[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 35, Number 20 (Monday, May 24, 1999)]
[Pages 938-945]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Luncheon in New York City

May 19, 1999

    Thank you very much. First of all, I want to say a real thank you to 
Jack and to Phyllis for having us here. I've been in their home in New 
Jersey; I've never been here before, and I wanted to come. And as you 
can see from the pictures on the wall, the Vice President has been here. 
[Laughter] And I've been rather jealous of this. [Laughter] To say this 
is an interesting house would be an understatement. [Laughter] And I'm 
just delighted to be here. And I thank them for opening their home to 
us.
    I also want to thank Gerry Ferraro for being here. And Congressman 
Kostmayer, thank you for being here. And I want to thank Joe Andrew and 
Beth Dozoretz and Fran Katz and everybody at the DNC for the work 
they've done.
    You know, Joe and I, we just finished a western swing; Joe and Beth 
and I, we've been out on the west coast. And about every time he got up 
to introduce me, he said, ``You know, we're going to win every election 
from the White House to dogcatcher.'' And I keep pointing out to him 
that that is not such a great distance. [Laughter] He acts like that's 
such an encompassing term, you know.

[[Page 939]]

[Laughter] He hasn't been paying attention to Washington lately. 
[Laughter]
    But let me say, I just came--a lot of you know this, but I just came 
from a remarkable event with Senator Moynihan and the Governor and a lot 
of the transportation authorities here. We announced new plans for the 
new Penn Station and the old Farley Post Office Building. And a lot of 
you--you probably saw, the last day or 2, the New York Times had a nice 
piece on the architectural plans and what was going to be done. But this 
is something that Pat Moynihan talked to me about way back in '93. And I 
also announced that we were going to put $60 million in our budget over 
the next 3 years to help pay more of the Federal share to build this. 
But I wanted to sort of use it as a metaphor for the point I want to 
make here.
    For whatever reason, I think nearly everybody who has been involved 
in this project has been captured by the idea of it. And most everybody 
with any sense of the past at all deeply regrets the fact that the old 
Penn Station was destroyed and, with it, a lot of memories of New York 
and of magnificent architectural creation.
    And so anyway, this little project, it was like a lot of Pat 
Moynihan's ideas. It was a little bit ahead of its time, and it took a 
while to catch hold. But I signed on early and told him to just call me 
back when there was something to do.
    And so slowly it sort of picked up steam and people kind of got 
together. So we announced it today, and everybody felt so good about it. 
And I was trying to think to myself why they felt so good about it. I 
think it's because it captures the past and it also throws people into 
the future in a way they feel good about, because beautiful public 
spaces really help us to build a community across all the lines that 
divide us; maybe because nearly everybody alive can remember sometime in 
his or her life, maybe when we were all much younger and had more free 
time, when we were sitting in a train station just watching people go 
by, felt free and kind of elevated by it.
    But I say that because, to me, what I've tried to do for the United 
States is to give us a sense that we could meet all our challenges but 
that we had to meet them together. That meant that everybody had a role 
to play and some citizen responsibility. It also means that with all of 
our diversity, which ought to be celebrated, not just tolerated but 
celebrated, we have to realize that what binds us together is even more 
important.
    And the story of the last 6 years has been an effort to try to take 
the ideas that I developed over a long period of time and that I 
developed a belief in, and that I talked to the American people about in 
'92 and again in '96, and turn those ideas into policies that then could 
be made real in the lives of the American people.
    And I'm very grateful for the good things that have happened in this 
country. But I came here today to say to you that for whatever role I 
played in it, I think the far more important contributing factor was 
that we had the right ideas, rooted in the right vision of America, and 
we had a good team and we showed up for work every day. And we intend to 
continue doing it down to the last day.
    That elicited a few laughs, but anybody that's ever watched any 
national capital in politics knows that it's no small achievement to get 
your team to show up for work every day, because an enormous amount of 
time and energy is always devoted to trying to divide your team and 
distract them and wonder who's dropping the dime on whom in the morning 
paper, so they won't work. Instead, they'll spend all their time calling 
each other names or being torn up and upset or worrying about something 
other than the people's business.
    So I am here today because for whatever role I have played in this, 
I know the most important thing was that we had the right vision and the 
right ideas, and we brought teamwork, and we showed up for work every 
day. And we need to keep doing that. And America needs to make that 
decision again. And every time you give the people a chance to have a 
referendum on whether they want politics to be about politicians and the 
politics of personal destruction or whether they want it to be about 
people and progress and unity, they always make the right choice. But 
you have to put the choice before them which means we need good 
candidates and

