[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: WILLIAM J. CLINTON (1999, Book II)]
[September 21, 1999]
[Pages 1570-1572]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]



Remarks at a Reception for Congressional Candidate Regina Montoya 
Coggins
September 21, 1999

    The President. I was hoping Regina would speak, since I'm so hoarse. 
[Laughter]
    I've spent all day at the United Nations, and I'm delighted to see 
all of you--Texans, Washingtonians, Michigans--Michiganders--
[laughter]----
    Audience member. New Hampshires. [Laughter]
    The President. ----and whoever came from New Hampshire----
    Audience member. I did.
    The President. ----we can give you one night off between now and--
[laughter].
    Let me say, first of all, I am delighted that Lloyd and Libby have opened 
their beautiful home and let me come in through the kitchen. [Laughter] 
I'm delighted that Regina is running for Congress. Most of you know that 
she was, first, Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental 
Affairs; she's had a distinguished career in the nonprofit sector as a 
lawyer; and she did great in the White House; and she's been my friend a 
long time. Her husband has been a distinguished 
United States attorney in Texas. So she is supremely well-qualified to 
go to Congress. We are just a few seats away from being in the majority, 
and this should be one of them.
    I just want to make three brief points. I have to take care of my 
voice a little bit, but I think it's worth your saying this to people 
all over America as the election season begins.
    When we started in 1992, we made an argument to the American people. 
We said, ``Look, the country's in the worst recession since the Great 
Depression. The social divisions in this country are deepening. The 
basically antigovernment philosophy that had dominated the last 12 years 
masked a growth in the Federal Government and a profligate explosion in 
the Federal debt.'' And we were in trouble. So we said, ``Give us a 
chance, and we'll cut the deficit until we get rid of it. That'll drive 
down interest rates and bring jobs. We will expand trade, because we're 
only 4 percent of the world's people, and we've got 22 percent of the 
world's income, so we have to sell something to somebody else. And we 
will find a way to do this and continue to invest in the education of 
our children and the other things that bring us together.'' That's why 
we say it was an argument. We said, ``We believe it'll work.'' And 
enough

[[Page 1571]]

