[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 32, Number 13 (Monday, April 1, 1996)]
[Pages 556-563]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks to the Community in Cincinnati

March 23, 1996

    Thank you so much. Thank you for the wonderful welcome. Thank you, 
Mayor Qualls, for the kind things you said, for making me feel so 
welcome here, for your outstanding leadership for Cincinnati. And 
congratulations on the recent success of your education and your stadium 
referendum. That was a very impressive thing.
    Thank you, Father Hoff, for making me feel so welcome here at 
Xavier. You know, I graduated from Georgetown. I tell everyone I'm the 
closest Baptist you'll ever get to a Jesuit. [Laughter] And I'm 
delighted to be here. The Jesuits have always been famous for their 
humility. [Laughter] I hope Father Hoff doesn't get in trouble for 
saying that now that I had seen the Pope three times I could finally 
come to Xavier. [Laughter] But I'm trying to move up in life, and I 
enjoyed it. [Applause] Thank you.
    I want to say a warm word of thanks to my good friend Senator John 
Glenn. Hillary and I admire John and his wonderful wife, Annie, so much. 
I want all of you to know that one of the most challenging jobs we've 
had in Washington in the last 3 years is to figure out how to downsize 
the Government without undermining the quality of service we're giving 
to the American people. And we now have the smallest Federal Government 
in 30 years. It's 205,000 people smaller than it was when I took office. 
By the end of this year it will be the smallest Federal Government since 
John Kennedy was President.
    But if you want to do that in ways that first, are humane to the 
employees involved, that do the maximum amount through early retirement 
or give the employees time to find other jobs and generous severance 
packages and don't hurt public services, it takes a really careful 
strategy. And the leadership of John Glenn, from his committee, telling 
us how to do this and helping us do it, was absolutely essential. And 
the whole country is in his debt for that and for many other things, and 
I wanted to say that in front of his constituents today so that you 
could know he deserves a lion's share of the credit for what we did.
    I'd like to thank the young musicians for playing ``Hail to the 
Chief'' so well. Thank you very much. I'd also like to say that Felisha 
Coady can sing for me any time. I thought she was great.
    You know, I love coming to Cincinnati today because Cincinnati 
really disproves something that Mark Twain said about you a long time 
ago. [Laughter] Remember what Mark Twain said about Cincinnati: ``If the 
world would end, I'd come to Cincinnati, because everything happens here 
10 years later.'' [Laughter] That's not true.
    Cincinnati is ahead of the times in many ways. I saw it today in 
looking at the remarkable work that you're doing with the communications 
between the school systems here and the universities and the business 
community, trying to help every young person succeed. I saw it in the 
votes that were cast in the referendum. I see it in the growth of the 
phenomenal businesses you have here.
    I see it in your successful obsession with basketball. I see it in 
many ways. So I am honored to be here today. And what I want to talk to 
you about today is something that will affect the lives of every person 
in this audience, but especially the young people. And let me begin with 
a little background.
    I ran for President in 1992, having been Governor of my State for 12 
years, because I was literally obsessed with trying to deal with all the 
sweeping changes going on in our Nation and world in a way that would 
allow us as a people to achieve three critical objectives. One is, I 
wanted then and I want now for this country to go into the 21st century 
in a way that every American who is willing to work for it will have a 
shot at the American dream.
    Secondly, I wanted to maintain the leadership of the United States 
at the end of the cold war as the world's strongest force for peace and 
freedom, for security and prosperity.
    And thirdly, I wanted to see this country come together around its 
basic values, not be divided as it too often is, especially in election 
season. If you were to ask me 3 years later what the most important 
lesson as President I have learned, it is this, simply: When we are 
divided, we defeat ourselves; when we work together, America always 
wins.

