[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 32, Number 22 (Monday, June 3, 1996)]
[Pages 969-977]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks to the Joint Session of the Louisiana State Legislature in Baton 
Rouge, Louisiana

May 30, 1996

    Thank you very much. I always enjoy coming to Louisiana and coming 
to this capitol building. I keep thinking I will somehow capture the 
secret of how you do it here. I thank you for that warm welcome. 
Governor Foster, thank you for your introduction. Mrs. Foster, Mr. 
Speaker, Senator Ewing, to your statewide elected officials, Senator 
Breaux and Congressman Jefferson, Congressman Fields, members of the 
Supreme Court, members of the State House and Senate, and all the guests 
who are here: I am very honored to be invited to speak to the Louisiana 
Legislature.
    I thank the Governor for coming up here with me. It's nice to see 
Republicans and Democrats standing together on the same little piece of 
ground here. [Laughter] I hope somebody got a picture of this. We're 
going to show it in Washington, DC.
    Somebody asked me if this was a good idea. I said, ``I don't know if 
it's a good idea for him, but anybody that comes to work in a 
camouflaged hunting outfit is my kind of guy.'' I like it. [Laughter]
    I do want you to know that I have not been in Baton Rouge all day, I 
started the morning in New Orleans. And we all went to lunch there, and 
I paid some good sales tax in Louisiana--[laughter]--had a wonderful 
meal; ate too much food. And what I ate was Louisiana crawfish, not 
Chinese crawfish.
    I'm happy to be here in a State I've spent a lot of time in, my 
neighboring State, a State that has shared so many of the challenges 
that we faced in the dozen years I was Governor of Arkansas and in the 
last 20 years I've been in public life. Indeed, you could argue that 
we've made a conscious effort, ever since the end of World War II, in 
our States and in other States throughout the South to catch up to the 
rest of America in providing opportunity in terms of jobs and education, 
and working together to get beyond the divisions of race, to go to a 
time when we could ask everybody to be responsible and everybody to work 
together more and put their divisions aside.
    And it's very interesting that now I think you can make a serious 
case that the whole country has to be on the mission that those of us in 
Southern States have been on for the last 50 years, because we know 
we've moved from the cold war to the global village; we know we've moved 
from an information age to one dominated by--I mean from an industrial 
age to one in which industry, agriculture, and all forms of human 
endeavor are dominated by information and technology.
    We know that the world is changing economically as much as it has in 
a hundred years. And Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft, in his recent 
book says that in terms of how we communicate with one another and share 
information, we're going through the biggest period of change in 500 
years, since Gutenberg printed the first Bible in Europe.
    And that means that if we want to preserve the American dream for 
our children and our grandchildren, that the whole country now has to 
work on the mission that, arguably, has been the mission of those who 
have been in the South for the last 50 years. We've got to have a system 
of education that is second to none in the world if we want our people 
to be able to compete and win in the global economy. And we have to find 
ways to create jobs in a competitive way. And we have to find ways for 
everyone to assume more responsibility for our common future and to do 
it together. We can't afford to be divided by race or gender or income 
or party or anything else anymore if it undermines the fundamental 
American mission of preserving the

[[Page 970]]

