[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 37, Number 16 (Monday, April 23, 2001)]
[Pages 624-629]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks at Central Connecticut State University in New Britain, 
Connecticut

April 18, 2001

    Thank you all. Thank you very much for that warm welcome. Governor, 
it's good to see you again. On the way in he heard I was going to get an 
honorary degree in law, and he said, ``Does that make you a lawyer?'' 
[Laughter] I said, ``Nope.'' But it's such an honor to receive such a 
degree. I want to thank the chairman. I want to thank Dick Judd, and I 
want to thank all the folks here at Central for working so hard to make 
our visit a great visit.
    I love your Governor. It seems like the people of Connecticut do, 
too. And like me, he married well. [Laughter] It's an honor to be here 
with the First Lady of the State of Connecticut.
    Sorry Laura is not with me today. She's doing a great job as the 
First Lady. I'm really proud of her. I'm proud of the fact that she's 
got her priorities straight: her faith and her family, her country, and 
teachers. She's spending a lot of time not only promoting literacy, but 
she's going to spend a lot of time encouraging people to become 
teachers, to saying to folks that are young and old alike, ``If you can, 
get in the classroom. It makes a huge difference.''
    And so, for the teachers who are here, we thank you from the bottom 
of our heart for being teachers.
    And for the young who are trying to figure out what they're going to 
do when they get older, think about teaching. It is a noble profession, 
and it's an important profession.
    And to the moms and dads, always remember that good teaching starts 
at home; that a mother and a dad must be a teacher to their children. 
And it starts by remembering the most important job you'll have, if 
you're fortunate enough to be a mom or a dad, is to be a loving mom and 
a loving dad, to love our children with all our heart and all our soul 
and all our mind. That's what it's all about.
    In order for America to fulfill its promise, all of us must, if 
we're fortunate enough to be a parent, assume that responsibility and 
understand how important it is to start teaching our children at home, 
not only how to read and write and add and subtract but to teach them 
the meaning of love and hope and compassion. And we can do a better job 
of that in our homes in America, and we will do so. And when we do so, 
our classrooms will be easier places for our teachers to teach.
    I'm honored to be traveling with members of the congressional 
delegation here from the State of Connecticut. First, Jim Maloney is 
here. Jim and I don't share the same party, but we share the same love 
for America. He serves his country because he loves America; I serve 
mine because I love America. We have got--figured out we can disagree in 
an agreeable way. It would be a lot easier if we disagreed less often. 
[Laughter] But nevertheless, I'm honored he's traveling with us today. 
Thank you, Jim.
    Rob Simmons is a Congressman from Connecticut, as well. He's newly 
elected. They tell me he's strong in his home district, and I know why--
because he's doing a fabulous job in Washington. Rob, thank you very 
much. The old, wily veteran, Chris Shays, is with us today. He's solid. 
I've gotten to know Chris, and I respect him and like him a lot. He's a 
good, solid citizen.
    And of course, the hometown girl is here with us. Nancy Johnson 
brings a lot of class to Washington, DC. She's so powerful--she said, 
``Mr. President, you make sure you

[[Page 625]]

