[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 31, Number 30 (Monday, July 31, 1995)]
[Pages 1288-1294]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks to the American Legion Boys Nation

July 24, 1995

    Thank you very much. To all the delegates of Boys Nation, I'm 
delighted to be here, as you know, with many members of our 
administration who are involved in the setting of economic policy for 
our country; delighted to see Mr. William Detweiler, the national 
commander of the American Legion, here; along with your other leaders, 
Ray Smith; Ron Engel; Jack Mercier, who has been with Boys Nation for 31 
years and I believe was there--that would make 32 years--when I was 
there in 1963; George Blume and others.
    Let me say, as I'm sure you know, I am especially delighted to 
welcome all of you here to the White House. I don't have to tell you 
what an important event this is for me every year and how much I look 
forward to it. But this is an especially important time for all of you 
to be here. The world in which you will live, the world which I am sure 
many of you will help to lead, can be America's greatest time. But it is 
a world being transformed to a degree seldom seen in all American 
history. Much of this change is good. But it's not all good.
    If you look at what is happening in America, we have more new 
businesses being formed, more Americans becoming millionaires, more 
people finding success than at any period in our history. But most 
Americans are still working harder for the same or lower pay they were 
making a few years ago, with greater levels of personal insecurity about 
their ability to take care of their parents if they get sick, their 
ability to educate their children, their ability to hold on to their own 
health care.
    If you look at what's going on, most of our social problems are 
being addressed very well in many places. In most major cities the crime 
rate is down, but the rate of random

[[Page 1289]]

violence and crime among our youngest teenagers is going up, and there 
are still too many problems with crime and violence, with drugs and 
gangs.
    If you look around the world, the cold war is over and peace and 
freedom and democracy and world trade are all increasing. But still 
there are serious problems with what I call the organized forces of 
destruction: ethnic, religious, racial hatreds leading to awful wars, 
the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in tiny amounts, as you 
saw when the terrible bomb exploded in Oklahoma City or the gas was 
released in the Japanese subway. So we have both a great deal of good 
and a great deal of troubling change going on in the world today and in 
our country.
    In recent weeks I have addressed those challenges in the face--here 
at home, first, to restore the American dream of opportunity and the 
American value of responsibility and, second, to bring our country 
together in a stronger community so that we can move forward together. I 
believe those two goals are inseparable. I believe the only way we can 
restore economic opportunity and solve our social problems is to unite 
our people more.
    I can tell you that it would have been unthinkable when I was here 
in 1963--we had a lot of problems in 1963; we had severe racial problems 
still; the country was still largely segregated--but it would have been 
unthinkable if someone had told us in 1963 that 30 years from now the 
country would be as deeply divided as it is today and that people would 
have lost faith in their institutions and would have the level of 
cynicism and skepticism that they have today.
    My vision for your future is a very positive one. I want this 
country to be a high-opportunity, smart-work country with good jobs and 
safe streets, with a clean environment and excellent education and 
health care; a country in which diverse people live and work together, 
in which communities and families can solve their own problems, and in 
which people are given the chance as individuals to live up to the 
fullest of their God-given potential in a world that is steadily moving 
toward more peace and freedom.
    When I say we have to restore the American dream of opportunity and 
the American value of responsibility, when I say we have to rebuild 
America's sense of community, that is simply a strategy to reach that 
vision, a strategy rooted in an obligation Americans have always 
accepted, the obligation to give each successive generation a better 
life than the preceding one had. That is an obligation from which I 
benefited and one from which millions of others have benefited as well.
    Exactly 32 years ago, on July 24, 1963, I came here as a delegate to 
Boys Nation when John Kennedy was President. I would never have made it 
here and gone from that day to this one, without the benefit of the 
shared beliefs and convictions and opportunities that made up the 
America of my youth. I lived in a family where everyone worked hard and 
where children were expected to study hard. I also had a lot of 
opportunity given to me by my community. I had good teachers, good 
schools, and, when I needed them, scholarships and jobs to make my 
education possible.
    I saw what happened, too, when good people had no opportunity. There 
were a lot of good people I grew up with who had no opportunity because 
they were of a different race or because they happened to be poor and 
white and isolated in poor communities in the hills and hollows of my 
State. I have lived my public life believing that everybody ought to 
have the chances that I had and that if everybody did and we all worked 
together, this country would be able to go on indefinitely as the 
world's best hope for freedom and opportunity. My philosophy is rooted 
in these beliefs, and the experience of the United States bears out that 
they are the right ones.
    I imagine the same is true in your lives. I'm sure a lot of you have 
been amazed at how very different your backgrounds are and yet how much 
you seem to have in common. Our Nation's work must reflect what you have 
in common. And our Nation's budget, which we're debating here with such 
intensity now, must also reflect those common values and our shared 
vision for the future.
    The priorities of American families and their household budgets 
aren't all that much different than the priorities of our larger 
American family and our Nation's budget. The way we spend our money as 
individuals,