people agreed with us that the Vice President and I were elected.
    None of what has happened in the last 6\1/2\ years-plus would have 
been possible without the support of the Democrats in the Congress, 
because we have lived through the most partisan era in my lifetime, even 
more, I think, if you go back and look at the division of votes and the 
rhetoric, than the McCarthy era, probably.
    But now it's not an argument anymore. We don't have to argue with 
anybody. It is an established fact that the policies we implemented have 
given us the longest peacetime expansion in history: millions more jobs 
than were created during the Reagan boom, which was fueled by massive 
deficit spending; the biggest surplus we've ever had; lowest minority 
unemployment in history; the lowest unemployment in 29 years; the lowest 
welfare rolls in 32 years; and the lowest crime rates in 26 years.
    We had some other arguments. We said, ``We believed that we ought to 
do more to help balance work and family. So unlike the previous 
President, I won't veto the family and medical leave law. I will sign 
it.'' And they said, ``Oh, if you do that, you will raise the cost of 
employing people. Small business will go under. It'll cut jobs.'' Well, 
we've got 19.4 million jobs, and for 6 years in a row we've set records 
every year for new small businesses getting started. It's not an 
argument now; it's a fact.
    We said, ``We ought to--unlike the previous administration, I would 
sign, not veto, the Brady bill.'' And I thought we ought to ban assault 
weapons. They told all the hunters and sportsmen they'd lose their guns, 
and everything would be miserable. And nobody who shouldn't have a gun 
would have any difficulty getting one. Now we know 400,000 people didn't 
get guns because of the Brady bill. We know that nobody's hunting or 
sport shooting has been interrupted. And we know we've got the lowest 
crime rate in 26 years. So it's not an argument anymore; it's an 
established fact.
    I say that because every election is always about change, and it 
should be. This country should never stand pat, even when it's working. 
The question will be not whether the election is about change, whether 
it's a Presidential election, a Senate election, or an election for the 
House of Representatives. The question will be: What kind of change are 
we for, and are we going to build on what works, or take it down?
    That is the issue. Therefore, every single race for the House of 
Representatives is a race that matters enormously to the people who live 
in that district and also will have huge implications for the United 
States as a whole.
    So now we're having a new debate, where we say, ``Look, before we 
squander this surplus it took us 30 years to get back--last one we had 
was 30 years ago, and we never had one this big--shouldn't we take 
account of the fact that the number of people over 65 is going to double 
in the next 30 years, that there'll only be two people working for every 
one person drawing Social Security and Medicare? Shouldn't we take 
account of the fact that Social Security is supposed to go broke in a 
little over 30 years and Medicare in 15 years? Shouldn't we fix Social 
Security and Medicare? Shouldn't we give the elderly people of this 
country access to prescription drugs, since if we were starting Medicare 
today, we'd certainly cover drugs, because it substitutes for so many 
medical procedures? Before we give all this surplus away, shouldn't we 
figure out what we've got to invest in education and health care and the 
environment and medical research and science and technology, the things 
that will keep us strong in hope? And shouldn't we--since we know lower 
debt leads to lower interest rates, higher growth, and higher incomes--
shouldn't we get this country out of debt over the next 15 years for the 
first time since Andrew Jackson was President?''
    Now, in the Fifth Congressional District in Texas, if what we're 
fighting for comes to pass, the elderly will be better off; the children 
will be better off; the poor will be better off; the middle class will 
be better off. And the Republicans will have more money to give to their 
candidates in the 2002 election. [Laughter] You know, when I see how 
much money they're raising, it's just testimony to how successful our 
economic policy is. [Laughter]
    And so I say that, because this is--it's something that's very 
important for people to realize. And we haven't done all this work, to 
get the country up to the point where it's working, to go into reverse. 
We need to continue to change, but we need to change from the base of 
what is working.
    There's still a lot of poor people in this country. There's still 
too many poor children in this country. There's still places, from the 
Indian reservations to the Mississippi Delta to the inner

[[Page 1572]]

cities to the rural farming communities and the little towns that have 
lost their industries, that haven't felt this recovery. There are still 
too many working people who don't have any insurance for their children. 
There are still significant environmental challenges. There are still 
enormous opportunities out there. We're trying to get funding for the 
next generation of the Internet, because it's becoming so clogged. The 
fastest growing instrument of human communication in history. Everyone 
knows we need a next generation; everyone knows we need some Government 
money to fund the basic investment. Their party's against funding it; 
our party's for it. We want to rehabilitate 6,000 schools. They want to 
rehabilitate 600 schools. We want to put 100,000 teachers out there to 
make classes smaller so our children will learn more. They don't want to 
do that.
    There are significant differences. They are huge. And they will 
affect the lives of every family in America.
    So what I want you to say is that every race is important. This 
one's really important, and she is superbly qualified. That we now are 
not making an argument to the American people; we are taking the 
evidence to them. And we have to remind them of what it was like before, 
so they can remember the difference.
    It really matters who's in the Congress, and what decisions are made 
on any given issue. And as someone who--probably I'm the only person in 
this room that can't run for office again, or for the first time--
[laughter]--my interest is seeing my country do well. That's what I 
want.
    Yes, I think the world of Regina, and yes, I feel very loyal to my 
party. But we have delivered for this country, and there is so much more 
to do. There are still vulnerable people. There are still unseized 
opportunities. And there's still a lot of change to make, but it needs 
to be the right kind. And if you want it made, you need to send her to 
Congress.
    Thank you very much.

Note: The President spoke at 8:14 p.m. at a private residence. In his 
remarks, he referred to reception hosts Representative Lloyd Doggett and 
his wife, Elizabeth; and Mrs. Coggins' husband, Paul Coggins, U.S. 
Attorney for the Northern District of Texas. Mrs. Coggins is a candidate 
for Congress in Texas' Fifth Congressional District. The transcript was 
released by the Office of the Press Secretary on September 22.