American dream for all of our people in a new world.
    And I see that so clearly as I travel around the world. I see that 
Americans are still looked up to by people around the world who think 
that we don't want to control their lives and we want to use our power 
to help everybody live in peace, who think that we are struggling to 
find ways for all of our folks to live together instead of defining our 
lives by who we're against and who we're not.
    In the South, you know, we see it in pretty stark racial terms, but 
it's gotten a lot more complicated than that. Our largest county in 
America, Los Angeles County, now has over 150 different racial and 
ethnic groups represented in one county in the United States. And the 
only way we're going to do well is if we all tack the same Constitution 
up on the wall, the same Bill of Rights on the wall, and say that's what 
we're going to live by; and if you will stand up and work hard and obey 
the law and share the same constitutional values and say we're all going 
to be responsible and do our best and work together, this country is 
going to do fine. We're going to do fine, but we have to do that.
    I do believe that the most important thing we can be doing today as 
a nation to create opportunity for our people is to give them the tools 
they need to succeed. In a global economy, the Government cannot give 
anybody a guaranteed success story, but you can give people the tools to 
make the most of their own lives. And education is the most important of 
all of those tools.
    I'd like to talk just a few minutes about how education fits into 
building a structure of opportunity for the 21st century, and what I 
believe the Nation's role is to the National Government, what I believe 
we should be doing through State and local government instead, and what 
we ought to leave to the private sector, both to groups like business 
and labor and just to individual citizens on their own. Because I think 
we need, in addition to a commitment to education, about which I want to 
say a little more in a minute, we need a system which will produce a 
growing economy, safe streets, a clean environment, and a Government in 
Washington that talks a lot more about what we need to do and a lot less 
about how we need to do it, that is leaner and more effective and 
focuses on those things which only we can do at the national level, and 
then does everything we can do to make it possible for people to do what 
should be done properly at the State level or the local level, or in the 
private sector.
    Now, I think it's clear that we're moving in that direction. If you 
look at where we are now compared to 3\1/2\ years ago, the country was 
mired in a recession, the slowest job growth since the Great Depression; 
we had quadrupled the national debt in 12 years; the deficit was 
projected to be about $300 billion a year. Now it is less than half of 
what it was when I took office. And I know you all see us fighting all 
the time over the balanced budget, but let me tell you something: We've 
now had 4 years of deficit reduction in a row for the first time since 
Harry Truman was President. We're going to balance the budget.
    We have these big differences about how we should do it, and we 
might still get an agreement this year. We can still do that. But 
whatever happens, with or without an agreement, that deficit is going to 
keep coming down. And we're going to take the burden of debt off of you 
and off of our children. And we're going to stop taking so much money 
out of the capital accounts of the country, so interest rates will stay 
down, and we can grow this economy. It is terribly important.
    The second thing we've been committed to doing is expanding our 
exports. And I know the Chinese crawfish story is a sore story, and I 
can tell you, I'll do what I can to address it. I wasn't just whistling 
``Dixie'' when I said that. But if you look at the big picture, our 
exports have gone up more than a third in the last 3 years. They're at 
an all-time high. The jobs we have tied to exports on balance tend to 
pay more.
    If you go down to the Port of New Orleans and just look at what's 
happened there, just in the last couple of years, it is obvious that our 
ability to trade with other countries is critical to our future. We've 
had more than 200 separate trade agreements, 21 with Japan alone. We're 
selling everything from United States rice in Japan to 
telecommunications equipment and cars, and in the 21 areas

[[Page 971]]

