[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 29, Number 31 (Monday, August 9, 1993)]
[Pages 1564-1569]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]
<R04>
Remarks to the National Urban League
August 4, 1993
Thank you very much. Reg Brock, John Jacob, distinguished dais
guests, and ladies and gentlemen. It was just about a year ago that we
were together at the Urban League convention in San Diego. What a
difference a year makes.
Many of you in this audience have been friends of mine for a very
long time. Those of you from my home State of Arkansas have worked with
me in partnership there for many years. I know what the Urban League can
do to make a difference in the lives of people and in the minds and
hearts of people.
I want to say at the outset today that while I came here to talk
about what we're trying to do in Washington, what we can do in
Washington is in no small measure determined by what lives in the hearts
and minds and visions of Americans throughout this land. I know that the
Urban League, for more years than I have by far, has struggled to remind
Americans that, without regard to our race or creed or station in life,
we must go forward together; that there is no place for hatred or
division.
And yet we know today that we are challenged by that on every hand.
When people would bomb the NAACP headquarters in Tacoma or Sacramento,
when people would threaten your own John Mack in Los Angeles, when
people would seek again to divide us by race instead of to take the hard
and difficult path of making the changes we all need to make together as
a country, we need the Urban League. America needs it. The President,
the Congress, the politicians alone cannot do nearly as much as you can
do to reach to the truth of the human heart and stand up against
bigotry. But there are things that we can do. I know the Attorney
General appeared before you in this conference, along with at least four
other members of my Cabinet. No wonder I couldn't find any of them this
week. They were over here. [Laughter]
But I tell you, one of the reasons that we picked Judge Louis Freeh
from New York to head the FBI is that he was not only committed to
continuing the long overdue work of opening the FBI to women and
minorities but also because he had successfully, heroically, and
determinedly prosecuted the criminals who murdered a Federal judge and a
civil rights leader in the South when others had given up and thought it
could not be done.
I am especially in debt to the Urban League because the Urban League
not only gave to the Nation such great leaders as Whitney Young, but you
gave to me a lifelong friendship and the service in this administration
of Vernon Jordan and Ron Brown. I would have never met either one of
them if it hadn't been for the Urban League.
I also want to say to all of you that it is terribly important as we
seek to bring America together that we continue our struggle to remind
the doubters and the naysayers that we can go forward together.
There was an especially reassuring article, at least to me, in the
Washington Post a few days ago by the distinguished columnist William
Raspberry, in which he pointed out that when I said I wanted a Cabinet
that looked like America I was subject to ridicule in many quarters, who
claimed that I was about to diminish the quality of the Government by
imposing some sort of quota system on the
[[Page 1565]]
Cabinet. Well, it turned out that I produced a Cabinet with more women
and more minorities than had ever served in a President's Cabinet. And
most people think it's one of the best Cabinets that ever served the
United States of America.
And as Mr. Raspberry pointed out, when Janet Reno speaks as Attorney
General now, people don't think of her as the first woman Attorney
General. When Mike Espy's out there up to his ears in mud in the middle
of the Mississippi River Valley flooding, and people are saying we've
got the best response to a national emergency they've ever seen, nobody
says he's the first black Secretary of Agriculture; he's somebody out
there helping the farmers to put their lives back together.
In the last 6 months, a great deal has happened in this town. The
pace of change has been dizzying. And with all the change there has been
strong opposition, and it's been a little ragged around the edges from
time to time. But let me ask you this: If on Inauguration Day someone
had told you that this administration, with the most diverse Cabinet in
history, would work with the Congress and with our allies in the country
and around the world to produce the Family and Medical Leave Act, twice
vetoed by the previous administration, which became effective this week,
to guarantee that working people can take a little time off when a
baby's born, a child's sick, or a parent's ill, won't lose their jobs;
would produce the motor voter bill, which is a significant advance in
voting rights for the young, the poor, and the dispossessed; would
produce a bill with the National Institutes of Health, which would take
the politics out of medical research and finally do what ought to be
done in medical research with regard to women and their health care
problems; would produce a dramatic change in environmental policy, which
would be applauded all around the world for putting the United States
back in the forefront of energy conservation, of responsible efforts to
deal with the population explosion, of all kinds of efforts to reconcile
the conflicts between the environment and the economy; if someone had
told you that we would take the lead in trying to keep democracy alive
in Russia in ways that would be good for ordinary Americans by
continuing to reduce the threat that nuclear weapons will ever be used
and by opening up future markets there; that the United States would be
able to go to a meeting of the great industrial nations of the world in
Tokyo and for the first time in a decade not be attacked because we are
a drag on world growth because of our deficit, and instead, we would be
complimented and they would agree with us to lower tariffs on goods in a
way that every American analyst concedes will add hundreds of thousands
of jobs, good, high-paying manufacturing jobs, to the world economy if
we can get all the other nations to agree with it; and that in the
middle of this budget debate we would pass the program for national
service which will give Americans a chance to bridge the gaps of race
and income and earn credit against their college education by dealing
with the human problems of Americans at the grassroots level--I'd say
that's a pretty good record for 6 months, and I think the American
people ought to be proud of it.
