[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 33, Number 5 (Monday, February 3, 1997)]
[Pages 112-117]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks at a Democratic Business Council Dinner

January 28, 1997

    Thank you very much. Well, thank you, Carol. Thank you, Steve. Roy, 
I won't ever make you stay in that bed again. [Laughter] I was simply 
trying to get even for all the nights he's bent my ear. [Laughter]
    I want to thank all the officers of the Democratic Party who are 
here, all the distinguished elected officials, and all the members of 
our administration who are here. And I want to thank you.
    Some of you may have noticed that I had a press conference today 
where there was one or two questions about campaign finance. [Laughter] 
And they said, ``Well, does it set a good example that you're going to 
this fundraiser tonight?'' And I said, ``Yes, I think it does, because 
there is no system which has been offered which is completely publicly 
funded from start to finish and funds the political parties. So we have 
to depend upon people to help us.''
    And this group, as Alan Solomont said earlier, has been responsible 
for dramatically increasing the number of business people and 
entrepreneurs all across America that have been a part of our party, 
broadening our

[[Page 113]]

base, giving us a chance to go forward. I thank you, Tom, for being 
willing to take over the leadership of it. I think it's a good thing if 
people like Tom or Steve, who had a very successful career in business 
and worked at the grassroots level, want to come in and be part of the 
Democratic Party.
    I also think it's terribly important that the President see as many 
people as possible, from as many walks of life as possible, from as many 
places in this country as possible, who actually know something about 
what's going on in the country and how people are living and what the 
challenges are.
    And as I said today, I never had anyone in 4 years who asked me to 
make a decision as President based on being a financial contributor, and 
I have never made such a decision. But I think we should listen to each 
other. I mean, you all have to listen to me all the time, and every now 
and then for me to take a little time to listen to you I think is pretty 
good because even Presidents need to learn. And almost no one learns 
when they're talking, and almost no one fails to learn when they're 
listening.
    So I think this is a good thing, and I welcome you here, and I hope 
you're glad to be here. And let me also say that--[applause]. Thank you. 
Having said that, I do want to compliment the new leadership of the 
party and the old leadership of the party for taking some unilateral 
initiatives to push the campaign finance reform system along by coming 
out against things that are legal that we're not going to do anymore 
because we want to try to push the system along, saying that if you 
can't vote, you shouldn't contribute, that companies that are primarily 
foreign-owned should not contribute, and that we would limit our large 
contributions. I think that's a good thing.
    But I also would urge you to help us pass a campaign finance reform 
bill that is fair, that is bipartisan, that does not give undue 
advantage to either party, and that gives challengers as well as 
incumbents a fair chance at the ears, the minds, and the hearts of the 
voters. I think that's a very important thing to do.
    We were talking around the table here at dinner--my impression is--
and I ran for Congress in 1974 and got beat by the way, but I did all 
right--but that was the first election under the old campaign finance 
reform, which was then the new campaign finance reform law. And my 
impression is that it did work to give people a greater degree of 
confidence that there were reasonable rules, regulations, and balance in 
the funding system.
    What's happened now is the explosion of technology and the 
escalation of cost and the multiplication of the way people communicate 
with one another and the proliferation of various groups who are doing 
it, and two Supreme Court decisions have basically swamped the old 
system.
    Now, there are very few of you who run enterprises who, even if 
you've been in business 20 years, could possibly be using the same 
communication system with the same budget in the same way that you were 
20 years ago. So it is unreasonable to expect that our Nation could have 
the right balance drawn between having a system that is largely 
privately financed but has adequate rules of disclosure, rules of 
conduct, and limitations, with a system that was written over 20 years 
ago, during which time we've had the biggest explosion in differences in 
the way people communicate and relate to each other politically than in 
any 20-year period certainly in the 20th century. So I hope you will 
help us get that done.
    The other point I'd like to make to you tonight is that you ought to 
be proud of what you have done. You know that the, the sort of 
superficial results: In '96 we had our first successful reelection for a 
President in 60 years. And someone, just to make sure I understood that, 
sent me the January 4, 1937 copy of Life Magazine, which I had framed 
and hung up in the White House so I don't forget that.
    We elected a Democrat, the first Asian-American Governor in the 
United States, something I'm very proud of. That's another thing I want 
to say. We welcome first-generation immigrant Americans into the 
Democratic Party--[applause]--we want them here. And it has been my 
personal experience--one of the richest aspects of being President and 
running for President twice has been getting to know in a personal way 
very large numbers of people who are first-generation Americans, who 
still come to our