come to my hometown if you're coming to Connecticut.'' I said, ``Yes, 
ma'am.'' [Laughter]
    I want to thank the three Republican Members for supporting the 
budget I sent to the Congress. I want to tell you something about the 
budget. It's a budget that sets priorities--priorities to make sure our 
folks who wear the uniform of the military get paid well. It's a 
priority that understands we can do better with health care in America. 
So, we double the Medicare budget; we increase the number of folks who 
will be served in community health centers; we have money for tax 
credits for the working uninsured. It's a budget that fulfills promises 
by making sure that we don't dip into the Social Security Trust in order 
to meet discretionary spending needs. It's a good budget.
    It's a budget, though, that has created some problems in Washington 
because it grows discretionary spending by 4 percent. And that creates 
some tension, because there's a lot of folks up there that would rather 
spend a lot more money than that. But let me remind you that 4 percent 
growth in discretionary spending is greater than the rate of inflation. 
It's more money on an increase than a lot of people's paychecks have 
gone up by. It's a pretty good chunk of money. It's real dollars.
    The tradeoff is, either you have priorities and keep discretionary 
spending at 4 percent and give people some of their money back or you 
increase the size and scope of the Federal Government. And I've made it 
clear, I stand on the side of the people who pay the bills in America. 
If we grow the discretionary spending by 8 percent, it means that in 9 
years, the discretionary budget of America will double, and that will 
crowd out private enterprise. It will make it hard to continue to grow 
our economy.
    I believe strongly that what we did in the House is the right thing. 
And I believe strongly that we're making good progress toward real, 
meaningful tax relief. The House had a $1.6 trillion cut. The Senate is 
a little over $1.2 trillion. And the summation of the message is: Tax 
relief is on the way, and it's right for America. It's the right thing 
for our economy, and it's the right thing to give people their own money 
back--actually, not take it in the first place--so that you can make the 
decisions for your families, so you can save and dream and build.
    The tax relief plan we submitted to the Congress says this: If you 
pay taxes, you ought to get relief. It says we ought not try to pick and 
choose winners. The role of Washington isn't to say, ``You get tax 
relief, and you don't get tax relief.'' That's not the role of 
Washington. The role of Washington is to say, ``We're going to be fair. 
Everybody who pays taxes ought to get relief.''
    We cut the rates at the bottom end, and we cut the rates at the top 
end. Now, I know I've heard a lot of people talking about, ``Well, you 
can't give tax relief to the people at the top end.'' I say, why not? If 
you pay taxes, you ought to get relief. But I also want to remind people 
of this fact--that there are thousands of small businesses in America 
who are unincorporated, people who pay--who are sole proprietorships who 
pay taxes at the personal income level. There's a lot of small 
businesses who are creating new jobs who pay high taxes. And when you 
cut the top rate in America, what we're doing is sending this signal: 
The role of Government is not to create wealth; the role of Government 
is to create an environment in which the entrepreneur can flourish. And 
tax relief means more money in the pockets of small-business owners in 
America. Ours is a tax plan that makes the code more fair.
    The marriage penalty is unfair, and we need to do something about it 
right now. And do you know what else is unfair? The death tax is unfair. 
It's unfair to farmers and ranchers and small-business owners, and it's 
time to get rid of it.
    Now, there's a myth in Washington that says you can't have 
meaningful, real tax relief. But those are the folks that want to 
increase the size and scope of the Federal Government. And it really is 
a matter of who you trust. And I'd rather have the American people 
spending the money than the Federal Government. Once we meet priorities, 
I trust the people with their own money. I trust the people of central 
Connecticut to make the right decisions for their families. I want more 
people to have more money in their pockets so they can save for their 
children's education or so they can build for their future.

[[Page 626]]