where we've made deals with them, our exports are up 85 percent in 3 
years.
    So America can compete with anybody anywhere in the world if we get 
not only freer trade but fair trade. That has to be our goal. That ought 
to be our goal with China. That's our goal with Japan. That's our goal 
with our neighbors in Latin America. That's our goal with everybody. We 
ask for no special treatment. But we do want fair rules that everybody 
follows, and we want to keep expanding America's ability to sell its 
products and services around the world.
    The third thing I believe we have to do is to continue to invest in 
the technologies of the future. You read a lot about the partisan 
squabbling in Washington, but I'd like to give the Congress credit for 
doing something almost unanimously in a completely bipartisan way in 
passing the telecommunications bill that we worked on for 3 years just a 
couple of months ago. The bill will literally create hundreds of 
thousands of jobs in the United States, good jobs, over the next few 
years, by making sure that we stay ahead of the curve in the 
technologies of the future. And we have to continue to do that.
    In Washington, one of our particular responsibilities, I believe, is 
in the whole area of biotechnology and how that relates to the whole 
communications and information revolution. We have to continue to invest 
in medical research, for example. We know that the 21st century, in 
large measure, will be the age of biology. We have people seriously 
telling us that we can raise the average life expectancy of people 
within a matter of a few decades to 100 years or more if we do it in the 
proper way. And we know that a lot of private enterprise cannot afford 
to do that unless we lead the way.
    So we have to keep doing that, looking to the future, expanding 
frontiers. Just as we went into space, we can't stop before we have 
explored the full frontiers of our ability to heal people and restore 
life and the capacity of people to do well and live out the fullest 
measure of their days. So we have to keep doing these things. And if we 
do, they'll have good results.
    We've got 8\1/2\ million more jobs than we had 3\1/2\ years ago, and 
we need more. But I say to you this proves that we can move forward and 
do it together. And that's a responsibility in Washington, to keep 
interest rates low, to keep the deficit coming down, to balance the 
budget, and then to target the money we do have in the best possible 
way.
    The other thing we've got to do, as I said, is to kind of reform the 
way the Government works. One of the things that all of the Governors 
wanted us to do, and the State legislators, was to pass the unfunded 
mandates law, which I signed a year or so ago, which says that we can't 
pass laws anymore in Washington and tell you what to do and, by the way, 
we want you to pay for it. Now, I hope that you will feel that in the--I 
hope you're feeling it now; I hope you'll feel it in the years ahead. I 
think it's a very important bill. I do not believe, having served 12 
years as a Governor, longer than I can legally serve as President, I 
will never forget what it was like to put my budget together every year 
and have to start with the bill I was getting from Washington, first.
    So we say if Washington wants to ask the States to do something, we 
need to help you pay for it. We need to pay for our own mandates and not 
ask you to pick up the tab. I think that's important.
    Perhaps more important, we're also reducing the size and the way the 
Government operates. The Government in Washington is 237,000, to be 
exact--237,000 people smaller today than it was the day I took the oath 
of office. It's now the smallest Federal Government in 30 years. As a 
percentage of the national work force, the Federal Government is the 
smallest it's been since 1933, before the New Deal.
    The era of big Government has been ended. We are reducing the size 
of Government. We are eliminating 16,000 of the 80,000 pages of Federal 
regulations outright, getting rid of them. We are changing a lot of the 
other regulations in ways that make it easier for people in the private 
sector to live with. We're cutting by 25 percent the total amount of 
hours businesses are going to have to spend complying with EPA paperwork 
requirements without lowering any environmental standards whatever.
    We have given now about 80 different businesses and State 
governments permission to throw out the EPA rule book if they

[[Page 972]]