[[Page 557]]

    And so I began to work on these objectives. I believed that we 
needed a new economic policy. I believed we needed a new social policy 
that emphasized personal responsibility as well as giving people the 
opportunity to escape the problems before them. I believed that we 
needed a new, aggressive, sharply focused policy in the world that got 
America more fair trade agreements and reduced the threats of not only 
nuclear war but terrorism and the spread of weapons of mass destruction. 
And I thought we had to dramatically change the role of Government, to 
make it smaller and less bureaucratic and less burdensome but still very 
strong and effective in working with the private sector to create an 
environment in which individual citizens and families and businesses and 
schools and community groups could make the most of their own lives by 
working together.
    Now, 3 years later, you see the incredibly impressive dimensions of 
the time in which we are living, including some things that seem to be 
paradoxical. And so let me describe this time as I see it to explain why 
I've come here to talk about this issue of not only our responsibility 
in Government, but business' responsibility to make a better future for 
the United States and for the working people of America.
    Consider just the last 3 years. Three years ago we had much higher 
unemployment. The jobs we were creating were overwhelmingly lower paying 
jobs. The deficit was more than twice as big as it is now. Well, after 3 
years the good news is that the deficit is half of what it was 3 years 
ago; that our economy has produced over 8.4 million jobs; that in 1995, 
most of those jobs actually paid above average wages, not below, those 
new jobs; we've had 3 years in a row of record new formations of small 
businesses; our trade is at an all-time high with other countries; 
interest rates have been low for home mortgages, so home ownership's at 
a 15-year high.
    That is the good news, and that is good news. America has recovered 
our lost lead. We now lead again the world in the sales of automobiles 
and semiconductors. Every year there is a World Economic Forum in Europe 
that votes on the most productive economies in the world. After we had 
slipped to fifth 4 years ago, for the last 3 years we've been voted 
first by a panel of international economists again. America is number 
one. That's good news.
    If you look at where we are with our social problems--the crime rate 
is lower, the welfare rolls are lower, the food stamp rolls are lower, 
the poverty rate is lower, the teen pregnancy rate has dropped--what has 
gone up is child support collections in the last 3 years. I think that's 
very hopeful for all of us.
    Now, we'll never come together again until we acknowledge some 
truths, though, the other side of this time of change. First, on the 
social side, all of those things are lower, but they're all still too 
high. They're all still too high. And I'm not going to talk at great 
length about that today, but I will say this: If we know what brings the 
crime rate down, which is more police officers on the street and 
community policing, effective partnerships in the community, and giving 
our young people something to say yes to as well as something to say no 
to, we ought to do more of it, not less of it. We shouldn't turn away 
from that.
    If we know now, because I have given the States and localities more 
freedom to experiment in the area of welfare in 3 years than occurred in 
the past 12 years combined, even though the Congress has still not 
passed welfare reform legislation that is both tough on work and good 
for children, almost three-quarters of the people on welfare in America 
today are under welfare reform experiments, because our executive branch 
has just told the States to have at it. And if we know what works, which 
is investing in children, providing work alternatives, being tough and 
requiring people to go to work, but making sure there is a job there and 
making sure the kids aren't punished, then we ought to do more of it, 
not less of it. That's what we ought to do. We need to do that.
    But let me come back now to the economy. How do you square all of 
those good statistics I just gave you with the fact that you constantly 
read articles about businesses downsizing; you constantly read articles 
about people who've worked harder and harder without a raise in years 
and years; you constantly see from your own experience that

[[Page 558]]

