-
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/files/original/4c754f81e7da7f4a3c2c3f07018d2d02.pdf
3c5eb77a6c58af410541574e6b6ed71c
PDF Text
Text
FOIA Number: 2006-0462-F
FOIA
This is not' a textual
record. This is used as an
.
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Oftic.e of Origin:
Speechwriting
Series/Staff Member:
.Terry Edmonds
Subscries:
10982
OA/ID Numb.er:
FoldcriD:
Folder Title:
Working. Families Flexibility Act & Info. For Radio Address (3/97) ,
·Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
s
0
0
0
0
�··"111"-'.
Dear Mr. Speaker:
America's working families find it
increasingly difficult to balance the demands of
work and family. Our nation's workers and their
employers deserve responsible compensatory time
legislation that gives working people the
flexibility they need to meet their obligations at
home and in the workplace, while upholding three
fundamental principles: real choice for employees,
real protection against employer abuse, and
preservation of fair labor standards such as the
40 hour work week and the right to overtime pay.
The legislation currently pending House
consideration, H.R. 1, the Working Families
Flexibility Act of 1997, does not meet these
principles. As a result, I strongly oppose H.R. 1
and will veto this bill if passed in its current
form.
We should enact comp time legislation this
year that meets the needs of working families and
U.S. businesses. Last year, I proposed employeechoice flex-time legislation and included
·
expansion of the Family and Medical Leave Act
(FMLAl so that workers could take leave for
parent-teacher conferences or attend to the
routine medical needs of their families. With
these objectives in mind, I encourage you to
support a substitute amendment to be offered by
Representative George Miller. (unlike H.R. 1, the
Miller amendment allows comp time without
endangering fair labor standards, and without
burdening business with greater costs or risksJ
'l
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
�It is time for us to work together to give
America's working families the help they need to
succeed in an increasingly demanding environment.
Although I am prepared to support and sign a
responsible cornp time bill, I intend to veto any
legislation that fails to guarantee real choice
for employees, real protection against employer
abuse, and preservation of fair labor standards
such as the 40 hour work week and the right to
overtime pay. To that end, I hope that you can
support the Miller amendment -- a ·good step toward
responsible comp time reform.
Sincerely,
The Honorable Newt Gingrich
Speaker of the
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
�DRAFT
PRESIDENT WILLIAM J. CLINTON
RADIO ADDRESS TO THE NATION
MARCH 22, 1997
Good morning. I am glad to be back at the microphone this morning. My knee is healing
just fine and I have just returned to the White House after a successful summit meeting with
·
President Y eltsin in Helsinki.
Today, I want to talk with you about how we can work together to strengthen America's
working families by helping them strike a real balance between work and family. We have made
significant progress in this area with the passage ofthe landmark Family and Medical Leave Act in
1993. I am proud of the impact this bill has had on the every day lives of working families. Since
its enactment, millions of Americans have been able to take unpaid leave to care for a new born
child or be with a family member who is sick. ·Everywhere I go, people tell me "I don't know .
what I would have done without the Family Leave Law -- it enabled me to take care of my child
without hurting my family, without losing my job."
With new pressures on families in the way they work and live, I believe we have to do
even more to give people the chance to be good workers and good parents. That is why I have
proposed expanding the Family and Medical Leave Act so that workers can take time off to
attend teacher conferences or to take a child for a medical check-up. I have challenged the
Congress to pass legislation that will do that this year and I have high hopes that they will.
But this morning, l want to talk about another way to strengthen working families. Last
June, at the Vice President's annual Family Reunion Conference in Nashville, I proposed that we
give our nation's workers and their employers responsible compensatory time legislation that
gives working people the flexibility they need to meet their obligations at home and in the
workplace. I laid out a plan that offers employees this simple choice: If you work overtime you
can be paid time and a half, just as the law now requires, or, if you want, you can take that
payment in time -- an hour and a half off for every hour you work overtime. Simply put, you can
choose money in the bank or time on the clock -- time that can be used for a vacation, an
extended maternity leave or to be there at critical moments for your children. But I have said from
the sta11 that this must be done the right way. Otherwise, it could open the door for employer
abuse. Any legislation must uphold three fundamental principals: real choice for employees, real
protection against employer abuse, and preservation of fair labor standards such as the 40 hour
work week and the right to overtime pay.
