[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: WILLIAM J. CLINTON (2000, Book II)]
[October 5, 2000]
[Pages 2050-2055]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]



Remarks at a Reception for Governor Tom Carper in 
New York City
October 5, 2000

    Thank you very much. First, I will try to be brief tonight, because 
most of you have heard what I have to say. [Laughter]
    I want to thank Mark Fox for sticking with his 
friend Tom Carper and for helping again, and for being so kind and 
generous to me over these last couple years. I want to thank Denise 
Rich for letting me come back into her home 
again. I don't think that Hillary and I have had a better friend 
anywhere in America than she's been to us for the whole time I've been 
President. Denise, you've been wonderful, and I'm grateful to you. Thank 
you very much. Yes, give them a hand. [Applause]
    I want to thank Brian Kennedy and Sarah 
Clancy for singing. Some of you know this, but 
I'm half Irish. And Brian Kennedy sang for me on November 30, 1995, in 
Belfast--he's from Belfast--with another Irish singer you might know, by 
the name of Van Morrison. [Laughter] Van and Brian sang to a crowd of 
about 50,000 people in the streets of Belfast, who came there to see 
Hillary and me, when I turned on the Christmas lights. They came because 
we had turned on the lights of peace in Northern Ireland. I loved 
hearing him sing again.
    But the Irish have meant a great deal to me. James Galway, the great 
Irish flutist, probably the greatest living flutist in the world, has 
played at the White House. And Bono, the lead singer of U2, has been a 
great friend of mine--now better known as the leading advocate for debt 
relief in poor countries in the entire world. He has that great sense of 
humor. When I left Brian, and I went to Dublin, we had a big rally in 
the square there. There were over 100,000 people. And after--Bono was 
there, and he had brought me a signed copy of W.B. Yeats' plays, and had 
William Butler Yeats in his little-bitty handwriting. And underneath, 
there was Bono's handwriting. It said, ``Bill, this guy wrote some good 
lines, too.'' [Laughter]
    So the Irish have their way, you know, and they worked their way 
with us tonight. They were wonderful. I want to thank Tom Carper for 
running for the Senate. When I met Tom years ago, I was a Governor, and 
he was a Congressman. And we worked together in writing the first major 
overhaul of the welfare laws, back in 1988. I liked him then; I like him 
more now. He's been a remarkable Governor. He told you a little bit 
about his record.
    I think that of all the Governors in the country, I can honestly say 
in during his period of service, no one was more innovative or made more 
progress on a wider range of social problems. And he's got that sort of 
disarming ``Aw, shucks, I'm from the 49th biggest State; you better 
watch your billfold when I talk to you for 5 minutes''--[laughter]--way 
about him, which allows him to be very effective.
    But it takes a lot of guts to make the decision, especially when he 
made it, to run against the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. I 
told Tom, I said, ``Two years ago we were outspent by $100 million in 
the congressional races. This year you may be outspent by $100 
million.'' [Laughter] So you're helping make sure that doesn't happen.
    I'd just like to make a couple of general points. First, I thought 
Al Gore did a really good job in those 
debates, and I was proud of him. Second, I'm sorry I'm making you miss 
Joe Lieberman's debate, and I'm going to 
shut up so you can watch it. Third, a lot of you here have helped 
Hillary, and I want you to know how 
grateful I am for that. I'm very proud of her, and she was no slouch in 
her debate, either. I thought she was very good. I was really proud of 
her.
    She's going home tonight, and 
we're going to get ready for another one on Sunday. But when I was 
watching that debate, what I was thinking is that all you should really 
hope for, in a great free society like ours, is that somehow people will 
understand the nature of the choices before them. Because we wouldn't be 
around here, after 224 years, if people didn't nearly always get it 
right. The American people nearly always get it right, if they have 
enough time and enough information. There's some mysterious center that 
anchors us in our freedom and our sort of forward progress.
    And the only thing I've ever really worried about this election is 
that I've lived long enough now to know that anybody over 30 can look 
back on at least one occasion in his or her life when you made a 
colossal mistake, either