But let me say to you that there is much, much more to be done. And
whether we can get about the business of doing it will be determined in
the next 48 hours or 72 hours or so by how the Congress of the United
States responds to the challenge presented by the economic plan.
I thank the Urban League for its early endorsement and support of
this plan, and I would remind you here briefly how you did it, what is
in it, how it makes a difference to ordinary Americans. Remember that
for 20 years now, literally 20 years in 1993, most working Americans
have seen the power of their incomes eroded. Wages for wage earners have
been virtually stagnant for 20 years as the cost of health care,
housing, and education had exploded.
In 1980, we had a Presidential election which said that this problem
that the American people were having paying their bills and dealing with
global economic forces was a problem of too much Government in America
and what we needed to do was to cut taxes, get Government out of the
way, and everything would be wonderful. What that rhetoric masked was an
old-fashioned attempt to cut taxes and increase spending, except it was
done in a different way. We cut taxes on the wealthiest Americans,
increased
[[Page 1566]]
primarily defense spending, and got out of the way.
And for a couple of years it worked. We had a couple of years in
which jobs came into the economy because we were spending a lot more
than we were taking in and putting a lot of people to work in defense
industries. But after that, the patterns imposed on the United States by
the realities of the global economy returned with a vengeance and were
made worse by the decisions made in the early eighties where we cut
taxes on the wealthy, ran the deficit up.
What happened later? When the Congress and the President started
going back at it, we had a decade in which taxes were cut on the
wealthy, and the top one percent got more than half of the income gains
on the 1980's. Taxes were raised on the middle class whose incomes were
going down. We reduced our investment in our children, their education,
our economy, and our future. We cut defense spending without reinvesting
in California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and the other States that
were hurt. And all of the money went to pay more for the same health
care, to pay more interest on the massive debt, and to deal with the
fact that we were creating a whole new class of poor people. It reached
the point that by 1992, 1 in 10 Americans was on food stamps.
So I say to you, that path didn't work very well. We now have
evidence that it didn't work. In the last 4 years, only a million new
jobs came into the economy. We are 3.5 million jobs behind where we
would have been in a normal economic recovery.
And so I presented a plan to the Congress--and I have asked them to
adopt it, and I asked the American people to support it last night--
which brings down the deficit by $500 billion over the next 5 years. Why
should liberals be for that? Why should people in urban constituencies
be for that? I'll tell you why. Because as long as that deficit keeps
getting bigger, we'll spend more and more of your tax money, hard-
working middle class people's tax money, paying bond payments to wealthy
bond holders instead of investing in reinvigorating the American
economy. Interest rates will go back up, and we won't be able to provide
the things that people need.
If we pay the deficit down--look what happened against yesterday. It
looks like we're going to pass the plan--the interest rates dropped to
an all-time low. I'm telling you, folks, we need to have a consensus in
America without regard to race or political philosophy that we have to
gain control over our economic destiny again and stop being paralyzed.
If we don't do something about this, within 5 years we'll be spending
all of our money paying more for the same health care and interest on
the debt. And there will be nothing to grow America and grow our people
and bring us together. That is the first issue.
The second thing is that this plan is fair. This plan is fair: 80
percent of the new revenues will come from people with incomes above
$200,000--80 percent--80 percent; no income tax increases on couples
with incomes below $200,000, actually $180,000 in adjusted gross income.
The 4.3-cent gas tax that is in this plan amounts to about $35 a year
for a family of four with an income of $50,000. Working families with
incomes of under $30,000 are held harmless. This is a fair plan. In 1990
when there was virtually no burden on the wealthiest Americans in the
budget plan, the burden on the middle class was 2\1/2\ times as great as
this.