    And that's what this debate is all about, as far as I'm concerned. 
And I'm not yielding. I remember who--because I understand this: The 
surplus is not the Government's money; the surplus is the people's 
money.
    I mentioned a while ago that one of my priorities in the budget is 
education. The Department that gets the biggest increase of any 
Department in our budget is the Department of Education. It's important 
to spend money on education. I recognize that, and we do. And I'll talk 
about some of the spending initiatives that we set out. But I also want 
to remind you, money alone isn't going to solve our problems. And we 
have some problems.
    Just 2 weeks ago, we received scores from the National Assessment of 
Education Progress; it's called the NAEP. It showed that American 
fourth-grade students are reading no better on average than fourth 
graders did 8 years ago. That's not right. The test also showed that in 
some neighborhoods the scores are going up, and in some neighborhoods 
the scores are going down, that there's a gap. And if there's a gap in 
literacy, you can imagine what that's going to mean in later years. And 
folks, we've got to do something about it in America. It's time to stop 
talking, and it's time to start doing something about it.
    The Third International Mathematics and Science survey was released 
recently. It was a survey of eighth-grade students in 37 foreign 
countries and 13 American States. And there, the news isn't very good, 
either. Students in high scoring Michigan finished well behind students 
in Taiwan, Korea, and Japan. American students, overall, scored lower 
than students in Bulgaria. It's time to stop talking about things, and 
it's time to start doing some things to make sure our students can read 
and write and add and subtract. And I mean, early, before it's too late.
    And that's the crux of the reforms I sent to the Congress, and I'd 
like to discuss those with you real quick. First, here are the 
principles involved. It means our Nation must set high standards and 
high expectations, just like Governor Rowland has done in the State of 
Connecticut. We've got to expect the best for every child. We cannot 
assume that only certain children can learn. We must have the attitude 
that every child in America, regardless of where they're raised or how 
they're born, can learn. Low standards will yield low results. We've got 
to raise the bar and expect the best in every classroom in America.
    Secondly, we must trust local people to chart the path for 
excellence for the children of America. We must trust the Governors and 
local school board members and principals in schools. We must empower 
people at the local level, because one size does not fit all when it 
comes to the education of the children in America.
    And thirdly, we've got to measure. We've got to hold people 
accountable. We've got to insist that, for example, if you receive 
Federal money, you measure. I don't believe the Federal Government ought 
to design a national test, that would undermine the local control of 
schools. But I do believe that in return for taxpayers' money, that the 
local folks ought to develop accountability measures that tells us all 
whether or not children are learning to read and write and add and 
subtract. It is so important to have an accountability system become the 
cornerstone of reform in America.
    And we're making progress on this issue, like we're making progress 
on the budget. The Members will be coming back from their Easter breaks 
and will be taking up the education reforms. I appreciate, for example, 
the work of Senator Joe Lieberman. Oh, I know that may surprise some in 
Connecticut or elsewhere in America to hear me say something nice about 
a man that tried to prevent me from becoming the President. [Laughter] 
But nevertheless, like me, he's put aside the election, and he's 
focusing on what's right for America, and he's helping bring forth an 
education plan that embodies the principles that I just described. And I 
appreciate his hard work and his support on this measure. And we've 
agreed on some core principles.
    We haven't agreed 100 percent all across the board, but we're making 
good progress. For example, we've agreed on a major consolidation of 
Federal education programs that will give States more flexibility and 
more freedom. In other words, to put it this way, instead of having 
Federal money with all kinds of strings attached to it, we're having

[[Page 627]]

Federal spending, Federal money, but trusting the local folks to spend 
that money that meets the needs of each respective State.
     We're making great progress on what I've called a Reading First 
initiative. The budget I submitted triples the amount of money to help 
fight illiteracy in schools. It says that if a State wants to, you can 
access the Federal money, but you develop a K-through-2 diagnostic tool 
to make sure kindergarten teachers through second-grade teachers have 
got the ability to discern which children need extra help. It means 
you've got to develop a curriculum that works. By the way, phonics needs 
to be a part of our curriculum in America.
    And as importantly, it provides money for intensive instruction. So 
when you find a child who may be lagging behind, instead of just 
shuffling him or her through the system, we say, ``What can we do to 
help you? What can we do to make sure you're up to speed early, before 
it's too late?'' So it's an intensive program that says that each child 
is important, and each child must be assessed. And when we find failure, 
let's get it addressed early, before it's too late, because we don't 
want one single child left behind in America.
    And we're making good progress on strong accountability systems, 
which I just described, that says, if you receive Federal money, you 
measure--three through eight--so we know. Some States posts scores on 
the Internet. I know there's a lot of discussion about parental 
involvement. There's nothing like getting a mom involved by posting 
lousy scores on the Internet. There's nothing like saying to somebody, 
``The school may not be quite what you think it is, and therefore, we're 
going to let you know what the results are by comparing it from one 
school to the next.'' No, results are important.
    By the way, what's important about results is it begins to change 
the whole attitude in the schools. Schools used to say--and still do in 
some places--they ask the question, ``Gosh, how old are you? Well, if 
you're 8, you're supposed to be here, and if you're 12, we'll put you 
here, and if you're 16, you belong here.'' And by having accountability 
as the cornerstone of reform, we begin to ask the question, ``What do 
you know? What do you know?'' It's a fundamental change of questions, 
isn't it? What do you know, instead of how old you are.
    And if you don't know what you're supposed to know, ours is a 
society that will work hard to make sure you do. For an accountability 
system to matter, there must be consequences. We just can't accept 
failure when we find it; something must happen. And we're making great 
progress to provide parents more options when we discover failure, when 
we find the schools won't change their teaching methodologies, for 
example, when they can't meet standards--options, such as charter 
schools or public school choice or private tutoring programs. And we're 
finding consensus to make sure that the accountability system has got 
some teeth to it, that there is a consequence for failure and, oh, by 
the way, a consequence for success, as well.
    Johnny and I have just come from B.W. Tinker School. It's good to 
have the B.W. Tinker PTA here--[laughter]--which, by the way, is an 
active PTA, I'm told. But the students were seriously underperforming 8 
years ago on the mastery test. Step one is, the State at least was 
measuring, so we knew. You see, you can't make that statement--the 
students were vastly underperforming on the mastery test--unless there 
was such a thing as the mastery test.
    Now because of two great principals, both of whom I met--and by the 
way, it's also--it should be clear to everybody, I hope, in America that 
a good principal, a great principal will make a huge difference in the 
education of the children. Paul and Lauren, they use the tests to 
refocus the curriculum and the teaching methodology of that school. In 
other words, they use the test for what it's designed to be for, and 
that is, as a way to correct problems. Tests should not be viewed as a 
way to punish people; tests need to be viewed as a way to correct 
problems. And they did so. And they intensified the students' reading 
programs and writing programs.
    We went to a very unusual writing program. It floored Congressman 
Johnson and me when we saw the task at hand. It was a very sophisticated 
writing program for a bunch of little ones. But they intensified the 
effort differently, and they said, ``We can do