[[Page 2051]]

a personal mistake or a business mistake, not because times were tough 
but because things were going so well you thought you no longer had to 
concentrate on life. If you live long enough, you'll make one of those 
mistakes. And countries are no different than people. They're just a 
collection of people, even a great country like ours.
    So here we are with the best economy and the longest expansion we've 
ever had, welfare rolls down, crime rates down, all the social 
indicators going in the right direction. We learned last week we had a 
20-year low on poverty, biggest drop in child poverty in 34 years, first 
time senior poverty ever went below 10 percent. We've got, for the first 
time in 12 years, even the number of people without health insurance is 
now going down again, because of our Children's Health Insurance 
Program.
    So you wonder whether people will say what I'll hope they'll say, 
which is, holy goodness, you have a chance like this about once every 50 
years, to build the future of your dreams for your kids, to sort of let 
all your hangups go and do what Tom said, just get together, identify 
the problems, identify the opportunities, paint your dream picture, and 
go out and do it. Or will they say, ``Well, what difference does it make 
whether I vote now? Things are going along all right. Maybe there's no 
real differences.'' And they just sort of, kind of stumble through the 
election. Countries, like people, pay a price when they think they don't 
have to concentrate.
    If the American people understand clearly the choice before them and 
the consequences for our kids, Al Gore and 
Joe Lieberman are going to do just fine. 
Tom Carper is going to win. Hillary 
is going to win. And we'll keep moving forward. But it's very important 
that you understand--a lot of you have been so generous to us, but I'd 
just like to ask you, just imagine how many people you will come in 
contact with from States beyond New York, between now--some of you 
aren't even from New York. Jeff lives in Atlanta; Georgia's a close 
State. We might win it; we might lose it. You think about all the States 
that you know people in, all the people you'll come in contact with 
between now and the election. If they ask you why you were here tonight, 
what answer would you give?
    Listen, I think this is really important. I think a lot of--if you 
look at the undecided voters, a lot of them are going to be persuaded by 
conversations they had with their friends. And if you just look around 
this table tonight, literally more than 10,000, maybe more than 20,000 
conversations will occur--maybe 100,000 conversations will occur between 
all of you collectively and the people with whom you come in contact 
between now and election day.
    So if they said, ``Tell me three good reasons I should vote for 
Gore instead of Bush; now tell me why you want me to support Tom Carper or 
Hillary or someone else that's 
running,'' could you do it? And that's very important, because what I'd 
like to ask you to do is to take every chance you can to do that. 
Because I really do believe that a lot of these decisions are going to 
be made by people who never get a chance to come to dinners like this. 
Even if they could afford to come, they wouldn't do it, because it's 
just not their thing. But they will vote, because they're patriotic 
citizens; they love our country. They want to make a good decision, but 
they've never had an encounter like this and probably never will.
    And all I can tell you is--just a couple of things--this economic 
issue is big. I read all the newspaper articles on all this. I think 
I've earned some credibility on the economy. People ask me all the time, 
``What great new innovation did you and Bob Rubin bring to Washington?'' And I always tell them, arithmetic. 
We brought arithmetic. [Laughter] I tell everybody I had a fairly basic 
upbringing, and I thought 2 and 2 had to add up to 4. So we got rid of 
the deficit and started running balanced budgets and surpluses, and 
interest rates came down. The economy went up. You did the rest.
    Then we opened markets abroad, and we had the right kind of 
telecommunications bill, so we opened markets at home. We were pro-
competition. And we invested in the American people, in their education, 
in their future, and tried to find ways to solve the big problems people 
face so that they could grow the economy. And that is pretty much what 
has happened.
    Now, I'm just telling you, you cannot cut taxes--I don't care--and 
most of you would be better off under the Republican plan than under the 
Democratic plan in the short run. But you've got a bigger stake in the 
long-term health and welfare of the American society, and the economy. 
You cannot cut taxes a trillion and a half dollars, spend another 
trillion dollars on a partial privatization of Social Security--it costs 
you a trillion dollars, because if those of you

