    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: WILLIAM J. CLINTON (1999, Book II)]
    [October 12, 1999]
    [Pages 1758-1761]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    Remarks at the Eighth Millennium Evening at the White House
    October 12, 1999

    [The First Lady began the program
    making brief remarks and introducing the evening's featured speakers:
    Dr. Vinton G. Cerf, senior vice president of
    Internet architecture and technology, MCI WorldCom, who discussed the
    evolution of Internet technology; and Dr. Eric Lander, director, Whitehead Institute/MIT Center for Genome
    Research, who discussed advances in genetic research and biotechnology.]

        The President. We have had many wonderful nights here, but I don't
    think I've ever been more stimulated by two talks in my life. Thank you,
    Dr. Cerf. Thank you, Dr. Lander.
        I would like to also say a word of appreciation to Hillary. I think that, as our time here draws toward
    its close, it's clear that she has been I believe the most active and
    innovative First Lady since Eleanor Roosevelt, for perhaps these
    Millennium Evenings will last longer in the imagination of America than
    virtually anything any of us have done, and I thank her for that.
        Also, being term-limited does have its compensations. Normally, at
    this time of year, in this kind of year, I'd be doing something else
    tonight. [Laughter] Yesterday I called the Vice President to rub it in and describe what I would be doing tonight.
    [Laughter] And I was having a very good time turning the screw about how
    fascinating this was going to be. And finally, he said, ``That's okay,
    you need to be there more than I do.'' [Laughter] The jokes about my
    technological and scientific limitations are legion around the White
    House. [Laughter]
        So I have been thinking of all these questions. Do I really want a
    mouse smart enough to go to Princeton? [Laughter] Won't it be sad to
    have an Internet connection with Mars if there are no Martians to write
    to or E-mail us? [Laughter] I am glad to know that the total connection
    of the Internet to the nervous system of human beings is a little ways
    out there in the future. I had been under the impression that that has
    already occurred among all children under 15 in America. [Laughter]
        This is an amazing set of topics. Let me say just one other thing. I
    really loved seeing--on a slightly sad note, I loved seeing that
    wonderful, famous picture of Wilt Chamberlain and Willie Shoemaker. Some
    of you may know the great Wilt Chamberlain passed away today, one of the
    greatest athletes of the 20th century. So I hope you will have him and
    his family and friends in your thoughts and prayers tonight.
        This is a fitting thing for us to do in the White House, because
    innovations in communication and technology are a very important part of
    the history of this old place. In 1858 the first transatlantic telegraph
    transmission was received here in a message that Queen Victoria sent to
    President Buchanan. Later, the first telephone in Washington, DC, was
    located in a room upstairs, and we now have a replica of that telephone
    in the same room upstairs. The first mobile phone call to the Moon was
    made here by President Nixon 30 years ago. Even these Millennium
    Evenings have made their own history. This is where we held the first-
    ever cybercast at the White House.
        So I want to thank the speakers for building on all of this and
    telling us what we can look forward to in the future and for reminding
    us that as we unlock age-old mysteries and make what we can think more
    possible to do, there are ways to do it that bring us together as a
    society.
        So I would like to begin the questioning, if I might, with a
    question to Dr. Lander, because it bears on a
    great deal of the work we've done.
        You talked about how we were 99.9 percent the same, but how if you
    looked at how many permutations there were in the one-tenth of a percent
    left, we could still be very different. I think it's very interesting--
    and I talk about this all the time--that as we're on the edge of this
    new millennium and we have these evenings and we imagine this future
    that you have sketched out to us, this is what we all like to think
    about, how exciting, how wonderful, how

    [[Page 1759]]

    unbelievable it can be. The biggest threat to that future is how many of
    us on this globe are still in the grip of the most primitive of human
    limitations, the fear of the other, people who are different from us.
    And we see all over the world, from Bosnia and Kosovo to the Middle East
    to Northern Ireland to the tribal wars in Africa, how easily the focus
    on our differences--that one-tenth of one percent--as what matters can
    lead first to fear and then to hatred and then ultimately to
    dehumanizing people who are different.
        And it's very interesting, as someone who grew up in the segregated
    South and lived with the whole terrible and yet beautiful struggle of
    the civil rights years, to think that there were in my hometown people
    who were dehumanizing other people because of the one-tenth of one
    percent difference between them is quite an awesome thing to
    contemplate.
        So I would like to ask you, if you could say
    in ways that would make sense to us, explain to us a little bit what is
    it that makes us the same and what is it that makes us different? And
    how could we communicate this scientific knowledge to people in a way
    that would diminish the force of racism and other bigotry in the world
    in which we live?

    [Dr. Lander responded to the President's
    question. Then, White House Millennium Council Director Ellen Lovell led the question-and-answer portion of the
    evening. One of the questions concerned the legal status of privacy
    rights.]