can prove they're meeting the same clean air and clean water standards 
that the rules require. These are the kinds of things that we need to 
look at. How can we preserve our environment and grow our economy and be 
more efficient. And if there are ways to do it, Washington ought to be 
willing to let people do it.
    Let me just give you the agency that I'm proudest of. We know that 
most new jobs are going to be created by small- and middle-sized 
businesses. We have cut the budget of the Small Business Administration 
by 25 percent and doubled the loan volume. We have dramatically 
increased loans to women and minorities with no requirements in advance 
and without making a single loan to a single unqualified person and 
without undermining loans available for other people who would get them 
in the ordinary course of business, just by aggressively reaching out 
and saying to everybody we have to create more small businesses. That's 
the way we ought to grow this country, put the programs where the needs 
are, let people meet the needs, and do it in a way that is most 
efficient.
    I'm very proud of what the SBA is doing, and I think 10 years from 
now we're going to have hundreds and hundreds of thousands of jobs 
because people, like the people who have gotten these loans, had a 
chance to get their start. That's how Federal Express got started, 
Intel, and a lot of other places.
    Let me give you a few more examples. If you look at the crime bill, 
we're committed to a national goal of putting 100,000 police on the 
street, but we don't tell the police--the law enforcement officers how 
to do it. New Orleans has had a big drop in their crime rate. Jefferson 
Parish had a big drop in their crime rate, a huge drop.
    I was with Sheriff Lee today, he said that he had gotten, I think, 
28 new officers the first go-around and 21 the second. I don't have any 
idea who they are, how they were trained, or how they were deployed. 
That's not the business of the Federal Government. We just knew that we 
tripled violent crime in 30 years and only increased by 10 percent the 
number of law enforcement officials. So police officers were having to 
drive around in cars more when what we really needed to do was walk on 
the streets more, to be in the neighborhoods more, to work with people, 
to stop crime from happening in the first place, to deal with the 
community crime watch groups and the children and try to give them good, 
positive role models.
    So we said, ``Here's our goal; now you figure out how to meet it and 
see if it will work.'' And we've had 3 years in a row now of declining 
crime rates all across America because we had the right kind of 
partnership, a national goal of 100,000 more police officers; let the 
people at the local level decide how to do it. It is working. That is 
the sort of thing we need more doing. And I can't help but say if we 
can't provide safe streets in this country, no one will ever trust 
Government to do anything else. People have to feel secure in their 
homes and on their streets and in their schools.
    So these are the sort of things that I think we need to be doing. I 
want to make just one remark about the whole issue of welfare reform and 
how we're going to change the Medicare and the Medicaid programs. Our 
administration has also given more freedom from Federal rules for States 
to experiment in the health care areas than previous ones have. A lot of 
States have wanted to go, for example, to managed care programs for all 
their low-income folks on Medicaid, and we approved a number of those 
experiments.
    I have not been for a block grant program for Medicaid because I 
believe it is in the national interest to provide health care to seniors 
who have to go into nursing homes, to families with children with 
disabilities who might be cut out in hard economic times if we didn't 
have a national guarantee for them along with national money, to 
pregnant women, and to poor children. And if something happens and we 
can't do that, I think it would be problem. As a person who was Governor 
of a State with economic challenges not unlike yours, I can tell you 
that it would give me a headache if I had had to go through the awful 
economic years of the 1980's with Medicaid as a block grant. I just 
don't think it's a good idea.
    But I do think it is a good idea for us not to micromanage the 
program to death. And whatever comes out of this, you will see there is 
an enormous willingness to let the States have much more control over 
how the pro- 

[[Page 973]]

gram is run, but to maintain, from my point of view, a Federal guarantee 
that the populations should be covered and a guarantee that when times 
are getting tough you will get the money from Washington you need. 
Because if we block grant it and a big recession comes along and there's 
not enough money in the so-called reserve fund, then it will amount to 
an unfunded mandate, or you will be in a position of having to walk away 
from some of your folks that need it worse or having a mandated tax 
increase. And I just don't think it's right, and I don't think we ought 
to do it.
    In the area of welfare reform I do think we can, and I hope we will, 
get a Federal bill through that will give States much more flexibility 
in the area of how to move people from welfare to work. We all know what 
we believe in: We think there ought to be strict time limits, stiffer 
child support enforcement, requirements to work, and help to give 
parents the child care and health care they need so they can leave 
welfare behind without worrying that they're leaving their kids in a 
tight spot.
    You want people on welfare to do what you want the rest of society 
to do, to succeed as parents and as workers. And if you talk to any 
group of working people today you find that that's what they're often 
worried about. If they're working hard and doing well, but they're 
working longer hours at work, are they spending enough time with their 
kids, are their kids going to be okay?
    And that's what we want in America, I think, is for everybody to be 
able to succeed at home and at work, because if we have to choose one 
over the other we're in a terrible fix. If we don't succeed at work, we 
won't be competing and winning and keeping the American dream alive. But 
if we blow it at home, it's all for nothing anyway.
    I often say, you know, if we're lucky enough to know when we lay our 
head on the pillow for the last time before we leave this Earth, most of 
us won't say, ``Gee, I wish I had spent more time at the office.'' But 
we might say, ``I wish I had spent more time with my children; I wish 
there had been just a little more time to try to do this, that or the 
other thing right. I could have been a better father. I could have been 
a better mother. I could have done this better.''
    So when you think about this welfare reform issue, I ask you only to 
think about this: What we want for every American family is success at 
work and success at home, and our policies ought to be designed to 
promote responsibility, work, and good parenting. If we do that, we're 
going to do the right things, and we'll get a better country out of it.
    I want to compliment Senator Breaux for the plan that he and the 
Republican Senator from Rhode Island, John Chafee, have introduced. If 
Congress would send me a bill like that, that is tough on work and fair 
to our children, then I'd be happy to sign it. And if we get a welfare 
reform bill it will probably be because John Breaux has stayed after it 
and has been determined to get the Republicans and Democrats together 
when it seems so often that there's a determination to fight. And I 
thank him for that and you should be grateful for that, as well.
    Meanwhile, we'll just keep on telling States that they can have 
permission to get around cumbersome Federal rules to fashion their own 
welfare reform. Since I've been President we've given 38 States a total 
of 62 separate waivers from the Federal rules. Louisiana got permission 
to impose a 2-year time limit and to require minor welfare mothers to 
stay in school and to have their children immunized, two good 
requirements that I hope every State in the country will follow, because 
that means success at home and success at work. That's good for America.
    These 62 waivers--let me just give you an idea of what that means--
that compares with a total of 24 in the previous two administrations, 
and there's more on the way. We have--75 percent of the families in 
America today are living under welfare reform experiments. And that's 
one reason, along with the improving economy, that there are 1.3 million 
fewer people on welfare today than there were in 1993 and one million 
people fewer on food stamps today. The poverty rolls are down. And that 
is because of welfare reform and the improving economy. So I urge you to 
continue to work on welfare reform and to continue to do it in a 
bipartisan fashion.
    Now, let me again say that we don't always do things in a partisan 
fashion in Washington.