[[Page 2052]]

that are under 45 take your money out, somebody has got to put it back 
in, because you're going to guarantee all the old geezers like me, who 
are 55 and over, and I'll be next year, that we get to keep what we've 
got. So you've got to fill it up. So then you've spent $2\1/2\ trillion.
    Then whatever they tell you about the surplus, take my word for it--
I know something about arithmetic--the surplus is at least $500 billion 
less than they tell you it is, because Government spending has grown at 
inflation plus population for 50 years--that's $300 billion, because 
they only measure it as inflation; and because all these middle class 
people are going to start paying the alternative minimum tax just 
because their incomes will grow, unless we change it, and that costs 220 
to change--or 200 and change. So believe me, it's at least 500 billion 
less.
    So that's one and a half trillion in taxes, a trillion in 
privatizing Social Security, a half a trillion because the deficit's not 
that big, and that's before you spend any money that the Republicans 
have promised to spend.
    Now, our tax cut is about a third the size of theirs, because we 
think we've got to save some money for education and health care and the 
environment and our responsibilities around the world, defense and other 
responsibilities, and because we think we ought to keep paying down the 
public debt. It turns out, did you ever think you'd see the Democrats to 
the right of the Republicans on the question of fiscal responsibility, 
even in rhetoric?
    The reason--there's a progressive reason for that. You keep interest 
rates down, you have more people working; you have more capital 
available. It's the best social policy in the world. Jonathan 
Tisch and I were talking on the way over 
here. He's a member and now the leader of our welfare to work 
partnership. He got 12,000 companies committed to hire people off 
welfare and put them to work. It's the best social policy there is. And 
they've hired--these 12,000 companies have hired hundreds of thousands 
of people off the welfare rolls. And if we keep interest rates down, the 
economy going, they'll hire more.
    So I can just tell you, I think it is a mistake for us to return to 
deficit spending, to start to erode the Social Security taxes for other 
things, to let interest rates get higher. Most people estimate, that 
I've talked to, estimate that the plan that the Vice President has advocated, that Carper would vote for, 
because he'll be at least as conservative as the administration on 
fiscal matters, will keep interest rates one percent lower for a decade. 
Now, that's worth $390 billion in lower home mortgages, $30 billion in 
lower car payments, and $15 billion in lower college loan payments. 
That's a $430 billion tax cut in lower interest rates. And I didn't even 
count credit card payments and business loans and all the things that 
will follow from that. You need to tell people that.
    We cannot afford this. It is not the responsible thing to do. We 
quadrupled the debt from 1980 to 1992. When I leave office, we'll have 
paid off $360 billion of it. I'm telling you, we need to keep paying it 
down, keep the interest rates down, keep the economy going, and the rest 
of it will take care of itself. I hope you can tell people that.
    Let me just give you one other issue, because I think it's 
important, because there's lots of advertising on this both ways, and 
there was a lot of yapping about it in the debate. I don't mean that in 
a pejorative way. They argued about their positions on health care. I 
would hope--because these things affect so many million people, I'll 
just deal with this. We're for this Patients' Bill of Rights that covers 
all Americans and all managed care plans, that says simply if your 
doctor tells you you ought to see a specialist, you can, and nobody in 
the HMO can tell you you can't. If you change jobs and change providers, 
but you're taking chemotherapy for cancer treatment, or you're pregnant 
and you've got one ob-gyn, you don't have to change them during the 
treatment, even if you change plans. If you get hit by a car, walking 
across the street in Manhattan, you can go to the nearest emergency 
room; you don't have to pass three before you get to one covered by your 
plan. And if you get hurt, you can sue, because if you can't do that, 
it's a bill of suggestions, not a bill of rights, unless there's some 
other mechanism that's binding on this.
    So they say, to be fair to them, ``Look, this is going to be 
burdensome.'' The Republican leadership that are against this, they say, 
``This is going to be burdensome to small businesses and to insurance 
companies, and it's going to raise the cost of health care. And we don't 
want to do that, particularly to people who self-insure. So it's too bad 
that we can't do it, but we