[[Page 628]]

better.'' They set the bar higher. And now, nearly two-thirds of the 
Tinker students showed mastery in math. That's up 40 percent since 1993. 
And more than three-quarters showed mastery in writing. That's up 36 
percent.
    In other words, the entrepreneurs, the educational entrepreneurs 
took hold of the situation. They used the information systems to say, 
``Something's not right. Now, let's do something about it.'' And they 
have. And B.W. Tinker students are better off for it, and I'm glad I 
went to see that school.
    Oh, I know it's hard for some to accept accountability as the 
cornerstone for reform. You'll hear all kinds of excuses. I heard them 
as the Governor of Texas; I'm sure Johnny's heard them. You'll hear 
people say, ``Well, that's too much Government. We can't have that kind 
of Government.'' My attitude is, the Government ought to be results-
oriented, not process-oriented. The Government ought to ask the people, 
``What are the results?'' And if the results aren't good enough, we 
better expect a better return for taxpayers' money.
    And you'll hear people say, ``Well, you can't test because it's 
racist to test.'' Folks, let me tell you this as plainly as I can: It's 
racist not to test. It is racist not to measure. Because guess who gets 
shuffled through the system--children whose parents don't speak English 
as a first language. It's so much easier to quit on some newly arrived 
to our country. ``It's too hard to education this person. We'll just 
move him through. We'll ask him how old they are and put them here, 
regardless of whether they can read and write.'' Inner-city kids--it's 
so much easier to walk into a classroom of inner-city kids and say, 
``These kids are too hard to educate. We'll move them through.'' Those 
days have got to end in America. What we need to do is to make sure not 
one child gets left behind.
    And I aim to do something about math, as well. I've been spending a 
lot of time talking about reading, but in my budget I want to point up a 
couple of programs that I think make sense: $200 million for States to 
develop math and science partnership programs with local education 
districts, as well as higher education institutions--an opportunity to 
be able to combine the two.
    We've got money in our budget for loan forgiveness for math and 
science graduates who teach in high needed schools for up to 5 years. 
And that's to defer loans from $5,000 to $17,500 of loan forgiveness. 
And as importantly, we increase teacher training funds, up to $2.6 
billion in the year 2002--up 15 percent from 2001--and provide States 
the flexibility needed to make sure that the teacher training matches 
the needs in the classrooms across the State of Connecticut, for 
example.
    Now, this budget is good. Now, they'll be arguing about spending 
more money or not spending more money. But the budget we submitted, 
coupled with the reforms that we're asking for, will make a huge 
difference in making sure that we meet a goal that's not a Republican 
goal, and it's not a Democratic goal; it's an American goal of making 
sure every child in America gets educated.
    And one other aspect of the education program I want to share with 
you is, also, we triple the amount of money for character education in 
our classrooms. Education is not complete unless we're willing to teach 
our children not only how to read and write but the difference between 
right and wrong. We ought not to fear to teach our children good, old-
fashioned values that have stood the test of time: Don't lie, cheat, or 
steal; respect others; respect their opinions.
    We also have got a program that says, in the after-school programs--
we spend all kinds of money for after-school programs--but I think it's 
so important for us to open up those after-school programs to faith-
based and community-based programs that will be able to say--that sends 
a clear message, that if you exist because of the universal call to love 
a neighbor just like you would like to be loved yourself, you're welcome 
on to the public school grounds in an after-school program to teach 
children right from wrong, to teach them that somebody in our society 
cares for them, which really leads me to a bigger point and a bigger 
mission for all of us. And that is, how to usher in a period of 
responsibility in America.
    I think I can help with that, and I think all of us in Washington 
can help with that by, first of all, working together to change the tone 
in our Nation's Capital. It means that we've got to have a spirit of 
respect in