A Republican bill that was passed in the House this week and a Senate version that will
soon be voted on, both fail that test. Let me tell you why. First, under the Republican plan,
employees aren't really given a choice of whether to be paid for overtime in money, or in time off
from work. There are no afeguards to stop an unscrupulous employer from telling his employees
who need the paycheck 1 ore than family time that they have no choice. Second, employees could
lose the ability to take t e time offifthey don't do it within a month after the overtime. Third,
employees who take c mp time could have to work extra hours in the week, and employers
�wouldn't have to pay overtime.
Let me be clear: the vast majority of employers will be fair to their workers, under any
system. But we must always make sure to protect those employees who need our help.
Giving workers the real choice of taking time off as overtime pay is good for families. It __,4_ ()
will helMII Americans balance the demands of home and work. But ifwe let employers fQI:.C@-~
~~ive up overtime pay without the real guarantee of time off, that's bad for families.
That'~ no cohice at all.
First, the Republican proposals could drastically limit the ability of employees to earn
overtime pay by allowing employers to for~r~ ;,a~~ornp !i~ instead of overtime.
Second, under their proposals, employees
.
csw=g over w~e the comp time
, ;, ~
they have earned. Employers could simply "cash out" any earned comp time with just 30 days_/fZ-1.~
notice or they could deny an employee's comp time request if they claim business would be
"unduly disrupted." And finally, under the Republican proposal, employers could make
employees work extra hours, beyond 40 hours, during the week they have taken comp time
without paying overtime. Under the Senate bill, comp time does not count as hours worked,
leaving the door open for an employer to provide only regular hourly pay for any overtime work
done by an employee during the week that comp time was used. It also would allow an employer.
to substitute comp time plans for existing vacation leave plans, leaving employees worse off.
fie
Employees and their families are the ones who should choose if, when, and how they
use comp time. The moment a responsible comp time bill hits my desk, I will sign it. But,
will veto any legislation that fails to guarantee real choice for employees, real protection
against employer abuse and real presea-vation of fair labor standards. It is time for us to
join together to give America's working families the help they need to succeed, both oil the
job and in the home. Let's pass comp time legislation, but let's do it right.
Thanks for listening.
�DRAFT
PRESIDENT WILLIAM J. CLINTON
RADIO ADDRESS TO THE NATION
MARCH 22, 1997
Good morning. I am glad to be back at the microphone this morning. My knee is healing
just fine and I am happy to report that I have just completed a successful summit meeting with
President Yeltsin in Helsinki. ~~ .~
Today, I want to talk with you about how we can work together to strengthen America's
working families by helping them strike a real balance between work and family. We have made
significant progress in this area with the passage of the landmark Family and Medical Leave Act in
1993. I am proud of the impact this bill has had on the every day lives of working families. Since
its enactment, millions of Americans have been able to take unpaid leave to care for a new born
child or be with a family member who is sick. Everywhere I go, people tell me "I don't know
what I would have done without the Family Leave Law-- it enabled me to take care of my child
without hurting my family, without losing my job."
With new pressures on families in the way they work and live, I believe we have to do
even more to give people the chance to be good workers and good parents. That is why I have
proposed expanding the Family and Medical Leave Act so that workers can take time off to
attend teacher conferences or to take a child for a medical check-up. I have challenged the
Congress to pass legislation that will do that this year and I have high hopes that they will.