there are communities that have not been touched by any economic 
recovery? How can those two things be squared?
    I want to focus on that today and what everybody's responsibility 
is. The truth is that the good news is true and so is the bad news. So 
are the problems. They're both true. Why? Because we are entering a new 
economy that is so different that we're going through the period of most 
profound change that we've been through in 100 years. It was 100 years 
ago when most Americans stopped living on the farm and started living in 
towns, cities; 100 years ago when most people stopped working on the 
farm and started working in factories or in businesses that supported 
factories or depended upon them.
    And when that happened, there was a great uprooting of the patterns 
of life in America and a lot of people had untold new opportunities and 
a lot of people had a lot of money that they never had before. And a lot 
of people were left out in the cold and sort of felt like they were 
twisting in the wind.
    And America developed what was called then a new progressive 
movement--and its first embodiment was a great Republican President, 
Theodore Roosevelt--which began to ask the question: What are we going 
to have to do together to reap the benefits of the industrial era when 
most of us are now living in towns and cities, not living in the country 
anymore, in order that every American will be treated fairly and we can 
grow stronger together? That's what the big debate was.
    That debate went on for 50 years from the late 1800's arguably until 
the end of World War II, when with the GI bill and a lot of other 
things, the United States of America built the greatest middle class the 
world has ever known and we had 30 years in which all Americans' incomes 
were growing, whether they were in the poorest part of our income scheme 
or the wealthiest part. And we had a very strong, growing country that 
was growing together.
    Then along comes the information and technology revolution. And now 
most economic markets are not national, they're international, the 
market for money, the market for products, the market for services, more 
and more global. Now most work is done with the mind, not with muscle, 
even in factories. Now, because of the information revolution, the 
nature of the workplace itself is changing.
    How could I reduce the Federal Government by 205,000 people and 
nobody know it in Cincinnati? Why? Because of the digital chip. Because 
fewer people can do more work that is related to information gathering 
and dissemination. It is the most sweeping change in 100 years.
    Bill Gates, the great computer genius who founded Microsoft, says 
that the digital chip is the most significant change in communications 
in 500 years since Gutenberg printed the first Bible in Europe. And that 
explains how you can have all this basically good news and still hear 
these gripping stories of people who are caught in the crosswinds of 
change.
    There are basically three groups of Americans who are caught in 
those crosswinds. Number one, there are people who live in isolated 
inner-city neighborhoods and isolated rural neighborhoods who have felt 
no economic recovery because they don't have new jobs there; it's hard 
to get the investment in.
    Number two, there are the people, principally those in the bottom 
half of the hourly wage earners of America, who work harder and harder 
and don't seem to ever get a raise because they don't have a special 
educational skill that a rich country can pay high rewards to in a 
global economy where people who live for things we can't live on can 
send products into our markets.
    And number three, there are these people who have worked all their 
lives for big companies that are now being downsized either because they 
have to, to survive, or because if they do it, they can make more money 
because they don't need as many people, especially in middle management, 
anymore. And you've been seeing a lot of their gripping stories. A lot 
of them are about my age.
    You know, when you're 50 years old and you've worked for the same 
company for 25 years and you've got two kids about to go to college and 
you get laid off and you think, ``My goodness, I'll never get a job 
paying this again; how am I going to send my kids to college,'' it's not 
a very comfortable thing for

[[Page 559]]

somebody to say, ``Well, relax, the President just signed a 
telecommunications bill and it's going to create 3 million jobs in the 
next few years; go to work for Sprint or MCI.'' And you say, ``But I'd 
have to go 500 miles away and I've got this home mortgage and I've got 
these two kids that are just about to get out of high school and what am 
I supposed to do?''
    So the good news is true, folks, and it's important. The United 
States has created 8.4 million jobs in the last 3 years and 1 month. And 
during that time the people in the other big six economies of the world 
have created a net zero. Three of the countries have created a few 
thousand jobs, three of the countries have lost a few thousand jobs; 
they netted out zero. So the big seven economies of the world have 
created 8.4 million jobs in the last 3 years, all of them in America. I 
wouldn't give that up for anything in the world. That's nothing to 
sneeze at. That's something we should want.
    So the question is, how do we do today what was done 100 years ago? 
How do we keep the dynamism of the American economy? How do we go 
forward into the future with great confidence? How do we do it together 
in a way that enables us to achieve our objectives? Every American 
willing to work for it has a shot at the American dream. We have 
stronger families and better childhoods for all of our people. How are 
we going to do that? That is what I want to talk about today.
    Yes, the Government has certain responsibilities. I've described 
some of the things we have already done. There are other things that we 
should do in Government. We ought to finish the work of balancing the 
budget to get interest rates down even further in a way that will enable 
us to invest and grow our economy. We ought to do that without cutting 
our investments in things like education and the environment and 
research and technology and college loans and college scholarships, the 
things that will grow the economy. We should do that, and we can do it.
    We ought to pass some tax relief for average families, and I think 
the most important tax benefit we could give America at a time when 
education is critical to income in the future is to give every American 
family a deduction of up to $10,000 a year for the cost of college 
education. I believe that.
    Now, there are other things that we ought to do. But let's face it, 
one of the things that we have done in downsizing the Government is to 
become even more reliant on the private sector. A far higher percentage 
of the new jobs created in our administration are private sector jobs, 
as compared with the jobs created in the previous 12 years. I want it 
that way. But if that is true, that means that this new era puts even 
more responsibility on that private sector, not only to grow and do 
well, but to help in dealing with the dislocations, the problems, and 
the challenges that this new age imposes upon us.
    That's what I want to talk about today. And I don't want to ask you 
if you agree with me on all these things, but at least I want you to 
think about this, because we have to succeed as citizens, as workers, 
and as parents in order for America to grow. We all have mutual roles. 
And let me begin again by saying what I said before: Our business 
community is the engine of economic growth that's the envy of the entire 
world. The most fundamental responsibility of any business in a free 
enterprise system is to make a profit. That's how they hire people and 
pay them. That's how they serve their consumers. So that's important.
    But we recognize that there are other responsibilities as well. Some 
businesses are in trouble and some businesses are so small they can only 
worry about the bottom line. But what I want to say to you today is that 
a lot of businesses in America today never make the headlines because 
what they're doing is good in trying to help people cope with all these 
changes. And in trying to help their employees cope with these changes, 
they're actually making more money.
    So as we look ahead, we should ask ourselves what is the role of 
Government in this new era? It should be smaller, it should be less 
bureaucratic, but it should be strong enough to help to create a climate 
which enables people to make the most of their own lives. What is the 
role of business in this new era? It should first and foremost do well, 
make money so you can hire people and contribute. But it should, 
whenever possible, do