[[Page 940]]

they have to be adequately financed, and we have to keep the message out 
there.
    The other point I'd like to make rather briefly is that I think it's 
quite important for us, even though we have now reached a point where 
Presidential elections almost take 2 years, which I think is wrong--I 
actually--I announced in October of '91, 13 months before the election. 
And that was a short campaign. I waged a short campaign. But I think 
it's very important, particularly for the Democrats, because we have 
been the party of vision and progress and of trying to pull the country 
together and not drive wedges among the people--it's particularly 
important for us to keep working, to keep working, to keep producing.
    There are things which won't wait until 2001. For example, Jack 
mentioned that we'd balanced the budget, and we now have the biggest 
surplus ever. I have offered the Congress a plan that would save Social 
Security and Medicare and actually pay the publicly held debt of the 
United States down to its lowest point since before World War I in 15 
years.
    Now, why do I think that's a good idea? Because I think it will keep 
interest rates lower and investment higher and create more jobs and 
raise incomes. It will also make us relatively less dependent on 
international capital markets at a time when I am doing my very best to 
stabilize them, so we don't have another Asian financial crisis, and we 
don't have to worry about spending an enormous amount of money to keep 
it from spreading to Brazil or all the things that those of you in 
finance know we have been working on the last 2 years.
    But I can't say for sure what will happen 10 years from now. I can 
say for sure, 10 years from now, that if we have a terrible recession 
and we have to deficit spend, it will be a lot better to do it if we've 
got a much lower debt base than we have. I can say for sure that if 
there's another round of global turmoil 10 years from now, we'll be much 
more immune to it if we've got a smaller debt and our interest rate 
structures are smaller.
    So these are important things. We need to do them now. We don't need 
to be waiting around. We need to continue our efforts at educational 
excellence. Today I introduced a bill into Congress--I announced it just 
before I came up here--every 5 years we have to reauthorize the general 
bill by which we give Federal money to public schools in New York and 
everywhere else. It's called the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. 
By and large, this money is given to help schools that have a lot of 
poor kids or a lot of kids whose first language is not English or a lot 
of kids who have special needs--disabilities--their targeted aid. And a 
lot of it is given to provide for other kind of special purposes, 
technology in the schools and things like that.
    None of it, however, is related to results. I have been working for 
6 years to get everybody to embrace the idea that we had to have 
standards and accountability, and we ought to do a better job making 
sure teachers know the subjects they're teaching and all this. But we've 
never really been able to move these standards into the schools. So it's 
basically--whether they're being observed or not is a function of the 
character of the local leadership or the commitment of the local 
political leadership or the State leadership.
    We now have a chance to actually change the way schools work. If we 
say, okay, for the next 5 years we're going to take all the research 
that has been done and take the uncontestable findings and make the 
pursuit of those findings a condition of the money--no social promotion 
but don't say the kids are failures; give them all summer school or 
after-school programs--this works. Identify the schools that are failing 
and turn them around or close them down, let the kids go some place 
else. Have charter schools, have districtwide school choice. Do 
something to give the kids other choices.
    Those are just a couple of examples of the kinds of things that I 
think we have to do. We also--I have to tell you, though, it's not--the 
Federal Government and others are going to have to find a way to put 
more money into teaching because we're going to have a 2-million teacher 
shortage the next decade, with more kids coming into the schools.
    Now, we already have too many teachers out there, teaching science 
and math courses,

[[Page 941]]

