sides back
    together and report to me by February 6th. Anybody know what February
    6th is? It's Babe Ruth's 100th birthday. So it struck me as a good day
    to settle the baseball strike. I identify with Babe Ruth. He's a little
    overweight. [Laughter] And he struck out a lot--[laughter]--but he hit a
    lot of home runs because he went to bat. You are the people in this
    country who go to bat. You have to deal directly with people. You have
    to be accountable, not only for the rhetoric of your speeches but the
    reality of your actions.
        And so I ask you to take this opportunity to join with us, and let's
    make the decision the American people made last November a good decision
    by making it one of shared responsibility. Let's move what we can back
    to the State and local level. Let's work to empower people. Let's reduce
    the burden of Government and increase the opportunity it creates. We can
    do these things, but it is very important that we not fix what ain't
    broke and that we not become diverted by issues that can only divide us
    when there is so much we can do that will bring us together.
        Thank you very much.

    Note: The President spoke at 4:36 p.m. in Room 450 of the Old Executive
    Office Building. In his remarks, he referred to Mayor Victor Ashe of
    Knoxville, TN, president, U.S. Conference of Mayors, and Mayor Rolland
    R. Grant of East Providence, RI.