The third point I want to make is, unlike 1990 and unlike the other
plans which have been offered to the Congress this year, this plan has
real incentives for economic growth that will affect a lot of you in
this room. Every small business in America will be eligible to increase
their expensing provision by almost double. What does that mean in plain
terms? It means that over 90 percent of the small businesses in this
country are going to get a tax cut out of this bill if they reinvest
more money in their business. Now, that's something the Republicans
haven't told you in the last few weeks: Over 90 percent will get a tax
cut.
For those of you who live in California and are worried about the
economy out there, this plan increases the incentives for companies out
there to invest in research and experimentation. That's where a lot of
it is going on. That will create more jobs. For those of you who live in
Michigan, Ohio, other States with heavy industry, this plan
[[Page 1567]]
gives those big companies some relief from the minimum tax provisions
if, but only if, they invest in new plant, new equipment, and they do
things that will make them more competitive and able to hire more people
and create new jobs.
This plan gives a sweeping new investment incentive for people with
the courage to invest in new and small businesses. It says if you do it
and hold the investment for 5 years, you get a 50 percent cut in the tax
you'd otherwise have to pay to get people into that. This plan will grow
the economy.
Finally, let me say this plan is fair to people who deserve our
support. There is some more money in this plan for Head Start, to help
pregnant mothers, to start people off well, to invest in the
apprenticeship training of our young people, to help to pay for national
service, and for more access to college education. And the most
important thing of all, which has received very little attention until
the last few days, this plan arguably has the most important piece of
social reform in the last 20 years because it puts $21 billion into the
earned-income tax credit program, which means we can say to the working
poor, if you have children in your house and you work 40 hours a week,
you will be lifted out of poverty. We are tired of seeing people work
their heads off and work their fingers to the bone and be in poverty.
That is something that every conservative in this country who's
talked about how well the welfare system is for years ought to embrace
with tears of joy. Think about it. For the first time in the history of
the country we can say, ``If you go out and work hard and play by the
rules and you're still living in poverty''--and almost one in five, 18
percent of the workers in this country work for a wage that will not
support a family of four above the poverty line--this says ``the tax
system, not a Government bureaucracy, not a program, the tax system will
lift you out. You will be rewarded for your work.''
That is a dramatic advance. It will change the lives of millions of
Americans who are out there just killing themselves to raise their kids
and to obey the law and to do what is right. And that, too, is in this
program.
But when they say, our opponents, ``This thing doesn't do anything
for jobs. It doesn't do anything to cut the deficit. It taxes the middle
class, not any different from what we've done, before.'' It is just not
so. And I ask you in these closing hours if you have a Senator or a
Representative who is potentially a vote for this, call them and tell
them you'll be with them.
I've spent a lot of time talking to the Members of Congress. I hear
two arguments from people who say they may not or they won't vote for
the program. Argument number one is a terrible indictment of democracy,
but a lot of them have said it: ``This is a good program; it's good for
America; it's good for my district, but our people don't believe it. So
much misinformation has been put out. They don't believe there's any
deficit reduction. They don't believe there's any spending cuts. They
believe the middle class is paying the taxes. They don't think there's
any incentives for growth. And we'll never convince them of that. So
even though it's good for America, I can't vote for it because my people
are not capable of hearing the truth.'' I think that is wrong.
As soon as this bill passes, we will clear away the murky fog of
misinformation and reality will take over. And we've been doing a better
job of that in the last month. But you need to give courage to those
people.
There are others who say, quite rightly, that ``This bill doesn't
solve every problem America has, and therefore, I won't vote for it.''
Well, we'll never vote for any bill if that's the test.
It is true, this bill brings the deficit down for 5 years, and then
it will start going up again unless we do something about health care
costs. But the time to do that is when we reform the health care system
and provide affordable health care to all Americans and control health
care costs in the private sector as well as the public sector. It is not
fair to say we're going to control health care costs and doing it by
slashing Medicare benefits to middle class elderly people or by simply
shifting the costs onto the private sectors.
