[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 34, Number 23 (Monday, June 8, 1998)]
[Pages 1036-1039]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks to the SAVER Summit

June 4, 1998

    First let me say a special word of thanks to the Members of Congress 
who are here and especially those who sponsored the legislation which 
created this summit. I thank Governor Allen and Secretary Herman for 
doing their sort of bipartisan introduction thing. I couldn't help 
wondering what all of us look like up here to all of you. [Laughter] I 
bet we look like a bunch of school boys in the spelling bee dying for 
the recess bell. [Laughter] But this has actually been better--it's been 
enlightening for me.
    The most encouraging thing of all that was said to me, from a purely 
selfish point of view was when the Speaker said, ``If I got to be 50, I 
could look forward to living another 30 years.'' Yesterday I was in 
Cleveland, and I went to an elementary school to see some work that some 
of the AmeriCorps volunteers are doing, and I was shaking hands with all 
these little kids. And it really is true that they say the darndest 
things. And this young boy was 6 or 7 years old, maybe, a little bitty 
boy, and he said, ``Are you the real President?'' And I said, ``Yes.'' 
And he said, ``And you're not dead yet?'' [Laughter] And I realized--I 
didn't know what he meant. First I thought he'd been reading the local 
newspaper here. [Laughter] And then I realized that to him the President 
was George Washington or Abraham Lincoln, and he actually thought it was 
a qualification of the job that you had to be deceased to hold it. 
[Laughter] It was an amazing encounter. [Laughter] But now, I've been 
reminded of the actuarial tables, and I'm ready to go back to work. 
[Laughter]
    Let me say just a couple of words by way of introduction. Most of 
what should be said has already been said and very eloquently. And I 
thank all the previous speakers. But I would like to make one point that 
has been alluded to, but I want to try to drive it home.
    We're living in a time where we have the lowest unemployment rate in 
28 years, the lowest welfare roles in 27 years, the lowest crime rates 
in 25 years, the lowest inflation rate in 32 years, the smallest 
Government in 35 years, and the highest homeownership in history. And 
we're about to have a balanced budget and a surplus for the first time 
in 29 years. This has given this country enormous self-confidence. We 
know that when we work together, we do get things done. We do not know 
when we'll have a time like this again.
    All of our reading of human history teaches us that nothing ever 
stays the same forever. If we can't deal with this issue now, when will 
we ever deal with it? We have an obligation to deal with this challenge 
and deal with it now. And we have an opportunity to do so.
    The balanced budget has freed up capital. It's led to an increase 
in--the efforts at fiscal responsibility have led to a significant 
increase in our national savings rate, even as individual savings has 
gone down. And that's been very good to this point because it's enabled 
us to have lower interest rates, higher investment, and higher growth. 
And you see here the relationship between savings and investment and 
growth, which has already been alluded to. So we've had an increase in 
net national savings and a decline in the budget rate, and it's led to 
more growth.
    But the problem is that we have to have more personal savings as 
well. And we have to deal with the problems presented especially by 
Social Security and by the fact that there are 50 million Americans 
without private pensions and by the fact that very few people are doing 
any savings above Social Security in whatever pension they have or don't 
have for their own retirement. So this is a deeply personal issue that 
Senator Lott, I thought, grippingly discussed, and it's also a big issue 
for our country.
    We have the opportunity and the obligation, I believe, to deal with 
a lot of our other long-term challenges, but a lot of our other long-
term challenges affect our children and affect children who have a 
poverty rate much