[[Page 560]]

well in a way that strengthens families and grows the middle class in a 
way that develops a loyal, productive work force for the business and 
keeps the middle class alive so we can support all these businesses by 
buying the goods and services that they produce. That is the balance 
that we must seek to achieve.
    It is also true that none of us exists in a vacuum. Business leaders 
would be the first to say that they are not motivated solely by economic 
considerations. I just talked about the work here done in Cincinnati in 
trying to develop the capacities of our young people here. And John 
Pepper of Procter & Gamble was there. They've invested a lot of money in 
this. I don't know if it helps their bottom line in the short run, but 
in the long run it's the morally right thing to do. I think it will turn 
out to be good for the company, by building a community that's positive 
to live in.
    The other day I was with three grocery store chains who announced 
that they were going to give up all their vending machines for 
cigarettes because they couldn't enforce the law that says it's illegal 
for young people under the age of 18 to smoke and they didn't want to be 
a part of it so they're just going to give up the income. They're just 
going to give it up.
    So I think it's important to recognize that there are a lot of 
incredibly good things going on in the private sector today. And that's 
what I want to talk to you about, because the people of this country are 
our most important asset. And our ability, first of all, to develop the 
educational capacity of our people, and secondly, to develop good values 
and a good sense of partnership in every workplace in America is going 
to be critical to our future. Because you look at the work--you can move 
technology anywhere. You can now move information anywhere. You can move 
money anywhere in the flash of an eye. What we have that is special--
what you have that is special in Cincinnati are what's been done here 
already and the people who live here. That's what's special. That's the 
key to the future.
    So I believe that the Government has a responsibility to create a 
framework in which the economy can grow. And the Government has a 
responsibility to help people who fall between the cracks in this new 
era.
    The private sector also has some challenges facing it, and many 
companies are meeting those challenges. Let me just mention five; one or 
two were mentioned by Senator Glenn. First and most important, we have 
to encourage companies to be more family friendly, because most parents 
work, most parents work. Most of us who are parents believe that that's 
still our most important job. For all my responsibilities to you, I 
still think it's my most important job.
    So we have got to work for a country where people can succeed at 
home and at work. Let's take Procter & Gamble. I'll talk about their 
policy. When a P&G employee gives birth to a child, she gets a year of 
maternity leave; then eligible for up to 5 years of reduced work hours 
to have more time to care for the child. Now, arguably, that costs some 
money. But, arguably, you get it back in a fanatically loyal employee 
who can stay with the company for a longer period of time. Not every 
company can afford to do that, but those who do wind up doing pretty 
well. The company offers direct subsidies for child care, so that 
children can have a more safe and secure environment.
    The first major bill I signed into law was the Family and Medical 
Leave Act, which requires most companies except the very smallest ones 
to at least give people some time off without losing their job when 
there's a baby born, a sick parent, or some other kind of family 
emergency. I think that that is a very important principle. If we want 
to succeed in a world where most parents have to work, then the 
workplace has to be more family friendly. And the Government and all the 
rest of us should do whatever we can to give the incentives and the 
encouragement to the business sector to make those workplaces family 
friendly.
    Secondly, we need to encourage companies, even the smaller 
businesses, to find ways to give their employees access, at least, to 
health care and to retirement. You know, now that more and more people 
are working for smaller companies, we have a smaller percentage of 
people in the work force with health insurance tied to their job than we 
did 10 years ago. And we're the only wealthy