[[Page 1290]]

as a family, and as a nation says an awful lot about who we are, what 
our values are, and what our vision for the future really is. We are at 
an historic moment, as I have said. For the first time in a long time, 
the leaders of both major parties agree on one thing we have to do 
consistent with our values, and that is to balance the Federal budget 
and relieve our children and our grandchildren from the burden of a 
permanently increasing Federal debt.
    You know, we never had a structural or permanent deficit in our 
country until about 1981. But from 1981 until the day I took office, the 
national debt was quadrupled. When I came here I was committed to 
getting that deficit off our backs. In the first 2 years of our 
administration, we cut the deficit by a third, and we are now reducing 
it for 3 years in a row for the first time since Harry Truman was 
President of the United States just after World War II.
    But it is still such a problem, what happened in the previous 12 
years, that the budget would be balanced today, today, except for the 
interest payments we make on the debt run up between 1981 and the day I 
became President. And this debt is so great that next year interest on 
the debt could be larger than the defense budget. This is a very 
significant problem, and there is more to do.
    Therefore, it is good news that both the Congress and I have offered 
plans to balance the budget. Both plans involve significant spending 
cuts which will not be easy to meet. Both plans protect our ability to 
maintain a strong defense and the world's finest military. Beyond those 
similarities, however, there are profound differences, differences that 
go to the heart of our ability to find common ground, to rebuild the 
American community around the old-fashioned values that I talked about 
just a moment ago. The commitment to our future I believe that we all 
have must be defined in large measure today in how this budget contest 
is played out.
    The congressional budget balances a budget in 7 years. My budget 
does it in 10. The congressional budget cuts taxes by about $250 billion 
over 7 years. Our budget cuts taxes, but by slightly less than half that 
amount. Why? Because our budget, by making those changes, enables us to 
increase investment in education and training by about $40 billion over 
the next 7 years, to help make sure all Americans have a chance to 
develop the fullest of their abilities and to compete and win in the 
global economy.
    This is very important. About half of all the students in college 
today everywhere in America have some form of financial assistance. It 
is critically important to maintain it. It is critically important that 
everybody who wants to go to school has a chance to go and has a chance 
to finish. And it's a big part of what our national security will mean 
in the global economy.
    Our budget strengthens health care coverage, especially for seniors 
through Medicare, and provides families some help in caring for their 
elderly parents who don't go into nursing homes. Our budget protects the 
food we eat, the air we breathe, the water we drink. It rewards work, 
concentrating tax policies on helping working families to raise their 
children and to educate both their children and themselves, because we 
know more and more adults will have to go back for job training over the 
course of their work lives. And it preserves our investments in science 
and technology, so that our workers and our businesses can compete the 
world over in a rapidly changing technological era.
    Our budget achieves all the economic benefits of balancing the 
budget. It gives you lower interest rates, higher investment in private 
dollars. It reduces the amount we'll have to pay on the debt for 
interest in the years ahead. But it maintains these other priorities, 
which I believe are essential to rebuilding the American community and 
finding common ground.
    These priorities are not Democratic or Republican priorities. They 
are commonsense, national decisions that have served us very, very well 
over the last generation. They have stood the test of time. They have 
marked our character as a nation, and they mark the road to the future 
we should take.
    Now, some in Congress say we need to retreat from the common ground 
we have so carefully built on education, on Medicare, on the 
environment, on science and technology to balance the budget in 7 years 
with these big tax cuts. They say we need to slash Federal aid to the 
schools and to increase