[[Page 2053]]

can't afford to do it. So we'll give you a much weaker bill.''
    Now, here's what it costs. I covered all the Federal employees, 
everybody that's covered by Federal health payments, Medicare, Medicaid, 
they're already covered by this. I did it by Executive order. You know 
what it cost us? A buck a month a premium. You know what the Republican 
Congressional Budget Office says it would cost to cover everybody else? 
Less than $2 a month. I would pay $1.80 a month to make sure that the 
people that serve this dinner here tonight, if they walk out from here 
and they get hit in an accident, can go to the nearest emergency room. I 
would do that. I think most Americans would, of all incomes. It's a big 
issue. Somebody needs to lay it out like that.
    All this fight they're having over Medicare drugs, they never did 
get down to what the real issue was. Here's the deal: If we were 
starting Medicare today, if you were designing a program for Medicare 
today, could you even think about not providing prescription drug 
coverage? Of course not. If you live to be 65, your life expectancy is 
82, and pretty soon it will be a lot higher. And the older you get, the 
more medicine you take. And if you take the right medicine in the right 
way, and you halfway take care of yourself, it can dramatically increase 
not only the length but the quality of your life. It's a big deal. You 
would never think of doing this if we were starting all over.
    Medicare was created in '65, when medical care was about doctors and 
hospitals and surgery and there was no--and our life expectancy was a 
lot less than 82, so you wouldn't do it. So we say, ``Look, let's use 
Medicare; it's got one percent administrative cost. And we'll let people 
buy into Medicare. If you're poor, we'll give you the premiums; or if 
you have huge drug costs every month, catastrophic costs, we'll cover 
those. Otherwise you've got to pay, pay your fair share, and we'll give 
you a good drug plan. And if you're eligible for Medicare, no matter 
what your income, and you need this, you can buy in, but it's totally 
voluntary.''
    They say, ``We don't want to do it that way. We're not sure it won't 
cost too much, and we don't want the Government regulating the drug 
market.'' We don't propose to regulate the drug market. We're selling 
insurance here: go out and buy the drugs, and people will pay the 
premiums. There's no price controls here. But they say, ``No, the 
Government shouldn't do that, but we will pay the premiums for people up 
to 150 percent of the poverty line, which is about $15,000 for a 
couple''--not a lot of money, $16,000--``and everybody over that can buy 
insurance, we'll make insurance policies available.''
    Now, here's the problem with that. Half of all the seniors in 
America that need that medicine, they're above 150 percent of the 
poverty line. Second problem, and I've got to give it--I've had a lot of 
fights with the health insurance companies for 8 years, but I have to 
tell you, I have really been impressed by the way they've handled this, 
because they've been very close to the Republicans in Congress, but they 
have refused to take a dive on this. They have told the truth. They have 
said over and over and over again, you cannot have a private insurance 
policy that is worth having that is affordable. We cannot make a private 
insurance policy market for seniors to have prescription drugs.
    Now, Nevada passed the Republican plan over a year ago. You know how 
many insurance companies have offered these people coverage? Over a year 
ago they passed it. Zero; not one. Now, I kind of admire that about our 
Republican friends. Evidence has no impact on them at all. [Laughter] 
You know, it's basically--I mean, you've got to admire that. ``I know 
what I believe, and don't tell me the facts. I don't want to be 
confused; I know what I'm for.'' [Laughter]
    Now what's really going on here? You see all these ads that are 
confusing; you hear all these arguments. Here's what you need to know. 
There is a real issue here. The pharmaceutical companies don't want this 
bill. And I am not demonizing them. I want to explain why they don't 
want it. And the Republicans in Congress and the Bush campaign, they're close to them, and they get a lot of 
support from them.
    Now, I am delighted that we have these companies headquartered in 
America. They develop all these miracle drugs. They've changed lives for 
nearly--most everybody in this room has taken some medicine that's been 
developed in the last 10 years, if for nothing more than allergies, and 
you're better off for it. And we are very fortunate that these companies 
are in our country. They provide tens of thousands of wonderful jobs. 
They do a terrific job.
    They've just got one problem. It costs them a fortune to develop the 
drugs, and then it costs them a lot of money to advertise. And every