But this morning, I want to talk about another way to strengthen working families. Last
June, at the Vice President's annual Family Reunion Conference in Nashville, I proposed that we
give our nation's workers and their employers responsible compensatory time legislation that
gives working people the flexibility they need to meet their obligations at home and in the
workplace. I laid out a plan that offers employees this simple choice: If you work overtime you
can be paid time and a half, just as the law now requires, or, if you want, you can take that
payment in time -- an hour and a half off for every hour you work overtime. Simply put, you can
choose money in the bank or time on the clock -- time that can be used for a vacation, an
extended maternity leave or to be there at critical moments for your children. But I have said from
the start that this must be done the right way. Otherwise, it could reduce flexibility for families
and make their lives more difficult. Any legislation must uphold three fundamental principals: real
choice for employees, real protection against employer abuse, and preservation of fair labor
standards such as the 40 hour work week and the right to overtime pay.
A Republican bill that was passed in the House this week and a Senate version that will
soon be voted on, both fail that test. Let me tell you why. First, under the Republican plan,
employees aren't really given a choice of whether to be paid for overtime in money, or in time off
from work. There are no effective ·safeguards to stop an unscrupulous employer from telling his
employees who need the paycheck more than family time that they have no choice. Second,
under their proposals, employees don't have real choice over when to take the comp time they
have earned. Employers could deny requests for comp time by claiming business would be
/
�"unduly disrupted," or they could simply "cash out" earned comp time with just 30 days notice.
Third, employees who take comp time could be forced to work extra hours at night or over the
weekend to make up the time, without any overtime pay. And even worse, the proposal in the
Senate could eliminate 60 year tradition ofthe 40 hour work week.
Let me be clear: the vast majority of employers will be fair to their workers, under any
system. But we must always make sure to protect those employees who need our help.
Giving workers the real choice of taking time off as overtime pay is good for
families. It will help all Americans balance the demands of home and work. But if
employers are the only ones with choices that's bad for families. And it's no choice at all.
Employees and their families -- not employers -- are the ones who should choose if,
when, and how they use comp time. The moment a responsible comp time bill hits my
desk, I will sign it. But, I will veto any legislation that fails to guarantee real choice for
. employees, real protection against employer abuse and real preservation of fair labor
standards. It is time for us to join together to give America's working families the help
they need to succeed, both on the job and in the home. Let's pass comp time legislation,
but let's do it right.
Thanks for listening.
�President Clinton Wants Flex-Time Legislation that Gives Real Choices
to Employees and Their Families
March 19, 1997
PRESIDENT CLINTON STRONGLY OPPOSES THE REPUBLICAN COMP TIME
PROPOSALS BEFORE CONGRESS BECAUSE:
The President believes employees should be able to choose to receive overtime in
income, or trade it in for time off to be with their families.
The Republican proposals could force employees to accept time off instead of
overtime pay, and could completely take away an employee's ability to earn
ovea·time pay. Many working families rely on overtime wages to pay for their rent, food,
and clothing. The Republican proposal could take that valuable overtime pay out of their
pockets. It allows companies to force employees to take comp time instead of overtime,
e.g. by al_lowing only workers who will take comp time to work more than 40 hours a
week.
Under Republican proposals, employees lose control over when to take the comp
time they have earned. The Senate GOP bill allows employers to "cash out" any earned
comp time with just 30 days notice-- even if the employee was planning to use that time
for extended maternity leave. Employers could also deny an employee's request to use
comp time ifthey claim business would be "unduly disrupted."
The Republican proposals have no effective remedy against employer abuses. The
only remedy available to employees is a lawsuit against employers who force them to take
comp time. That's not practical remedy for most lower-paid workers. And there is no
remedy at all when employers deny overtime to an employee who prefers that option.
Republican pa·oposals undermine the 40-hour work week. Under the GOP proposal,
employers could make employees work extra hours (beyond the 40 hour) during a week
they have taken comp time without paying overtime. Under Senator Ashcroft's biweekly
work or flexible credit programs, employees are never entitled to overtime unless the
employer specifically requested it in advance.
HERE IS WHAT PRESIDENT CLINTON DOES SUPPORT:
Flex-time that gives employees ~ choice, not less -- letting them choose between
time off and overtime pay, whichever is best for them. Under the President's plan,
employees and their families are the ones who choose if, how, and when they use comp
time. Under the Republican bill, employers, not employees, make those decisions -- and
employees are not adequately protected from employer abuses of these laws.