[[Page 1037]]

higher, almost twice as high, as senior citizens. Unless we deal with 
this issue, unless we nail down Social Security for the 21st century and 
stabilize it, and unless we deal with the need for more private pension 
coverage, and unless we deal with the need for more savings, it will 
also--make no mistake about it--it will impair in a direct financial way 
our ability to fulfill our responsibilities to our children who are 
living in difficult circumstances. And now we can help to chart a 
different future, and eventually it will undermine the self-confidence 
we're now enjoying, and it will make people very short-sighted again 
when we could be dealing with these issues that will shape the future 
10, 20, 30, 50 years from now. So I think it's a very, very important 
thing.
    And to answer to Senator Lott's question, let's begin with Social 
Security. And I want to thank him for what he said and for what he said 
to me in private, and to both the Speaker and Senator Lott and the other 
Democratic leaders of the Congress. I believe, while I think this SAVER 
summit should keep meeting, I don't believe we should wait until all of 
your meetings years in advance to deal with the Social Security issue. 
The demographics are too clear.
    We now have until 2032 before it starts to run a deficit, but that's 
very misleading. With modest changes now, we can have huge impacts 
later. If you wait, the closer you wait, the more dramatic the changes 
you have to make just to pay the bills. So my view is that we should 
continue to have these forums around the country, these bipartisan 
forums; we should continue to solicit advice; but our goal ought to be 
to have the Congress take up Social Security reform as the first order 
of business early next year and finish in the first half of 1999, saving 
Social Security for the 21st century, so that we baby boomers do not 
bankrupt our children in their ability to raise our grandchildren. And 
my commitment is to try to get that done on that timetable.
    In order to do it, I have to say I still believe that we have to 
resist two temptations with the budget surplus. The first temptation is 
to say, ``Well, it's large and projected to be growing,'' and maybe I've 
just been in executive positions too long in public life, but those 
projections don't mean a lot because sometimes they don't pan out.
    Now, we've been real lucky for the last 5 years, all our projects 
have been too conservative, and we've done better than we've projected. 
But I think the first thing we have to do is to resist the tendency to 
spend the surplus on spending our tax cuts until we have dealt with the 
Social Security issue. The second thing I think we have to do is to 
resist the temptation to take one thing, even it seems like a very good 
thing to a large number of people, like the individual accounts, and 
deal with that without knowing how you're going to deal with the whole 
system. So what my view is--that we ought to say that we're going to 
pass comprehensive reform. And I don't rule in or out any ideas here on 
that. That's not my purpose. And I solicit all of your ideas.
    But I just think it would be a big mistake, knowing what the 
magnitude of the money we're talking about is, to miss this chance to 
say we're going to hold on to this surplus until we pass comprehensive 
reform. Then if there is money over and above that after we do this--I 
hope in early 1999--we can have a wonderful, old-fashioned American 
political debate about what the best way to proceed is, whether we 
should cut taxes, invest the money, pay down the debt. We can have that 
debate. But I think we should commit ourselves again to the idea that 
saving Social Security first is the right policy for America and the 
right thing for the 21st century. And I hope we will do that.
    Now, let me say, in addition to that, we have some very specific 
proposals which I think respond at least in part to the concerns which 
were raised by earlier speakers on pension matters. The Vice President 
mentioned the Retirement Protection Act, which passed, I believe, with 
an almost unanimous vote in Congress in late 1994, to protect the 
pension benefits of more than 40 million workers. But I want to build on 
that.
    In the balanced budget proposal that I have presented to Congress, I 
proposed to offer tax credits to small businesses who start pension 
plans to help them deal with the problems, the costs that you mentioned 
of starting it, starting the programs up and getting the advice. It 
could be worth, I think,

[[Page 1038]]