[[Page 561]]

country in the world that doesn't provide a system for health insurance 
for all working families when they're under 65; Medicare takes care of 
it for everybody over 65.
    This is a big challenge. The same thing is true with pensions. More 
and more small businesses are developing what are called defined 
contribution plans instead of defined benefit plans. And more and more 
people now are changing jobs before they stay 10 years on the job and 
before their pension vests.
    So what do we have to do? We don't want to stop the dynamism in the 
economy. If you try to freeze things, unemployment will go up. We want 
to keep creating jobs. So what do we have to do? We have to develop 
health care packages that people can carry around with them from job to 
job. We have to make it easier for small businesses to take out pension 
plans for the owners and the employees. And we have to develop some 
portability provisions so that people can carry those pension plans 
around, including being able to stop contributing in the period when 
they're unemployed and pick it up again, and make up the difference. 
We've got to do some things like that if we want people to do well over 
the long run.
    I met a young man at the airport when I came in today, wrote me a 
letter about his mother not being able to get health insurance, and it 
led to his mother being able to get health insurance. But the Kassebaum-
Kennedy bill that Senator Glenn spoke about is the first step along the 
way. It doesn't solve all the problems, but it's a first step along our 
journey to developing a system that will enable the economy to continue 
to grow and provide some economic security for families who need it. It 
simply says that you can't automatically lose your health insurance when 
you change jobs or when somebody in the family gets sick. That's what 
health insurance is for, to cover people when they get sick.
    We also need to make it easier for small businesses to buy in the 
insurance pools that are large so they can buy insurance more cheaply. 
But we also need to encourage and laud and lift up companies that 
provide these kinds of benefits. Starbucks Coffee is a big chain now in 
America; it hasn't always been a big chain. But they provide health 
insurance for their employees, quite unusual in that kind of business. 
And why do they do it? Well, they think it's the right thing to do, but 
they also conducted an analysis of why there was so much turnover in 
that line of work. And one reason was all these young people who work 
for them said, we can't get any health insurance, we would stay a year 
and go do something else.
    So they discovered that it cost them $1,500 to train a new employee, 
which meant if they bought health insurance for their work force--most 
of whom are young, healthy, and single--and they stay 3 years instead of 
one year, they would make up all the money and still some. So sometimes 
it's possible to do right and do well, and we should encourage that.
    The other thing we need to do is to do more to encourage companies 
and to challenge them to invest in their employees. I got a letter the 
other day from a man who is head of a big high-tech company who said the 
single most significant challenge facing the American people today in 
the area of education is reeducating the existing work force; it's the 
only way to get incomes up. We have got to help people do that.
    Now, there are lots of companies that are doing this. The American 
people need to know about it. We need to lift them up. Others need to be 
encouraged to follow their lead. They should get telephone calls and ask 
how they did it and made money besides. You take one of my favorites, 
Harley-Davidson, because they brought motorcycles back to America; they 
set up basic reading, writing, and math skills instruction at an on-site 
learning center and they made money out of doing it because their 
employees became more productive.
    Xerox, a lot of other companies, do this. United Technologies will 
permit a person who is an employee there to go back to school for any 
degree program, whatever, it doesn't even have to have anything to do 
with their job, and they'll pay a lot of the tuition and give them half 
the time off.
    We need to look at what the policies of good companies are and lift 
these companies up and ask ourselves: Is there something the Government 
can do, something the commu- 

[[Page 562]]