[[Page 1291]]

the cost of student loans. They say it is all right to make the elderly 
pay up to thousands more for their Medicare benefits and to dramatically 
reduce our ability to protect the environment to meet the 7-year time 
period with the big tax cuts. They say all this is necessary to balance 
the budget. But many would use the balanced budget as an excuse to do 
these things which they wish to do anyway.
    I have shown we can balance the budget without retreating from our 
common ground on education, on health care, on the environment. So I 
invite Senators and Members of Congress from both parties to join me in 
balancing the budget while protecting our common ground. I will work 
hard to get their support. But if they refuse, I must continue to act, 
alone if necessary, to protect the common ground that brought every 
single one of you into this White House today. I will do that. 
[Applause] Thank you very much.
    Let me say again, there is no question that we have to balance the 
budget. And the majority in Congress deserve credit for proposing a plan 
to do that. But we do not have to do it in 7 years. We do not have to do 
it with massive tax cuts to people who don't really need it.
    The haste of their schedule and the scope of their tax cuts are 
luxuries, and this is not a time for luxuries. Think again about your 
family's budget. If you can't afford luxuries right now, you don't 
sacrifice necessities to have them. Take education. I think it's a 
necessity. From the birth of the land-grant colleges during the Civil 
War to the creation of the GI bill 51 years ago this summer, we have 
understood that when we invest in the education of our people, it makes 
the whole country stronger.
    We have understood that, regardless of party, right through the 
first 2 years of our administration. In 1993 and in 1994, we had 
bipartisan support for the most remarkable education agenda in the last 
30 years. We had higher standards for our schools. We had more 
affordable college loans with better repayment terms. We had a national 
service initiative, AmeriCorps, that now gives 20,000 young people a 
chance to serve in their communities and earn money for their college 
educations.
    We had a dramatic expansion of Head Start, a program that has 
enjoyed bipartisan support for decades now. We expanded the age at which 
children were eligible, improved the quality of the program, and 
increased the numbers of kids in Head Start to make it more likely that 
more Americans will have a chance to be sitting where you're sitting 
today. But now, as a part of this balanced budget program, many in 
Congress are willing to cut 50,000 people out of the Head Start program 
and block its expansion.
    Another example is the commitment to educate and train all 
Americans. We know the global economy demands more skills and 
information than ever before. We know--we know that the middle class in 
America today, including many of your parents, are either going up or 
going down economically, are either increasing their security or feeling 
more insecure, based directly on the level of skills they have. We know 
that. We know that is a reality for the lives of Americans all across 
this country.
    So what did we propose? We proposed to do everything we could to 
increase the access of people to college and to increase the training 
available to adults. But again, many in Congress would cut the Pell 
grant program by 300,000 slots a year. That's 300,000 poor people who 
won't get college degrees to become middle class people, maybe even rich 
people, and pay back far more to the tax treasury--to the Treasury in 
taxes than they ever took out in the Pell grants.
    And the job training in some ways is the most troubling of all. I 
have proposed that we consolidate all the Government's training programs 
into one big scholarship program for adult workers who are unemployed or 
are underemployed, giving them a voucher worth up to $2,600 a year to go 
back for 2 years to get further training so they can increase their 
abilities to earn a good living. We should not reduce this. We should 
increase this. We shouldn't reduce it. People are in trouble out there 
today in this country because they don't have the education and skills 
they need to maintain family-wage jobs in a global economy. These are 
very important. We don't have to get rid of this to balance the budget.