[[Page 974]]

We passed the bipartisan budget for this year that brings down the 
deficit, continues to invest in education, in the environment, in 
Medicare and Medicaid. We passed a tough antiterrorism bill. We passed 
that unfunded mandates bill. We passed the line-item veto, thank 
goodness, after talking about it for 15 years.
    So we are doing some things up there in a bipartisan fashion, and I 
will continue to try that, and I hope welfare reform is one of them. But 
meanwhile, you keep after it, because it is the symbol in America of 
what is wrong with Government but also what could be right about 
Government. And I think you can make a real difference at the State 
level. We'll do all we can to help you.
    Let me just say a couple of words about education. The magic of 
education obviously is what occurs in the classroom between the teacher 
and the child, supported by the family. You need, for it to work, a good 
principal; you need, for it to work, a good school district; you need, 
for it to work, a strong State system that has not only adequate 
funding, but high standards, high expectations.
    And then I believe that the National Government has a responsibility 
to help States deal with the populations that are especially 
troublesome, which we do through programs like the Chapter One program 
to help you if you have a disproportionate number of poor children, for 
example; through the Head Start program to get more of our kids in 
preschool programs; through the college loan programs, the college 
scholarship programs, which we've expanded to make college more readily 
available; and through the Department of Education's efforts to promote 
reform.
    I appointed a Governor to head the Department of Education, Dick 
Riley, the former Governor of South Carolina. And he has designed an 
approach that I think is the proper one, where we try to encourage and 
facilitate school reforms, but we don't mandate them. The Goals 2000 
program, for example, only requires that States have a plan to meet high 
national standards, and that they decide how they're going to do it and 
how they're going to implement it. And in return for that, they get some 
help and freedom from a lot of hassle that used to be in Federal rules 
and regulations.
    The school-to-work program, about which I want to say just a little 
more in a moment, is in some ways the most important thing you can be 
focused on in the short run of your economy, because it recognizes that 
we are one of the few advanced countries in the world that has no system 
in every State in America to move people who don't go to colleges into 
the work force with enough skills to get jobs where the incomes will 
grow instead of going down. And every State has got to figure out how to 
do that.
    The school-to-work program is just a device in which you can get 
people together who represent the technical schools, the community 
colleges, the private sector, people who are interested in this, to find 
a way to deal with it. But let me say, as I told the Speaker of the 
House and the President of the Senate earlier this afternoon, if you 
must look at the 1990 census you will see this issue screaming at you 
from the 1990 census, because it shows you that in the 10 years between 
1980 and 1990 the people with a high school degree or less who were 
younger workers got jobs where their incomes went down. The people with 
4 years of college or more get jobs where their incomes went up.
    But you didn't have to have a 4-year degree. What you had to have 
was the equivalent of 2 years further training after high school. So 
people who went to a vo-tech school, a community college, into the 
United States military, or got training on the job that amounted to 
adding to the skill levels by 2 years got jobs that were more solid, 
more predictable, where they had a better path to the future and rising 
incomes.
    So our school-to-work program doesn't tell you to do anything, it 
just provides a framework in which you can bring all the people in 
Louisiana to the table and a little bit of money so that you can 
increase the number of young people who don't just get out of high 
school and drop through the cracks.
    One of the things we have got to do is to show these young people 
who are dropping out of the system,who aren't voting, who feel cynical 
about it, that they can have a positive future if they won't give up on 
themselves after high school and they'll put them- 