especially, for which they have not been academically prepared, and in 
which they, themselves, have not passed performance exams. So it's all 
very well--we've got to invest more money in this, and we've got to be 
more flexible about getting people into teaching in all kinds of ways 
that actually know the subjects we expect them to teach.
    So these are some of the things that are in this bill. I think this 
is quite important. This could have a lot to do with what America looks 
like 10 years from now. If we can't give--everybody knows we've got the 
best higher education system in the world and, relatively speaking, a 
higher percentage of people going into colleges than other countries. No 
one seriously believes that we're giving all of our kids the best 
elementary and secondary education in the world. And until we can do 
that, we won't be able to take full advantage of this astonishing 
diversity in our student body.
    And I think this is, by the way, a huge asset for us in the global 
economy, to have all these kids from all these different countries. Just 
go to the New York school system and look. This is a big deal. This is a 
plus, not a minus. This is a good thing in a global society to have this 
but only if we can give these kids a chance to learn what they need to 
know to do well in the world they will become adults in.
    Let me just mention one or two other things. The aftermath--Hillary 
and I are going out to Littleton, Colorado tomorrow. And the aftermath 
of that shooting, I think, has had an even more profound impact on the 
country than all the school shootings last year did. And you can see it 
by what is happening in the Congress now. I think there is finally a 
feeling that it's time for everybody to stop making excuses; it's time 
for everybody to stop trying to place blame, and instead just basically 
say, ``I would like to assume whatever my share of responsibility is for 
giving a safe childhood back to our children.''
    And there's something for the gun people, the entertainment people, 
and the Government people to do. There's also something for the school 
people and the parents to do, and the kids, themselves. But I would just 
like to make a couple of points.
    Number one, the American people can take a lot of pride in the fact 
that in the United States Senate--that would never have passed any 
reasonable gun control on a bet 6 months ago--over 70 Senators last 
night voted to impose child trigger locks on the gun manufacturers. They 
voted to raise the age of handgun ownership to 21. And they voted on--I 
don't like the bill they voted for because it's got too many loopholes, 
but at least they're moving toward closing the gun show loophole.
    The Speaker of the House yesterday came out for closing the gun show 
loophole and for raising the gun ownership age to 21. This is good. The 
Democrats who have been for this for years should reach out the hand 
across the aisle and say, ``Look, this is good.''
    We've come a long way since 1994 when one of the principal reasons 
we lost the House of Representatives in the '94 election was the 
lobbying of the NRA against our Members who voted for the crime bill, 
with the Brady bill and the assault weapons ban. Ask the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania, he knows. We lost at least a dozen and perhaps as many as 
20 seats solely because of this. This is a different country than it was 
then.
    And the grieving of the American people for these children and the 
recognition that these two young men, who had gone to such a dark place 
in their own minds, had a
Tec-9 and were making bombs, large numbers of them, I think it really 
registered on people. And we have a chance, therefore, to do something 
good.
    While I was in California last weekend I told the entertainment 
community I thought that they should stop advertising what is violent 
that might be shown to kids who couldn't see the movies or rent the 
movies or the video games; that the advertising--people who are exposed 
to the advertising ought to be rated in the same way that the people who 
are exposed to the underlying product, and that the whole rating system 
ought to be reevaluated in terms of gratuitous violence.
    Now, this doesn't mean that the people that manufacture guns or the 
people that manufacture movies or video games are personally responsible 
for anything. But it does mean--we know this--we know that kids are

[[Page 942]]

spending more time on their own, less unsupervised time, that their 
parents, when they're with them, are more tired because they're often 
working two jobs, than at any previous time. We know this. And 
therefore, we know that there will be more of them who will be 
vulnerable.
    And if that is true, and you have easier access to guns and 
explosives, on the one hand, and on the other hand, you have now over 
300 studies that say that sustained exposure to violence--and the 
average 18-year-old has now seen 40,000 televised murders on movies or 
TV or a video screen--40,000--and we know that the vulnerable among us 
are made more vulnerable, then the whole mixture is a cauldron out of 
which some dramatically terrible things will happen.
    And you don't have to blame anybody personally for this, but we all 
have to say, ``Look, we've got to do something about this.'' Then I 
think there has to be a national grassroots campaign in every community 
involving religious institutions and schools and other groups patterned 
on what the Mothers and Students Against Drunk Driving did, patterned on 
the national anti-teen-pregnancy campaign--grassroots, value-based, 
personal contact with all these kids to try to really dramatically 
reduce this. And believe me, it can be done.
    The last thing I'd like to say is, I've been in a lot of schools and 
there are--some schools do better than others with counseling programs, 
with peer mediation programs, with intervention programs that ultimately 
lead to mental health for the kids who need it, and also with just 
trying to set an environment in which people are encouraged to be in 
groups, but the groups are not encouraged to look down on one another 
and provoke social discord. I mean, there's a lot that can be done in 
the schools by the students.
    And finally--a person came up to me the other day--everybody says, 
we need to do more to try to make it easier for parents not to lose 
touch with their kids. And anybody who has ever raised a child through 
adolescence knows that it's an interesting challenge. I mean, you want 
your child to become independent, to have space, to begin even to have 
things that aren't necessarily shared with you. But you don't want to 
lose the connecting cord.
    And we have--it's interesting, isn't it, that we think we should get 
help in education and instruction and support for everything from losing 
weight to improving our athletic skills, to figuring out how to use a 
computer to how to make money in the stock market. And yet, we don't 
think anybody ought to have instruction in the most important things in 
life. And this grassroots campaign ought to be out there helping parents 
to deal with the challenge of having their children come of age and get 
that independence they're entitled to without severing the cord that 
they don't want severed. This is a big deal.
    And you know, our family and Al and Tipper Gore, we've worked on a 
lot of these issues for years and years and years. And we're going to 
spend a lot of time on this in the next 18 months.
    The last thing I'd like to say--I'd like to say just a word about 
the world, because people are so interested, especially in the crisis in 
Kosovo now. We have tried in the last 6 years to be a force for peace, 
from Northern Ireland to the Middle East to Bosnia. We've tried to be a 
force for reducing the threat of weapons of mass destruction, and we've 
made a lot of progress in that and for standing up against terrorism and 
the emerging threats of biological and chemical weapons in the hands of 
organized criminals or terrorists. We've worked on all that. And we've 
tried to expand global prosperity through trade initiatives.
    But I think it's ironic--and Jack said it at lunch, he said, ``It's 
interesting to me, in this great, modern world we live in, we still 
can't figure out what to do about genocide''--since that's what World 
War II was really about. And I think if you think about what 
characterizes the modern age in a positive sense--an explosion of 
technology, especially in the telecommunications area; computer science 
increasingly being merged with the biological sciences, so that when the 
human genome project is completed we'll be able to get a map of--the 
genetic map of ourselves and our children and our grandchildren, and it 
should move us very rapidly over the next 15 years to another dramatic 
increase in life