nity can do to make it easier for others to do this? But this is an 
important thing.
    The fourth important point, I believe, is to encourage business to 
work in greater partnership with their employees. That can mean a lot of 
things. It can mean a greater voice in the production process, it can 
mean good faith in collective bargaining, it can mean gain-sharing of 
all kinds, sharing the benefits when times are good if you have to share 
the burden when times are bad. It can mean that when there has to be 
layoffs, it can mean having policies that really work, to at least let 
the employees know that you're doing your best to make sure they can 
move from this life to another one.
    I was at an interesting company in California a couple of weeks ago, 
Harman International, where they make a lot of electronic speakers for 
sound systems for automobiles and offices and homes and everything else. 
There's great fluctuation in their orders. But to try to keep their work 
force whole and loyal, they set up a whole new business called Ole, Off 
Line Enterprises, and they used all of their scrap materials to let 
their employees design products having nothing to do with their main 
line of work and then sell them. And they were able to keep a couple of 
hundred employees all the time that otherwise would have gone out on the 
street, so they can call them back without wrecking their lives. It made 
the company money, but it also made the company a world reputation among 
the work force that they cared about them and they were trying to keep 
them whole in the tough times. We need to encourage things like that and 
support them.
    If you look at what Cinergy here in Cincinnati did, they had to trim 
their work force by 10 percent, and they did it by the beginning of this 
year without laying off a single, solitary soul. That's an important 
thing. They did it through early retirement incentives, through 
voluntary generous severance packages, and they have now put in a policy 
of no layoffs between now and 1999.
    Now, the Government can't make all companies do this; for one thing, 
not every company could do it. There are too many differences in the 
market. But we all ought to be out here knowing that these things are 
going on and that they're good, and we ought to be able to get this 
information out all across America, so when other companies are 
confronted with these challenges, they will ask themselves: Are there 
things I can do to support the economic security of the families of the 
people who are working for me? Are there things the Government could do 
not to make me do this, because you can't freeze the future, but at 
least to create a climate in which it would be easier for me to do this 
and still do well?
    The last point I want to make is that every company has a duty to 
provide a safe workplace. Now, a lot of people see this as the 
Government's duty, and it is to some extent. For 25 years or more the 
Occupational Safety and Health Administration has had the responsibility 
of providing a safe workplace, and I've opposed the attempts in the 
Congress to weaken OSHA and to undermine its budget and to make it turn 
back on its mission.
    Fundamentally, what you want is for the value of every company to be 
a safe and healthy workplace. You take Motorola. I'm proud that we 
worked with Motorola to open up the Japanese market to their cellular 
telephones and help them create jobs in America. But I'm even prouder in 
some ways that because of their own safety programs, their own safety 
training--things that Government does not require them to do--injuries 
are 70 percent below the industry average in those plants. That's the 
sort of thing we ought to encourage.
    OSHA ought to be out doing more of what we're trying to do now, 
making partnerships with companies and saying, look, if you can figure 
out how to have a safer, better workplace, we could care less, you can 
throw the rulebook away. We're interested in results. We want the 
employees to feel good when they go to work every day. We want them to 
participate in making the workplace safer.
    These are the elements of corporate citizenship that together with 
the proper policies from the Government will enable us to move into the 
21st century with the American dream alive for everybody. Just think 
about it, five simple things: family friendly workplaces; health care 
and pensions; training and education; more partnership; and safe and 
healthy workplaces. Five challenges that the

[[Page 563]]

rest of us ought not only to encourage the business community in America 
to meet, but to help them to meet wherever we can.
    Soon I will announce--I will invite, excuse me, the chief executive 
officers of some of our country's best companies to come to Washington 
for a conference on corporate citizenship before I leave for Japan and 
Russia next month. And we are going to talk about the good things that 
are being done and how we can spread them. We're going to talk about not 
how we can complain about the disruptions that the global economy is 
bringing to America, but how we can do something about it to guarantee 
more economic security to the American families that are out there doing 
the best they can and working hard.
    Let me say again, there is no running away from this future. We 
don't have to run away. This country can compete and win and maintain 
its standard of living and enhance it. And that is the only way we can 
maintain our standard of living and enhance it. You will not find a 
country that has run away from the global economy who is doing as well 
as the United States is. We can't run away. And we cannot do anything 
that will try to freeze the dynamism of the economy; otherwise we won't 
be able to create jobs.
    But we can lift up those companies that are doing a good job. We can 
ask ourselves relentlessly, what sort of Government policies in 
Washington, in Columbus, or in Cincinnati can help companies to do 
better? And we can continue to work together to create a climate in 
which every single workplace will want to be identified with these five 
characteristics.
    I say again, we have got to do this together. The thing that works 
in the world we're living in is working together. And when America works 
together, we always win.
    Thank you, and God bless you.

Note: The President spoke at 12:28 p.m. in the Schmidt Memorial Field 
House at Xavier University. In his remarks, he referred to Mayor Roxanne 
Qualls of Cincinnati; Rev. James E. Hoff, president, Xavier University; 
and John E. Pepper, chief executive officer, Procter & Gamble, and co-
chair, Cincinnati Youth Collaborative.