The President's legislation, the Expanded Family and Medical Leave and
Choice Flex Time, would also:
Employe~
�o
Allow employees to decide whether or not to "cash out" comp time with 15 days
notice to their employer.
oExpand Family and Medical Leave by allowing a worker to take unpaid hours off-- up to
24 hours annually-- for parent-teacher conferences, their children's regular doctor visits,
or to care for older relatives' health needs.
�.· ·. ·. ·. · · · · · · · · · "'· · .
':P.~9~·:TJI
President Clinton Wants Flex-Time Legislation that Gives Real Choices
to Employees and Their Families
March 19, 1997
PRESIDENT CLINTON STRONGLY OPPOSES THE REPUBLICAN COMP TIME
PROPOSALS BEFORE CONGRESS BECAUSE:
The President believes employees should be able to choose to receive overtime in
income, or trade it in for time off to be with their families.
The Republican proposals could drastically limit the ability of employees to earn
overtime pay. Many working families rely on overtime wages to pay for their rent, food,
and clothing. The Republican proposal could take that valuable overtime pay out of their
pockets. It allows companies to force employees to take comp time instead of overtime,
e.g., by allowing only workers who will take comp time to work more than 40 hours a
week.
Under Republican proposals, employees lose control over when to take the comp
time they have earned. The Senate GOP bill allows employers to "cash out" any earned
comp time with just 30 days notice -- even if the employee was planning to use that time
for extended maternity leave. Employers could also deny an employee's request to use
comp time ifthey claim business would be "unduly disrupted"-- even if the employee is
simply doing something that's already covered by the Family and Medical Leave Act.
The Republican proposals have no effective remedy against employer abuses. The
only remedy available to employees is a lawsuit against employers who force them to take
comp time. That's not a practical remedy for most lower-paid workers. And there is no
remedy at all when employers deny overtime to an employee who prefers that option.
Republican proposals undermine the 40-hour work week. Under the GOP proposal,
employers could make employees work extra hours (beyond the 40 hour) during a week
they have taken comp time without paying overtime. Under Senator Ashcroft's biweekly
work or flexible credit programs, employees are never entitled to overtime unless the
employer specifically requested it in advance.
HERE IS WHAT PRESIDENT CLINTON DOES SUPPORT:
Flex-time that gives employees~ choice, not less -- letting them choose between
time off and overtime pay, whichever is best for them. Under the President's plan,
employees and their families are the ones who choose if, how, and when they use comp
time. Under the Republican bill, employers, not employees, make those decisions-- and
employees are not adequately protected from employer abuses of these laws.
The President's legislation would Expand the Family and Medical Leave Act and
Give Employees New Choices on Flex Time. The President's plan would allow a
.\·
�worker to take unpaid hours off-- up to 24 hours annually -- for parent-teacher
conferences, their children's regular doctor visits, or to care for older relatives' health
needs.
�4
~.
DRAFT
Flexible credit hour program leaves employees with less money, not more jlexibQity.
•
The Problem: The Ashcroft bill's flexible eredit hour program does not sufficiently protect
employees who use the program - thus denying families the flexibility it appears to offer them:
• The bill gives employees no explicit rights to use their fl.ex:J.ole credit hours - paid timeoff that the employees have already earned- when they want to, and no protection against
an employer who prevents them from using their credit hours when they choose.
• Employees don't have true flexibility to choose when and how to earn credit hours,
because in all cases the schedule and hours must be jointly designated by the employee and
employer.
• Employees have no right to request a cash out of banked credit hours: the bill only
provides for cash out at the end of the year or if· the employee leaves the program.
Banked hours are cashed out at the employee's rate of pay at the time of payment, even if
the employee had a higher rate when the hours were earned - and there is no requirement
that the employer actually pay the employee within a reasonable time .frame.
• There are no provisions covering how or when an employer can tenninate a flexible
credit hour program - an employer could end the program with no notice to employees.
• Employers are not required to keep a written record documenting which employees have
elected to participate in the flexible credit hour program.