Now, I want to say this again. This is something we all have a
common interest in. We do spend too much on health care. We spend it in
the private sector and in the public sector. We spend over 14 percent of
our income on health care. Only Canada, of all the other
[[Page 1568]]
countries in the world, spends as much as 9 percent of their income on
health care. Everybody else is less. And we spent it partly because the
whole system costs too much to administer--it is a bureaucratic
nightmare--and because we are the only advanced country that doesn't
provide some quality coverage to all of our citizens and security of
people so that they'll have health care coverage even if they lose their
jobs or if they move jobs or if somebody in their family has been sick
before. We have to deal with this.
But if we did what these folks are saying and tried to solve the
health care problem now by slashing what we spend on Medicare and
Medicaid without reforming the system, do you know what would happen?
We'd either hurt the middle class elderly or the poor, or we'd keep on
doing what's been done in this country now for about 15 years: We'd be
sending the bill to the private sector. All of you who are in the
private sector--most of you are paying health insurance premiums that
cost too much already. If we just cut what the Government pays, you'll
pay more.
So I say to those people who say we have to do something about these
entitlement programs and health care, you are right. Let's do it right.
Let's not use that as an excuse not to move forward with this program.
There's too much good in it.
And finally, let me say we have a lot more to do. We have to move on
to health care. We have to move on to welfare reform. We have to move on
to the crime bill, which will do a great deal to help us to put more
police officers on the street in community policing settings where we
will be working with people in the community to make them safer and to
prevent crime from occurring in the first place. We need to pass the
Brady bill. We have fooled around with this too long. It is time to pass
it.
I had a heartbreaking conversation over the weekend with a friend of
mine who is a Member of Congress who had a friend whose son was shot in
one of these blind, mad encounters between children over the weekend
where four young boys got in a fight with four others, and they didn't
know the other guys had guns. And finally they just took out the guns
and started shooting them. This is crazy. This is crazy.
Our television news is filled at night with horrible incidents of
violence in Bosnia and other places in the world that break our heart.
Twenty-four people were killed in this town, our Nation's Capital, in
one week last month. We have to get on with that.
You had Hugh McCall here the other day, my friend, Hugh McCall, one
of the most enlightened bankers in America, a supporter of our community
development banking proposal. We've got to prove we can bring free
enterprise and investment back to distressed urban and rural areas in
this country. That is out there waiting for action. None of this stuff
is going to be addressed until we get this budget economic plan passed
and get it behind us and move forward.
The Vice President is going to present a stimulating plan to
reorganize the Federal Government in ways that serve you better at the
grassroots level and still save the taxpayers money. We are not done
with trying to control the budget. But we cannot move forward unless we
act on this now.
And so I say to you, my fellow Americans, we have tried delay,
denial, gridlock. We've had all this tough talk and easy action. I've
been criticized in some quarters for not talking tough enough. My theory
is if you do the tough things, your actions can speak louder than your
words. We've had too many words that didn't mean a thing in this town
for too long.
So I ask you as Americans to continue your support of these
endeavors. I ask for your partnership for the future. Let's make the
national service program work and make it an instrument of healing and
unity and real problemsolving, just what the Urban League has always
been about. Let's prove we can deal with the health care issue in
America, that we don't have to be the only advanced country in the world
that can't seem to find a way to either control health care costs or
provide security to our families. Let's prove that we can bring our
deficit down and grow our economy.
In short, let us prove that together we will assume more
responsibility, create more opportunity, and come together again in this
great American community. I am tired of hearing about all the things we
cannot do. I am tired of hearing about cynicism and
[[Page 1569]]
skepticism being the excuse for inaction and paralysis.
This is a very great country. And when you travel abroad and you see
the problems that these other nations are having and you see all these
other rich countries with higher unemployment than we have, you know
that there is nothing before us that we cannot deal with if we simply
have the vision and the will to do it. We are being given a chance now
to demonstrate that vision and that will. It is consistent with
everything the Urban League has ever stood for or done.
I ask for your prayers, your support, and your memory that--
President Kennedy once said it better than I ever could, ``Here on
Earth, God's work must truly be our own.'' Our work is before us. I'm
trying to do my part. I hope you will do yours.
Thank you, and God bless you all.
Note: The President spoke at 10:48 a.m. at the Washington Convention
Center. In his remarks, he referred to Reginald K. Brock, Jr., chairman
and chief executive officer, Time, Inc.; John Jacob, president and chief
executive officer, National Urban League, Inc.; and John W. Mack,
president, Los Angeles Urban League. A tape was not available for
verification of the content of these remarks.