[[Page 943]]

expectancy. So that's the first thing, this explosion of technology and 
its immersion with telecommunications and with the biological sciences.
    And then the second thing is the world getting closer together, 
national borders becoming more porous, the interconnections of people 
becoming closer. Isn't it ironic when we're dreaming of our children all 
learning how to speak different languages, having E-mail pen pals in 
Asia and Africa and Latin America, and all this sort of interesting 
stuff that we want to dream about, that the number one problem we're 
facing in the world today is the incredible, durable persistence of the 
oldest demon of human society, the fear of people who are different from 
us. And the fear leads to loathing. The loathing leads to 
dehumanization. The dehumanization leads to the justification of 
killing. And the justification of killing then often leads to the 
justification of systematic killing, based on racial or ethnic or 
religious difference.
    But it is the oldest problem of human society. And it is a true 
irony that when we--I look at these young people here, and I think: 
Gosh, the world they'll live in 30 years from now will be full of things 
that I can't even imagine. Will they really be burdened by this 
primordial madness that manifested itself in Bosnia or in the little 
villages of Rwanda, where 700,000 people at least were hacked to death 
in a hundred days, in a country not a colonial creation, those people 
had been living together for 500 years, or Bosnia, where a quarter of a 
million people died, and 2\1/2\ million people were made prisoners, and 
mosques were burned, and libraries and museums were burned up, and books 
were destroyed that were priceless--or what's going on in Kosovo?
    Will the people of Northern Ireland take the last step that's still 
hanging them up to make peace? Will the evident desire of the voters in 
Israel for peace and security find a concrete expression in the next few 
months?
    The biggest problem to all of it is when it gets right down to the 
lick log, it's hard to hold hands with somebody who's really different 
from you and jump off into a common future. It's hard.
    And I know a lot of people that question what I have done and how I 
have done it in Kosovo. All I can tell you is I'm convinced that I've 
done the right thing in the best available way. And one of the things 
you hire a President to do is to think about all the implications of all 
the options that are available. But I would far rather be here today 
answering the questions that I have to answer to the American people and 
to the press about what we have done and why we have done it and how we 
have done it, than I would like to be here today asking you to 
contribute money to our party and to our cause if I were sitting on my 
hands and letting those people be butchered and thrown out of their 
homes and plundered and their records erased.
    And I think the fact--it's amazing to me how many American Jews have 
told me they support what we are doing for Kosovar Muslims. It is a 
great thing. It is something special. We have no territorial ambitions 
there. We have no economic ambitions there. We, in fact, are going to 
have to spend more money to help them rebuild the area and build it 
higher than it was. What we want is for our children to be able to live 
in the world where they can maximize the explosion of technology and 
maximize the openness of borders, and you cannot do that in a world 
where you're worried about being blown up by a terrorist who is driven 
by ethnic, religious, or racial hatred.
    That is what this is about. It's very much in our security interests 
to do this. But it's because of the world toward which we're going. If 
this were 1950, it wouldn't be. The world we're going to live in does 
not need a Europe consumed, even at its edge in southeastern Europe, by 
this kind of hatred.
    Let me just close with this story. I've been telling this for 5 days 
now, but I was overwhelmed last week. I had an experience which to me 
embodies the best in this country. Last week, at the request of our 
leader in the Senate, Senator Daschle, and the other four Democratic 
Senators from North and South Dakota and Montana, we hosted in the White 
House a meeting of 19 Native American tribal leaders from the upper 
plains States.