        The President. Let me just say this. We've been working on this, and
    it's very important to me because I'm a fanatic about this issue. I want
    unlimited scientific discovery, and I want unlimited applications. But I
    think we don't want people to lose their sense of self and the fragility
    of their personhood, here, in some sort of assault. So we've been
    working on this.
        What you said sounds great, but it's not as easy to do as it sounds.
    So I think it might be helpful, if I could just ask Secretary
    Shalala, who is in charge of one piece of
    this, which is our efforts to protect the privacy of medical records,
    just to talk a little bit in practical terms about what we're doing to
    respond to this young man's question.
        Donna, would you? There's a mike.

    [Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna E. Shalala noted the relative lack of Federal protection of an
    individual's health information, citing that video rental records were
    more secure. She also noted that a person's State of residence could
    make a difference.]

        The President. But let's deal with two hard questions here, real
    quick. I think this is important. Question number one, pretty soon if
    the genome project is brought to fruition, according to what Dr. Varmus
    told me, when I spent a day out there, it will become normal in some
    point in the not-too-distant future for young mothers to go home with
    their babies from the hospital with a map of their genetic future. You
    may not want to know about Alzheimer's, but you could know about things
    that even if you can't cure you could delay, defer, or minimize. So you
    get that.
        Now, the mother and the father are employed by someone, and they
    provide family health insurance. Since private insurance is based on a
    reasonable approximation of risk--I don't agree with the way we finance
    health care in this country. You all know that, but that's a fight I
    didn't win here in the last 7 years. If it's based on an assessment of
    risk, what should the insurance company have a right to know? And if the
    insurance company doesn't have a right to know, haven't you undermined
    the whole basis of privately funded insurance based on risk--question
    one. Question two for you.
        Dr. Cerf. We don't get to answer that
    one?
        The President. Yes, I want you to answer that, but I want you guys
    to talk. Question two, this is the problem we face in a much more grave
    sense in dealing with the prospect of cyberterrorism or something. It's
    one thing for us to write laws that protect privacy of records. But you
    just got through--in answering Omar's question, you were talking about
    how, well, but all these kids are always figuring out, well--among the
    things they're figuring out is how to break into various systems all the
    time. So even if we had perfect laws, how are we going to protect
    privacy when we're dealing with all of these creative geniuses out there
    working through the net? Respond to those two questions.

    [Dr. Lander replied that insurance companies'
    right to know depended on whether insurance was about matching rates to
    risks or about sharing risks not chosen. The question-and-answer portion
    of the evening continued and included a question from the Internet by
    Danella Bryce

    [[Page 1760]]

    in Sydney, Australia, about technology's effect on alleviation of
    growing numbers of the disadvantaged in world population.]

        The President. Can I give--you said that we got 6 billion people
    last night. Half of them live on $2 a day; 1.3 billion live on $1 a day
    or less. Those are the numbers behind what Ms. Bryce is asking.

    [The discussion continued.]

        The President. If I might just interject. I don't know the answer to
    this, but I've spent a lot of time thinking about it. This woman, Ms.
    Bryce, she works, and she's talked about she
    works in sustainable development. A big problem in poor countries, they
    totally destroy the environment to try to develop, and then they don't
    have anything upon which to develop. The biggest problem in our
    hemisphere is Haiti. If you fly over the island of Hispaniola, you know
    when you're going from the Dominican Republic to Haiti, because in all
    the years when it was governed by dictatorships, they just tore down all
    the trees and--if any of you know anything about it, know this.
        The real question is--we used to have certain assumptions about
    development in a poor country: that if you wanted ever to build a middle
    class life for a substantial number of the people, yet have X amount of
    electric generating capacity, you had to have Y number of roads, and you
    had to have Z number of manufacturing companies, no matter what they did
    to greenhouse gases, and that eventually you get around to building
    schools and universal education, and then 30 or 40 years later you start
    letting the girls go to school with the boys and there is this sort of
    thing that would happen.
        I do believe that the question, the real question is if you're
    running a country like this, should you put this sort of infrastructure
    development first? That is assuming you've got a base level of
    electricity necessary to run a system. Should you do this first because
    this gives you the possibility to skip a whole generation of development
    that would otherwise take 30 years in the economy and in education? And
    I think the answer to that, at least, is, maybe--at least, is, maybe.
    That I think is really the question that this woman is asking.

    [The discussion continued.]

        The President. If I could just give you one example, because I think
    this may have also relevance for remote, physically remote areas in
    America, Appalachia, the Native American reservations, things of this
    kind.
        We were talking before we came in here tonight. I was out in
    northern California the weekend before last. And I was talking with a
    lot of people who work for eBay, and they were telling me that there are
    now, in addition to the employees of eBay, over 20,000 people who make a
    living on eBay, buying and selling and trading, and that a fair number
    of these people were actually people who once were on welfare, who moved
    from welfare to work. That is, from--and presumably a lot of them work,
    didn't have a lot of formal education. They had made this jump, and a
    market had been created for them, where they lived, that otherwise would
    be alien to their own experience. They wouldn't have been able to go
    down to the bank and get a loan and on and on and on.
        Now, last year we made and this year we will make, through our aid
    programs in foreign countries over 2 million microenterprise loans to
    poor people, to help them start their businesses in Africa and Latin
    America and Asia. If you could somehow marry the microenterprise concept
    to setting the infrastructure of the Internet out there, I do think it's
    quite possible that you could skip a generation in economic development
    in a way that would reinforce rather than undermine the environment.