[[Page 2054]]

other rich country in the world, including Europe, Japan, and Canada, is 
under price controls. So they have to recover 100 percent of all their 
development and advertising costs from you and me and the rest of 
America, whether they're poor, rich, or middle class. And if they don't 
do that, their profit margins will get cut so much they fear they won't 
be able to develop new medicine.
    Once they do that, it becomes very economical for them to sell the 
rest of the medicine anywhere in the world, which is why you see all 
these people going to Canada buying their medicine. You've seen all 
these stories; people in upstate New York, they go over to Canada. The 
reason this happens is, the rest of America's consumers have covered the 
cost of developing the drugs and advertising them. And once you get 
those costs covered, it costs minuscule just to make another pill or 
two. And that's why you can go to Canada and get it cheaper.
    Now, what they're worried about is, if Medicare becomes the biggest 
drug buyer in America, that we'll use market power to get the prices 
down so that American seniors will buy drugs made in America almost as 
cheap as Canadian seniors can. See, this is a real issue. These people 
have a real problem. And we want them to succeed; we want them to keep 
doing it. But here's our position. This is the Gore/Lieberman position 
and the Democratic position.
    It cannot be that the way to solve this problem the drug companies 
have is to keep medicine away from American senior citizens that they 
need. That can't be the only way to solve this problem. Those people 
have got plenty of money, plenty of power. We need to solve the problem 
that the seniors have, and then we need to go solve the drug company 
problem that will be created when we solve this. But let's take care of 
America's health first, and then let's go try to figure out how to solve 
their problem. But we've got the cart before the horse here. I think 
we're right and they're wrong.
    Now those are just three issues. But you need to know the answer to 
the difference in their education plans, the environment, crime, the 
whole nine yards, and you need to be able to answer. Because I'm telling 
you, we need to elect Tom Carper. And we've got a chance to win the 
Senate, a chance to win the House; I believe we're going to win the 
White House. And then when we get there, we have to be faithful to the 
positive change of the last 8 years.
    That's the last thing I'll say. When Al Gore says, ``You ain't seen 
nothing yet,'' it may sound like a campaign slogan when a candidate says 
it. But I'm not running for anything, and I believe that too. Because it 
takes a long time to turn a country around. It's like a big ocean liner. 
That's what happened to the Titanic. The crew saw the iceberg; they just 
didn't see it quick enough. And you can't turn it on a dime. A country 
is like that. So it takes time to turn it around. I've done everything I 
know to do to turn the country around, to pull us together, to move us 
forward. But all the best stuff is still out there.
    I mean, young women in this country, within 10 years, I think 
they'll be having babies with life expectancies of 90 years, because of 
the human genome project. I think we'll be curing Alzheimer's. I think 
we'll be able to take women within, I don't know how many years, but 
some period of years, women in their thirties that have the gene 
predictors for breast cancer, and correcting it so they never develop it 
in the first place. I think these things--unbelievable stuff is going to 
happen. You're going to find out what's in the black holes of the 
universe, and what may even surprise you more, what's in the deepest 
depths of the ocean. It's going to be an amazing time.
    But we've got to also get rid of child poverty. We could bring free 
enterprise to Indian reservations and inner-city neighborhoods and poor 
little country towns that never had it. We can provide health insurance 
to working families that have never been able to get it. We could 
dramatically cut AIDS, TB, and malaria deaths around the world that kill 
one in four people every year that die. We can do anything you ever 
dreamed of, if we make the right decisions. But if we get careless and 
we don't understand what the choice is and what the consequences are, 
we'll pay for that as a Nation, just like all of us who are of any age 
have paid for it in our personal lives in the past.
    So in my lifetime we never had a chance like this. So thank you for 
helping Tom. Thank you, those of you who have helped Hillary, for doing that. It means more than I can say. 
But just do it for yourselves and your kids and your grandkids and your 
future. Every chance you get between now and November 7th, you tell 
somebody, ``Let me tell you why I hope you'll

[[Page 2055]]

vote, and what I think the choice is, and what the consequences are.'' 
Because if everybody knows, we're going to have a great celebration.
    Thank you.

Note: The President spoke at 9:43 p.m. at a private residence. In his 
remarks, he referred to event cohosts Mark Fox and Denise Rich; 
Republican Presidential candidate Gov. George W. Bush of Texas; and 
former Secretary of the Treasury Robert E. Rubin. Governor Carper of 
Delaware was a candidate for U.S. Senate in Delaware. A tape was not 
available for verification of the content of these remarks.