[[Page 1292]]

    The same is true about health care. Thirty years ago we decided as a 
people that we would at least protect the elderly of this country from 
the fortunes of not having adequate health care. We did it with 
Medicare. We did this as an extension of the compassion we feel in our 
own families, for the elderly in our individual families.
    Medicare has worked well. It has low administrative costs. It has 
covered all people over 65. I might add that we are the only advanced 
country in the world that doesn't have some form of universal health 
coverage for everybody. But at least we do it for senior citizens. It's 
a basic American value. We help take care of people who raised us up and 
took care of us.
    Before Medicare, half of the elderly people in this country had no 
health insurance whatever. Now, 97 percent of the senior citizens in 
America have access to health care. Of course, we have to reduce the 
rate of inflation in the Medicare program. I have said that from the 
first speech I gave to the Congress as President. But we can do this by 
reforming Medicare, not by ruining it. We can still maintain protections 
for every senior citizen in America, instead of deciding that some will 
do fine and others will get the shaft.
    Some in Congress want to cut $270 billion from the Medicare program, 
about the same amount they want to cut taxes. Their proposal would 
require our seniors--maybe some of your grandparents--to pay as much as 
$5,600 more a couple in out-of-pocket costs. So we cut spending in one 
way and offload the burden to others. That does not reflect the values 
of most American families. Maybe some people can afford to pay some more 
because they're upper income, but most seniors in this country hardly 
have enough to live on as it is.
    If you look at the attack on the environment, you see another 
example. The environment has been a bipartisan issue in America. The 
Environmental Protection Agency was established under the Presidency of 
Richard Nixon, a Republican President. We have shared a common 
commitment to the environment. Perhaps our country's most outstanding 
environmental President was our first environmental President, Theodore 
Roosevelt--again, a Republican. This has never been a partisan issue.
    We have agreed for a long time as a people that the stewardship of 
our natural environment is a big part of maintaining the American dream. 
With the first Earth Day, 25 years ago, Americans came together to say 
no to dirty air, toxic food, polluted water and say yes to leaving our 
children a nation as unspoiled as their dreams. We recognize together 
that our business in creating jobs was not undermined, and in fact could 
be enhanced, by protecting the environment.
    We all know that in the last two decades there have been some rigid 
regulations and some unreasonable enforcement that have limited the 
effect of our laws and alienated people from the whole cause of 
environmental protection. So we should change the way our regulators do 
their work. We have worked very hard to do that. Right now, we have in 
motion an initiative that will reduce by 25 percent the amount of time 
people in the business community spend complying with the environmental 
laws.
    Right now we are putting in place a small business program that says 
to every small business person in America, if you're worried about 
violating an environmental law, if you will call us and ask for help, 
you cannot be fined for 6 months. We will work with you because you 
asked for help. We're not interested in fining people; we're interested 
in protecting the environment. But that is very different from just 
walking away from our commitment to protect the environment.
    Some in Congress want to slash funding for enforcement by almost 50 
percent. It could put at risk the safety of the water we drink. It would 
increase the chances of raw sewage washing up on our beaches. It would 
excuse some polluters from having to clean up their mess. That is not 
our vision.
    Believe it or not, some of these restrictions would actually 
undermine the ability of the United States to enforce the Clean Air Act. 
The Clean Air Act was last signed by President Bush, my Republican 
predecessor, who said it was his proudest legislative achievement. This 
has always been a bipartisan thing. It is now being put at risk in this 
budget debate. And I believe it undermines our ability to find common 
ground.

[[Page 1293]]