• Employees are not protected if employers don't make comp time available to employees
on an equal basis; the employer can pick and choose which employees get this option.
• An employer could substitute a .flexible credit hour program- where hours are earned at
straight time - for an overtime or comp time system - where pay or hours are earned at
time and a half- as long as the employer does not require any employee to work more
than 40 hours in a week. In other words, employees who wanted to work extra hours
would never be able to earn an overtime premium.
•
Ihe Solution: The scheduling flexibility already available under the current law, in
combination with the President• s comp time proposal, provides the right balance of .flexibility
for both employees and employers without sacrificing the rights of employees. ·
UJI>-1
b
l.V (t
yo
36
~
~
~~
+ I
D
Cae
~cl
~R
~~ 16"
'
�DRAFT
PRESIDENT WILLIAM J. CLINTON
RADIO ADDRESS TO THE NATION
MARCH 22, 1997
Good morning. I am glad to be back at the microphone this morning. My knee is healing
just fine and I am happy to report that I have just completed a successful summit meeting with
l
President Yeltsin in Helsinki.l ov...~L --..o~ ~c..c...
.\ '\.c._:. ~ ._..:>O~d ~ \.._g ·v-(_
•
e.,......).~~~"';;>\:)..
.
'1.
Today, I want to talk with y'f}U about how we can work together to strengthen Amenca's
working families by helping them strik-e-a 1eal balanc~ between work and-family. We~ made
significant progress in this area with the passage of the landmark Family and Medical Leave Act in
1993. I am proud of the impact this bill has had on the every day lives of working families. Since
its enactment, millions of Americans have been able to take unpaid leave to care for a new born
child or be with a family member who is sick. Everywhere I go, people tell me "I don't know
what I would have done without the Family Leave Law-- it enabled me to take care of my child
without hurting my family, without losing my job."
With new pressures on families in the way they work and live, I believe we have to do
even more to give people the chance to be good workers and good parents. That is why I have
proposed expanding the Family and Medical Leave Act so that workers can take time offto
attend teacher conferences or to take a child for a medical check-up. I have challenged the
Congress to pass legislation that will do that this year and I have high hopesthat they will.
~ morning, I want to talk about another way to strengthen working families.
Last
June, at the Vice President's annual Family Reunion Conference in Nashville, I proposed that we
give our nation's workers and their employers responsible compensatory time legislation that
gives working people the flexibility they need to meet their obligations at home and in the
workplace. I laid out a plan that offers employees this simple choice: If you work overtime you
can be paid time and a half, just as the law now requires, or, if you want, you can take that
payment in time -- an hour and a half off for every hour you work overtime. Simply put, you can
choose money in the bank or time on the clock -- time that can be used for a vacation, an
extended maternity leave or to be there at critical moments for your children. But I have said from
the start that this must be done the right way. Otherwise, it could reduce flexibility for families
and make their lives more difficult. Any legislation must uphold three fundamental principals: real
choice for employees, real protection against employer abuse, and preservation affair labor
stan~ards such as the 40 hour work week and the right to overtime pay.
A Republican bill that was passed in the House this week and a Senate version that will
soon be voted on, both fail that test. Let me tell you why. First, under the Republican plan,
employees aren't reallY. ·
a choice of whether to be paid for overtime in money, or in time off
from work. There ac no
c 1ve safeguards to stop an IJ!l~mp!~er frm ~ing his
employees who ne Cl the paych ck more than family time that they have no choice. Second,
under their prop sals, employee don't have real choice over when to take the camp time they
have earned. mployers could't ny requests for camp time by claiming business would be
�...
~~~1Lat
"unduly disrupted," or the;kould simply " ash ou ' earned comp time with just 30 days notice.
Third, employees who take comp time could e forced to work extra hours at night or over the
weekend to make up the time, without any overtime pay. And even worse, the proposal in the
Senate could eliminate the 60 year tradition of the 40 hour ~ork week.
Let me be clear: the vast majority of employers will be fair to their workers, under any
system. But we must always make sure to protect those employees who need our help.