[[Page 114]]

shores seeking opportunity and making opportunity. And virtually without 
exception, they give this country many times over what they ever ask 
from it. And I think that is a very good thing.
    We had the first woman Governor ever in the State of New Hampshire. 
And we carried New Hampshire for the second time, and that's only 
happened three times in the history of the State that a Democrat's won 
there twice. And I'm very grateful to them. We had 100 new Democratic 
legislators. We picked up some seats in the House.
    So we're--those things were good. But what I want you to do is just 
take a minute tonight to look behind that, to understand what I believe 
20, 30 years from now when people look back on this time, what they will 
about it. For almost 30 years, the other party has dominated 
Presidential politics, and the salient issues dividing the voters, I 
would argue, have been the power of appeals to people's differences 
based on race and religion and extreme political views as opposed to 
appeal to community.
    In the last 16 years, the argument of what we Democrats called, 
``trickle-down economics'' and what the other fellows called, ``supply-
side economics''--that is that if you cut taxes enough, you would 
generate so much revenue the budget would be balanced, and if it wasn't, 
it didn't really matter, and we quadrupled our debt in 12 years 
following that theory--and the argument that the Government is the 
problem--and so if we just chalked Washington full of people who hated 
their Government, things would be wonderful out in the country.
    If you go all the way back to '68 and watch the Presidential 
elections unfold, any analysis would say that those things were very 
powerful components of that. What has happened in just the last 4 years? 
Number one, we haven't abolished the divisive feelings Americans have 
about each other, but we've come a long way toward subordinating them to 
the idea that we are one community, and we're better off if we relate to 
each other across the lines that divide us, and it's a big part of our 
meal ticket to the 21st century. That is a huge, significant step 
forward.
    And even in places where people didn't agree with me about specific 
issues--for example, when I stood up for the proposition that 
affirmative action should be reformed but not abolished at this point in 
time--in California the voters disagreed in the vote on the initiative, 
but they voted for the Clinton/Gore ticket for reelection. Why? Because 
I think people know deep down inside, we've got to go forward together. 
That's a big thing. It's a significant change.
    Number two, the theory of trickle-down economics was tested and 
abolished in 1993 with our budget, our much maligned budget passed only 
by members of our party. Four years later, we know who was right and who 
was wrong. We have had--[applause]--the deficit went down by almost two-
thirds. Inequality decreased among working families for the first time 
in 20 years. We increased our investment in education and technology. 
And the economy produced 11 million jobs plus for the first time in a 4-
year term in history. So we replaced trickle-down economics with invest-
and-grow economics--in trade and reach out to the rest of the world. 
It's working. That is a significant thing.
    And the third thing we did, I talked about in the Inaugural. We said 
Government is not the problem. That's wrong. But Government is not the 
solution. We have to be the solution. Democratic Government is simply 
the gift our Founders gave us to meet our challenges and to pursue our 
dreams that must be met and pursued in common. And the primary function 
of Government today is to give people the tools they need to make the 
most of their own lives, to build strong careers, strong families, and 
strong communities and then to keep us the world's strongest force for 
peace and freedom and democracy.
    And we have done that. And you should be very proud of that. That is 
what you helped to create. There are other things. Social problems used 
to be rhetorical instruments of political campaigns which no one really 
expected to change very much. So whether you were tough on crime or not 
was largely a function of who could talk tougher in campaigns.
    We went out and wrote a crime bill based on what the police 
officers, the community patrol people, the community leaders in this 
country said would work to bring the crime

[[Page 115]]

rate down and to contribute to what people were doing in some 
communities already in America to bring the crime rate down. And we know 
that community policing, we know that tougher punishment for repeat 
offenders, and we know that giving young kids something to say yes to as 
well as something to say no to all work. And we've had now 4 years of 
declining crime. That is a very significant thing. Nobody has to believe 
that crime is inevitable anymore.
    We had--long before this welfare bill passed, we were out there 
giving States and communities permission to try new things that would 
move people from welfare to work, and 2.1 million people now have moved 
in only 4 years from welfare to work, the biggest decline in American 
history.
    And let me just say--I want to say some more about that in a minute, 
but my decision to sign the welfare reform bill was based in large 
measure on my unshakable conviction that we can go the rest of the way 
and that we have to build a community-based system where able-bodied 
people are not segregated, the unemployed, from those on welfare. We 
need a family- and work-oriented, community-based system of full 
employment for people who are capable of working.
    And of course, when the economy is down, there will be more people 
out of work. And when the economy is working, there will be more people 
in work. But you have to play a role in that, and I'll say something 
about that in a minute.
    This was a huge deal. Nobody believes that the welfare rolls have to 
grow forever now--2.1 million fewer people on welfare. So social 
problems are something more than the rhetoric of campaigns now, they're 
about how people live.
    We've also put what I think of as the right kind of family values 
back at the center of our policymaking. What is it we can do to help 
families cope with the challenges of family and work and family and 
culture. That's what the Family and Medical Leave Act was all about. 
That's what the V-chip and the television rating systems were all about. 
That's what all that was about. How are people going to juggle all these 
balls and still do the most important thing in life, which is to do a 
good job raising their children? It's the number one job any person ever 
has. How can we do that?
    Well, we're moving in the right direction on that. All these changes 
have been made in just the last 4 years. It's a good basis from which we 
have to go forward. And I'm going to give the State of the Union Address 
in a few days, and I will focus on what I hope we can do together, 
working with the Republicans to balance the budget, to put education 
front and center on our national agenda so we have national standards 
and we open the doors of college to all, to build on this families first 
agenda, and to keep the crime rate coming down and to expand health care 
coverage and to reform the systems of Social Security and Medicare so 
they're there for the next generation and they don't bankrupt the budget 
and to continue to reach out to the rest of the world.
    And this is the last thing I'd like to say. Because I believe we 
should talk, and I should also listen as well as talk, I always tell 
people who contribute to our efforts that you have even more 
opportunities and responsibilities to make your voice heard. And I would 
like to just say two things. There are many things I will ask for your 
help on, but I want to serve notice there are two things that I will ask 
for your help on.
    Number one relates to what Mr. Grossman used to do before he came to 
the party. I said if Steve Grossman could run AIPAC and keeps those 
folks together, he ought to be able to unify the Democrats. And all the 
members of AIPAC thought that was funny.
    But one of the things that we have to recognize is, there is no such 
thing in the 21st century as being strong at home and, therefore, 
saying, you don't care what happens abroad. We cannot be strong at home 
unless we are also strong abroad. And that is about more than the 
defense budget. That means they're going--that means, among other 
things, now that they're reforming the United Nations, we have new 
leadership, we got to pay the money we owe them. We can't any longer be 
the biggest debtor at the U.N. We got to show up and pay our way. We 
can't expect to lead the world if we won't even do the minimum required 
of a responsible country.