    Others say we should cut science and technology, the most powerful 
engine we have to boost our economy. Finally, there are even proposals 
that would undermine our ability to make work more attractive than 
welfare.
    I have worked now for 15 years, long before I became President, to 
move people from welfare to work. I have learned that most people on 
welfare want to go to work and that one of the things that we permitted 
to happen over the years was to build in too many disincentives to work. 
So that's why I've supported welfare reform proposals that would move 
people from welfare to work. We have given 30 States permission to get 
out from under Federal rules and regulations, to come up with new and 
innovative ways to move people from welfare to work, including letting 
States take welfare checks and give them to employers as income 
supplements so they would actually hire people to go to work.
    One of the things we have to do is to make sure we don't tax people 
back into poverty. And when people are out there working on low wages, 
what we did in 1993 was to say, if you're out there working 40 hours a 
week and you have children in your house, you should not be in poverty. 
The tax system shouldn't put you in poverty. We will lower your taxes. 
If necessary, we will give you a tax refund so that if you'll work 40 
hours a week, you can raise your kids outside of poverty. There are even 
some people who want to erode that tax cut so that we can cut taxes for 
people who don't really need it in this budget program.
    There are a lot of things being done here which will violate and 
undermine our chances to achieve common ground. And they do not fall 
into the traditional partisan differences. Most of these things have 
been supported by Republicans and Democrats. The tax provision for 
working families was called by President Ronald Reagan the most 
important pro-family, antipoverty initiative in the last 30 years. Now 
there are people in Congress who are trying to erode it. And it is 
wrong. And it undermines our ability to make common ground.
    The 7-year timetable and the huge tax cut, these are luxuries. To 
make room for them, some in Congress would slash necessities. I say, 
let's take 10 years instead of 7; let's have a modest tax cut targeted 
toward what people really need, which is help in raising and educating 
their children and knowing they can always get new education and 
training themselves; and let's keep on investing in the things that are 
our necessities. These things will create millions more American dreams 
if we continue them.
    We can cut taxes. We can balance the budget. But we have to do it in 
a way that maintains what has been for decades and what clearly is now 
the common ground on which we can go forward together.
    Your parents recognized that it was unacceptable to destroy the 
environment and created the environmental movement. My parents saw the 
pain of their parents and insisted that we create Medicare. Every 
generation has done something to build up and create the fabric that is 
what we know as the American dream. We now have to create a system of 
lifetime education and training that all can have access to, and we now 
have to deal with these social problems that have been too long ignored. 
We can do it in a way that permits us still to balance the budget and 
lift that burden from your future. So I say to the Congress, come back 
to common ground. We can do this.
    The Congress has recently passed the so-called rescission bill. You 
may not know what that means, but basically it's a down payment on our 
balanced budget. It cuts from the budget that we are presently spending 
in this year.
    This rescission bill, when they first sent it to me, caused me to 
veto it because it had unacceptable cuts in education, training, and the 
environment. When we went back to the table to work together, Congress 
came up with a revised bill that reflects our shared values. It permits 
us to cut $16 billion from this year's budget; to maintain our 
commitment to education, health care, and the environment; to invest in 
helping those people in California who still are suffering from the 
earthquake; to deal with the terrible tragedy in Oklahoma City; to keep 
our commitment to the Middle East peace process and a number of other 
things and still cut even more spending to continue our work toward 
balancing the budget.

[[Page 1294]]

    Now we share, I hope and believe, a basic commitment that each 
generation must take account of the accumulated wisdom of generations 
that have gone before as well as our new ideas. When we ignore the 
evidence of what has plainly worked in the attempt to fix what is 
plainly wrong, we pay a terrible price. We mustn't throw over, in a 
moment of partisan zeal, the common sense and bipartisan conclusions of 
our fathers and mothers, derived from lifetimes of experience with 
problems that we will only have to suffer through again if we ignore 
that experience.
    So I ask you as you come together in this wonderful Boys Nation 
experience and you debate these issues, imagine what you want your 
country to look like. Ask yourself what your vision of the future is 
like. Write it down on a piece of paper. What do you want America to 
look like in 20 years? What is your vision, and how will we achieve it? 
And what things do we have to do together? What things ought we to be 
for, whether we're Republicans or Democrats, whether we live in the 
Northeast or the far West, whether we're men or women and without regard 
to our racial or religious background--what are those things that we can 
say, this is what we want America to look like?
    That, my friends, is where we must find our common ground. And that 
is what I am determined to protect in this great debate to balance the 
budget.
    Thank you very much.

Note: The President spoke at 12:11 p.m. in the East Room at the White 
House. In his remarks, he referred to Ray Smith, chairman, American 
Legion National Americanism Commission; and Boys Nation officers Ron 
Engel, director, Jack Mercier, director of activities, and George Blume, 
legislative director.