    [The question-and-answer portion of the evening continued.]

        The President. Did you say you expected the penetration of the
    Internet to equal that of the telephone by 2006?

    [Dr. Cerf confirmed the Internet would equal
    the size of the telephone system by 2006 and, thereafter, exceed both
    telephone and television.]

        The President. I want to get to the genes, but I think we should
    answer that question, too. The whole question of whether we're going to
    develop a digital divide in our country, I think, is a very, very
    serious one. Our administration, especially the Vice President, when we rewrote the Telecommunications Act, we
    fought very hard not only to get people to participate in NetDay to
    hookup every classroom and library to the Internet by the year 2000--I
    think we'll get there by the end of the year; functionally, we'll be
    just about there--but also, to get the Federal Communications Commission
    to

    [[Page 1761]]

    adopt an E-rate which would subsidize the cost to poor schools and
    poorer hospitals and poor areas and isolated rural areas, so that
    everyone could have access in the schools.
        Now, but the divide won't be bridged until the parents of those
    children have that in their home. So I think we ought to have as a goal
    at least to make access to computer technology and to the Internet as
    universal as telephone access is. And I think until we achieve that,
    there will be a digital divide, so we ought to try to hasten that day
    and promote whatever policies we can afford or we can achieve to hasten
    that day, because until we do, there will be a digital divide.
        Dr. Cerf. I agree with that. In fact,
    it's a goal. A personal goal of mine is to see, literally, Internet
    everywhere.
        The President. Now, what about the gene? That goes to patenting and
    all that, doesn't it?

    [The discussion and question-and-answer portion of the evening
    continued. The First Lady then
    introduced the outgoing Director of the National Institutes of Health,
    Dr. Harold E. Varmus.]

        Dr. Varmus. I assume by ``outgoing''
    you mean I'm leaving as opposed to my social behavior. [Laughter]
        The President. You mean, as if an outgoing head of NIH were an
    oxymoron? [Laughter]

    [Dr. Varmus made brief remarks about the
    role of genetics in cancer research at NIH.]

        The President. Before we go on, I just want to say--we sort of
    glided over this--this man has done a
    magnificent job at the NIH for a long time, and I am very grateful. We
    thank you for it, for your service to your country.

    [The question-and-answer portion of the evening continued.]

        Ms. Lovell. I think you just summed up the
    whole evening. And I'm going to give the President the last minute.
        The President. Well, you know, that great humorist Ogden Nash once
    said, ``Progress may be all right, but it's really gone on too long.''
    [Laughter] And I was thinking that if he were here tonight, he would
    have to revise his opinion.
        This has been an astonishing evening for me and for Hillary and I
    hope for all the American people and the people throughout the world who
    have been a part of this.
        I want to thank you both. I want to just leave you with one thought:
    There are public responsibilities involved here, particularly for basic
    research. We have been very successful, and never more successful than
    under the leadership of Dr. Varmus, in
    getting strong bipartisan, nonpartisan support for investments in
    health. And I think that it's obvious that we can all see that as in our
    self-interest and as in the public interest. We want to live forever,
    and we're getting there.
        But I think it's quite important also not to forget our
    responsibilities for basic research in other areas as well. And one of
    the things that we will come to know as the intersection of your two
    disciplines, informatics and genomics, come together, then we will have
    to study even more closely how all this that we know about the human
    body and its development interacts with changes in the environment.
        So other areas of research will be also important, into things like
    global warming and climate change and the sustainability of the
    environment. And what I hope we can do is to build a broader consensus,
    as we look into the new millennium, for the whole research enterprise in
    those areas where it will never be productive in the beginning, or
    profitable for people like you, to do the beginning. And then we can
    find these things, and then the American entrepreneurial genius will
    take off.
        And so I leave here with a renewed commitment to trying to help
    people like you get started. We may not understand it, those of us in
    politics, but we have an obligation to help you find it.
        And when the first mouse graduates from Princeton, I will invite
    you both to deliver
    the commencement address. [Laughter]
        Thank you, and good evening.

    Note: The White House Millennium Evening program began at 7:35 p.m. in
    the East Room at the White House. In his remarks, the President referred
    to basketball Hall of Famer Wilt Chamberlain; and retired jockey Willie
    Shoemaker. The discussion was entitled ``Informatics Meets Genomics.''
    The transcript released by the Office of the Press Secretary also
    included the remarks of the First Lady, Dr. Cerf, Dr. Lander, Secretary
    Shalala, Ms. Lovell, Dr. Varmus, and the participants in the question-
    and-answer portion of the evening. The discussion was also cybercast on
    the Internet.