[[Page 629]]

Washington. We've got to end this kind of needless name-calling and 
finger-pointing, the kind of zero-sum politics that says if so-and-so 
thinks it's a good idea, I think it's a lousy idea, because we happen to 
be from different political parties.
    I think we need to respect each other more in Washington, which 
will, in turn, set a good signal for people on the playgrounds of 
America, for example, to respect somebody with whom they may not agree. 
We need a culture of results in Washington, DC--less noise, less 
preening in front of cameras, and more focus on getting things done on 
behalf of the American people. And we need a spirit of responsibility. 
And it starts with leadership, as well, that each of us understand the 
awesome responsibilities of the jobs we hold.
    I think we're making progress in the Nation's Capital, I truly do. 
Oh, I know there's occasionally somebody says something, particularly 
about a nice fellow like me, that I don't like--[laughter]--but I tend 
to ignore it and focus on the people's business. And the people's 
business is what's important. And that's why I love to travel outside of 
Washington. I love to drive the roads of our country, just like I did 
today, and see the hundreds of people who came to wave at the 
Presidential limousine. It's important for a President to see that and 
for Members of Congress to be aware of that, as well, because it reminds 
us about the strength of America.
    And the strength of this country lies not inside the halls of our 
Government in Washington, DC, or in Hartford, Connecticut. The true 
strength of America lies in the hearts and souls of the American 
citizens.
    And that's why I'm so optimistic about this country's future, 
because if that's the case, if the true strength of America is in the 
hearts and souls of our citizens, we've got a bright future ahead of us, 
because we've got great citizens in this country.
    This is a fabulous country. In Washington, we've got to always 
understand that. That's why tax relief is important, because it empowers 
people to make decisions in their lives. That's why the Faith-Based 
Initiative I've talked about is important, because it says that in order 
to change lives, we need to change hearts, and there are thousands of 
people who are willing to love a neighbor, just like they'd like to be 
loved themselves.
    No, the great strength is when we understand America's society 
changes one heart, one soul, one conscience at a time. And that's 
oftentimes because some loving American, not because of Government but 
because of care and compassion, says to a neighbor in need, ``What can I 
do to help?'' I hope to see mentoring programs flourish all across 
America. I want any child who wonders whether somebody loves them to 
have a loving adult say, ``I love you. I love you with all the bottom of 
my heart.''
    No, this country is based upon great values and great principles. 
But its true greatness is the fact that we're a land full of decent, 
loving, and compassionate and hard-working people. And I can't tell you 
what a huge honor it is to be a President of such a land.
    God bless you.

Note: The President spoke at 12:40 p.m. in the Welte Auditorium. In his 
remarks, he referred to Gov. John G. Rowland of Connecticut and his 
wife, Patricia; Lawrence D. McHugh, chairman, board of trustees, 
Connecticut State University System; Richard L. Judd, president, Central 
Connecticut State University; and Lauren F. Elias, principal, and Paul 
V. Ciochetti, former principal, B.W. Tinker Elementary School.