[[Page 944]]

    They are the poorest of all of our Indian tribes. And most of them 
don't have any gambling. They don't have any population density. And 
it's long way from here to there, so they don't get a lot of new 
investment. And they haven't been part of this great booming economy. 
They haven't noticed that the stock market went from 3,200 to 11,000 in 
the last 6\1/2\ years. It just totally escaped them. I mean, they 
haven't felt this.
    So they came to the White House. And the first thing they did was, 
they said, well, now--and we met in the Roosevelt Room, which is a room 
that some of you have been in--it's commemorated, basically dedicated to 
Franklin and Eleanor and Theodore Roosevelt. And Theodore Roosevelt's 
Nobel Peace Prize is on the mantelpiece there, which he got for helping 
to end the Russo-Japanese War in 1905.
    So they say, ``Well, can we get all this stuff out of here and sit 
in a circle? That's our custom.'' So we get the table out and everybody 
is sitting in a circle. And a lot of Cabinet members were there. And 
their spokesperson was a 6'6'' tribal chief named Tex Hall--not exactly 
your Native American name, but anyway, that's his name. [Laughter] So he 
gets up and speaks and then everybody speaks, and they talked about the 
education concerns and the health care and the economic concerns. And I 
came in about midway through the meeting; they all were talking. So at 
the end, Chief Hall, he stands up again, and he said, ``I want to tell 
you something.'' He said, ``There's something else we want to do before 
we go.'' He said, ``We have a proclamation here we have signed 
supporting what you are doing in Kosovo,'' representing the poorest 
Americans, right, and the first Americans. He said, ``You see, Mr. 
President, we know something about ethnic cleansing. And our country has 
made a lot of progress, and here we are today, and we think we should 
stand up against it.''
    And then this other young man said that he wanted to speak. And he 
represented one of the tribes in South Dakota. He wasn't very tall, and 
he had this beautiful piece of Indian jewelry on around his neck, silver 
jewelry. And he said this--you think about this when you leave here 
today, about what kind of country you want in the 21st century--he said, 
``Mr. President, I had two uncles. One of them was on the beach at 
Normandy. The other was the first Native American fighter pilot in the 
history of the American military. My great-great-grandfather was 
slaughtered by the 7th Calvary at Wounded Knee,'' he said, ``and here I 
am in the White House.'' He said, ``We have come a long way from my 
great-great-grandfather to my uncles to this day. I have only one son 
and he means more to me than anything. I would be proud for him to go 
and fight against ethnic cleansing in Kosovo.'' He said, ``We know what 
is right now.'' And you could not hear anyone breathe in that room.
    I ask you to think about that. This is a different country than it 
was 6\1/2\ years ago. It needs to be a different country 6\1/2\ years 
from now. We have still so much to do. But If you made me choose one 
thing I could do in the next nearly 2 years I've got left, it would be 
to bring the American people closer together, not to give up our fights 
and our disagreements and our arguments but to just remember this is 
quite an extraordinary place. We have had quite a journey. We have a lot 
to do at home and abroad, and we'll be able to do it if we don't forget 
that what binds us together is more important than all the things that 
divide us.
    Thank you, and God bless you.

  Note: The President spoke at 1:55 p.m. at a private residence. In his 
remarks, he referred to luncheon hosts Jack and Phyllis Rosen; former 
Vice Presidential candidate Geraldine A. Ferraro; former Congressman 
Peter H. Kostmayer; Joseph J. Andrew, national chair, Beth Dozoretz, 
national finance chair, and Fran Katz, national finance director, 
Democratic National Committee; Gov. George Pataki of New York; Columbine 
High School gunmen Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold; Tex Hall, chairman of 
the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation (the Three Affiliated Tribes); 
and Gregg Bourland, chairman, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe.

[[Page 945]]