in the first year, about $1,000 for small business, which should cover 
the costs involved in the start-up.
    It would encourage employers who don't provide pension plans to give 
workers the option of contributing to IRA's through payroll deductions, 
the budget would. The budget also cuts the vesting period for 401(k)'s 
from 5 years to 3 years. Eventually--I'll make a prediction--it may not 
happen in our time here, but eventually we will have to figure out how 
to have people paying, investing continuously, no matter how frequently 
they change jobs, because you're going to have--if you look at all 
modern advanced societies, you have a higher and higher percentage of 
people doing part-time work, you have a higher and higher percentage of 
people doing more than one job, and you have more rapid turnover. You 
have a very high rate of vitality and activity in the business 
community. It means a lot of places being started, but the more 
businesses that start, the more you're going to have that also won't go 
on, that won't make it.
    And in the increasingly churning, dynamic world, we are going to 
have to focus very carefully on that. This is something I believe, by 
the way, that I think the SAVER Summit could really work on in the years 
ahead because of the congressional legislation, you know, having you 
meet again in a couple of years and then again in a couple of years 
after that. But for right now--we know enough now to know we can 
preserve financial stability in a responsible way and cut this vesting 
period from 5 to 3 years. And I hope very much that we'll be able to do 
that in the budget discussions with the legislation that passes this 
year.
    Finally, there's an easy to administer, defined benefit plan that's 
part of our budget proposal, and I hope the Congress will pass that.
    Also, in an effort to encourage more workers to enroll in the 
401(k)'s that are already available to them, we have made it clear that 
employers can automatically enroll workers in the 401(k) plans unless 
the workers themselves choose to opt out. Now currently, most companies 
require the employees to opt in to the 401(k) plans, a process that 
takes some time and some paperwork. Companies that have cut out the 
paperwork with automatic enrollment policies that then the employees can 
opt out of report participation rates of about 90 percent, as compared 
with an overall participation rate of 67 percent for companies offering 
401(k)'s. So that's something that you will discuss. It sounds like a 
small thing, but it's one thing that can really affect a very large 
number of people in getting them into the business of saving for their 
own retirement.
    Let me just say, lastly, we all know we have to do more about 
personal savings. We have worked together in a bipartisan way to expand 
the availability of IRA's and the attractiveness of them so that people 
could invest in IRA's and then withdraw tax free if the money were used 
for education purposes or health emergencies or other things of that 
kind. But we need, clearly, to do more. And this is an area where, quite 
apart from the 401(k) issues and the pension areas, I invite you to give 
your best ideas to the administration and to the Congress, because--let 
me just give you an idea of what a difference it could make. A person 
who could afford to save $5 a day for 40 years would have $300,000 by 
the time he or she retired, at just a modest return, above and beyond 
Social Security and pensions. Young people have a unique opportunity, if 
we can get it into their minds early: If you save $2,000 a year 
beginning at age 25 and you retire at 65, you have $328,000; if you wait 
until you're 45 to start, you only have $78,000. So that really matters.
    And let me finally say that--let me begin--let me end where I began. 
This is a moment of real self-confidence for our country. People have 
the emotional space to think about the long term. If you just think 
about your own businesses, your own families, raising your kids; if your 
child is sick and you're really worried and your child is 10 years old, 
it's hard to work up the emotional space to think about where your child 
is going to college and how much it will cost. If you think you can't 
pay the electric bill at your business, it's pretty hard to think about 
whether you're going to buy a piece of expensive equipment next year 
that will make you productive 5 years from now.

[[Page 1039]]

    Events intrude on nations just as they do on people in their 
individual, personal, and business lives. We have been given a gift, and 
we have to use it. This is a wonderful moment, but it is a moment of 
responsibility that we dare not squander.
    Some of you probably know this, but it makes the point, finally, 
that if we have a saving nation, it means we have a nation of people who 
think about the future and who believe in it. When Benjamin Franklin 
died--you know, ``a penny saved is a penny earned''--he left 
<brit-pound>2,000 sterling to the cities of Boston and Philadelphia, 
with only one caveat: Nobody could spend any of it for 200 years. By 
1990, the <brit-pound>2,000 sterling had matured into $6.5 million, 
quite conservatively invested.
    By leaving that money to people 200 generations removed from himself 
and his family--I mean, 200 years removed, Benjamin Franklin made a 
simple, powerful, eloquent statement that he believed in the promise of 
America, he believed in the future of America, and he was prepared to 
contribute to it in a truly astonishing way. Well, we don't have to ask 
the American people to save for 200 years, but we do have to make sure 
they can think about tomorrow and prepare for it. And this is a magic 
moment to do it.
    Thank you very much.

Note: The President spoke at 12:15 a.m. at the Hyatt Regency Hotel. In 
his remarks, he referred to former Gov. George Allen of Virginia. SAVER 
is an acronym for Savings Are Vital for Everyone's Retirement.