[[Page 116]]

    And number two, we have to invest some measure of our money. We 
spend less of our budget than any great country in the world on foreign 
affairs, but we have to spend enough to enable our country to lead the 
way for peace and freedom. And I hope you will help us convince the 
Congress of that and our fellow citizens.
    Second, and closer to home, I know that this welfare reform bill can 
be made to work. I think we have to change some of the provisions 
relating to immigrants and some other things, but the substance of the 
bill simply says, if you're able-bodied, within 2 years you have to move 
from welfare to work. And if you do, as Governor Romer said, we'll give 
you more child care; we'll support you in other ways; we'll keep the 
health care guarantee for your kids; we'll help you with transportation. 
But you have to do it.
    Now, you might say that is inherently impossible because last year 
in a boom economy there were six applicants for every entry-level job 
opening in Chicago and nine for every entry-level job opening in St. 
Louis. So how can you do that? The answer is, I can't, but you can. And 
now every State in the country has the power today to take the welfare 
check and give it to an employer as a wage and training supplement for a 
year or more and, if it's a small business employer, to keep covering 
the children with health care. Every one.
    I've asked the Congress to adopt a special tax credit that would 
give every employer who hires someone certified from welfare up to 
$10,000 a year in salary a 50 percent tax credit. Those two things 
together are more than enough incentive for people to marginally add to 
the work force if they've got a healthy business and they want to do 
something for their country.
    And you think about it. If small business, medium-sized and large, 
and for-profit and private institutions like churches and community 
groups, if we said--businesses saying, ``For every 25 employees I've 
got, if I have these incentives at the grassroots level, I'll hire 
somebody off welfare,'' this problem would go away tomorrow. Oh, yeah, 
there would be people who would have a hard time making it, and they'd 
fall on and off the rolls, and we'd have to work with education and 
training and preparing people. But the problem, as a big problem, would 
go away. And we would have what I have always wanted, which is a 
community-based system that treats all people who are out of work with 
dignity--dignity by giving them the support they need for their children 
and dignity by giving them the expectation that if they're able-bodied 
they will work when they can. [Applause]--a good thing to do.
    But I just would say to you, we have to set an example here. And we 
are going to have to go out and find the people to do this. And all of 
you are going to have to help me do this. And I'll have an organized way 
of doing that which I will explain to you over the next several days and 
give you a better chance to participate in it. But that's what being a 
Democrat means. We can be pro-business and have a social conscience. We 
can be for very high standards in school and still be compassionate for 
people that need a hand up.
    We need to do things that prove that you don't have to make false 
choices--you can grow the economy, protect the environment, you can 
balance the budget and invest in education, you can be strong at home 
and be strong abroad. And we can build a unifying vision that will bring 
this country together and move it forward.
    That's what I want you to be a part of. I want you to be excited. I 
want you to be happy. I want you to be proud to be a part of what we're 
trying to do. And I want you to be a part of what we're trying to do. 
You are very welcome.
    Thank you, and God bless you all.

Note: The President spoke at 8:12 p.m. at the Sheraton Carlton Hotel. In 
his remarks, he referred to Carol Pensky, treasurer, Steve Grossman, 
national chair, Gov. Roy Romer, general chair, Alan Solomont, national 
finance chair, Democratic National Committee; and C. Thomas Hendrickson, 
chair, Democratic Business Council.

[[Page 117]]