[[Page 975]]

selves in a position where they can get skills and they can continue to 
learn for a lifetime.
    The last thing I'd like to say about that is that I believe that we 
at the national level should do more to increase access to education 
after high school, not to shrink it. That's why I think the most 
important tax cut we could give the American people is a tax deduction 
for the cost of all education after high school, whether it's by the 
parent or the child, whether it's in a 2-year program or a 1-year 
program or a 4-year program, because we need to set up a system where 
people can keep learning for a lifetime. That is a way that we don't 
make any decisions; the people make all of the decisions.
    The second thing I propose is, we take all of these Federal training 
programs, 70 or 80 of them, and collapse them all and put them in a big 
pot of money, and when somebody loses their job, just send them a 
voucher, and let them do what they want to with it--go to the local 
technical college; go to the local community college; get in whatever 
program is certified and approved--and then send some money to the 
States for the people that aren't in driving distance of a high-class 
program where you can make a decision on how to deal with those people 
if they're isolated in rural areas or whatever.
    But these are the kinds of things, it seems to me, that we can do 
together. Meanwhile, I just want to commend you for what you're trying 
to do on teacher salaries; I want to commend you for what you're trying 
to do on the whole issue of higher education. I know some people say--I 
was proud to hear the Governor say what he said about the regional 
average--some people say, you know, this education is not a money 
problem and to some extent it's not. But one of Clinton's laws of 
politics is, I'll bet you anything when somebody tells you it's not a 
money problem, they're talking about somebody else's problem, not 
theirs. Money is not a sufficient condition to improve education, but it 
is necessary. It is nowhere near enough, but it's important, and I 
applaud you for what you're trying to do.
    I also will say again, I think this whole issue of high expectations 
is important, and if I might just return for one moment to my Governor 
days, I spent I don't know how many hours in hundreds of schools as a 
Governor, must of them in my own State, but some of them in States all 
over the country. I got to where I could get the feel of a school within 
10 minutes after walking in. I've talked and listened to principals and 
teachers and students and parents, and we did something yesterday that I 
just wanted to mention, because Louisiana ought to be really proud. We 
honored the Blue Ribbon Schools of 1996 yesterday, and there were eight 
Louisiana schools on that list, which is higher than your population. 
They were from Gretna, Metairie, Shreveport, Abbeville, New Orleans, St. 
Joseph's Academy right here in Baton Rouge. What I was going to say 
about these schools is, they all have some things in common. They all 
have high standards, and they all have high expectations. They have 
systems of accountability and they reward people, and they deserve 
credit for that.
    But the thing that I have been most frustrated about when I was 
Governor and still as President is that we don't seem to have a system 
in education that you see in other forms of human endeavor where people 
are dying to learn from the folks that are doing it in a way that works. 
And anything you can do, whether it's setting up charter schools or 
permitting parents to have more judgment about their schools--we've 
passed a broad public school choice plan in Arkansas, we're trying to 
help 3,000 of these charter schools to be set up within public school 
districts, but groups of teachers can establish it on their own, 
anything that you can do that will help these schools at work get copied 
by others, I think that's one of the most important things that any 
State government could do in America, because every problem in public 
education has been solved by somebody somewhere.
    We could all sit here and tell each other stories until 3 a.m. 
tomorrow morning about it, and some of these stories will bring tears to 
your eyes. I was in a junior high school in--I'll never forget as long 
as I live--in Chicago in the highest crime rate area in the city before 
they started bringing the crime rate down. The principal of the junior 
high school was from my home State, from the Mississippi Delta. They had 
a school dress code. They had a mandatory attendance pol- 

[[Page 976]]

icy. They had an absolute zero tolerance for weapons. They had 150 
mothers and 75 fathers volunteering in that school every week. They had 
attendance rates, graduation rates, and test scores above the State 
average, and they had no violence in the toughest neighborhood in the 
whole city.
    We could all tell stories about that. Why can't--if that can be done 
in one place or two places or 100 places, or in these eight schools in 
Louisiana or in all the Blue Ribbon Schools, whey can't we do that 
everywhere? That cannot be done by the Federal Government. But if you 
wanted to do something that would revolutionize Louisiana forever, if 
you can figure out how to take what those eight schools we awarded 
yesterday, those Blue Ribbons are doing, and get it done everywhere, you 
will do something that no State has figured out how to do that I think 
would make a difference that is profound in the future of the children 
of this State.
    Finally, let me say I think that there is one other thing that we 
ought to help do, and that is to add to the basics for the 21st century 
computer literacy and access to the information superhighway. I have 
asked the Congress to give me a small amount of money, $2 billion, to 
help us work with the private sector in school districts all across 
America to make sure that by the year 2000, every classroom and every 
library in every school in America is connected to the information 
superhighway, and I think that is very, very important.
    If you just think about what that would mean, and if we do it in a 
way that guarantees the good software and properly trained teachers--the 
State of West Virginia has been hooking up a grade a year, for 6 years 
now. They're going into junior high school; they just got out of grade 
school. But one-third of all the money they've spent on computers and 
wiring and connections, one-third of all the money they spent on teacher 
training. So it's important that whatever we do to help put the rest of 
these together, the teachers are properly trained.
    That could also do more for our poor States and our poor school 
districts than anything else. Think about it. If you've got good 
equipment, good software, trained teachers in the remotest, most rural 
school district in the mountains of the Arkansas Ozarks or in the 
backwaters of Louisiana, you could have children doing research papers 
out of libraries in Australia on volcanoes anywhere in the world. You 
could have the quality of instruction coming to people that they could 
never get any other way, that today may be available only to people who 
go to the fanciest, most rigorous private and public schools in America.
    So I think that--I want you to all think about that. We ought not to 
start this new century without every classroom and every library hooked 
up to the Internet, without adequate software for these kids, without 
adequate computers for these kids, and without enough teachers being 
trained to make sure they can do it. We can leapfrog a whole generation 
of economic advancements in our public schools if we do this right. And 
there's no excuse for us in the South--we have waited too long for 
this--there is no excuse for us to walk away from this, especially in 
the Southern States.
    So I ask you to think about those things. And again, I say in 
closing, I saw my job when I became President to create a structure of 
opportunity for the 21st century, so that every American would be able 
to make the most of their own lives, and to find a way for us to work 
together with responsibility and a united community, instead of being 
divided.
    The results, I think, have not always satisfied me in Washington, 
But we are in better shape than we were 3\1/2\ years ago. And even in 
Washington--you look at it--every time we work together, we produce 
something that's good for America. When we work together, we do 
something that is good for America. When you work together, you will do 
something that is good for Louisiana.
    And I will say again, I believe that having a world-class education 
system that is available to all of our children is now the single most 
important thing we can do, not just for the South to catch up to America 
but for America to remain the strongest, most prosperous country in the 
world in the next century. And we owe that to our children.
    Thank you, and God bless you all.

[[Page 977]]

Note: The President spoke at 6:15 p.m. in the State Capitol. In his 
remarks, he referred to Gov. Mike Foster and his wife, Alice; H.B. 
Downer, Jr., speaker of the Louisiana House; and Randy Ewing, president 
of the Louisiana Senate. A tape was not available for verification of 
the content of these remarks.