Giving workers the real choice of taking time off as overtime pay is good for
families. It will help all Americans balance the demands of home and work. But if
employers are the only ones with choices that's bad for families. And it's no choice at all.
Employees and their families-- not employers -- are the ones who should choose if,
when, and how they use comp time. The moment a responsible comp time bill hits my
desk, I will sign it. But, I will veto any legislation that fails to guarantee real choice for
employees, real protection against employer abuse and real preservation of fair labor
standards. It is time for us to join together to give America's working families the help
they need to succeed, both on the job and in the home. Let's pass comp time legislation,
but let's do it right.
Thanks for listening.
�DRAFT
DRAFT REVISED 3/14197
The Ashcrort Bill Fails to Provide Employees with Flexibility and Choice
Employers decide when worker:s use their comp time.
•
The Problem: The Ashcroft bill won't give families more flexibility because employers will
have significant control over when employees can use their camp time:
• Employers may cash out earned comp time above 80 hours at any time with 30 days
notice, even if the employee was planning to use the comp time for extended maternity
leave, for example.
• Employers may deny an employee's request to use comp time if the employer claims the
business would be "unduly disrupted" - even if the employee was counting on using the
camp time to care for a sick family member.
•
The Solution: The President's proposal gives fiu:nilies real flexibility by letting them choose
when to use their camp time:
• Employees decide whether or not to cash out comp time, with 15 days notice to their
employer.
• Employees may use comp time for family and medical leave reasons whenever they need
it.
• Employers must grant an employee's request to use comp time for any other reason with
two weeks notice, unless the leave would cause substantial economic injury to the ·
employer - a higher standard than under the Ashcroft plan.
• Employees may choose whether to cash out their comp time at the ·end of the year or to
carry it over for up to three months.
Employees' rights are unprotected
•
The Problem: The Ashcroft bill leaves the door open for unscrupulous employers to take
adv~tage of their employees:
• Employees may not be able to manage their comp time effectively because the bill
provides no mechanism to help them keep track of the hours they have banked or used.
• Employees can't really choose between overtime and comp time because there is no
remedy in suits by employees when employers deny overtime work to an employee
- because the employee wants overtime pay instead of comp time.
• Employers could eliminate paid leave plans and replace them with comp time plans,
leaving employees worse off
• Employers are not required to make comp time available to employees on an equal basis.
•
The Solution; The President's proposal speCifically protects the rights of workers against
comp time abuse:
• Employers must provide regular statements on accrual and use of comp time.
• Double damages would be assessed against employers for denying overtime hours to
employe.es who want to earn premium pay for their overtime work, not comp time.
�2
DRAFT
• Civil money penalties would be assessed for violations of comp time or record-keeping
requirements.
• Comp time could not be used to replace or substitute for other leave benefits, or to
deprive a worker of unemployment eligibility.
• Employers must make comp time available to similarly-situated employees on an equal
basis.
Using comp time could actually leave employees with less jlex:ibiUty eJ!. less money.
The Problem: When an employee uses comp time - say, to take her child to the doctor- the
time won't count as hours worked under the Ashcroft bill. If later that same week the
employer demands that the employee stay late and work extra hours on top of her nonnal
schedule, she would only be entitled to regular hourly pay for those extra hours worked.
Despite the disruption to her family, she would not be entitled to a time-and-a-half premium
·or to choose comp time instead of pay for those hours, as long as she hadn't actually worked
'
"L. for more than 40 hours that week. And the employer may be more lilcely to demand extra
~ work hours in a week that the employee takes comp time, because the extra hours cost the
, . ~ employer less that week than in a week where the hours would be overtime hours. So the
Ashcroft bill gives "flexibility" with one hand, but takes it away with the other - and leaves the
employee with less money!
•
c:::::7J
-6
•
The Solution· The President's proposal treats comp time as hours worked, so employees who
use comp time can't be forced to work extra hours later in the week without earning overtime
pay or comp time.
Unpaid comp time is not safeguarded against employer bankruptcy.
•
The Problem: The Ashcroft bill does not provide sufficient protections for banked comp time
when an empJoyer goes bankrupt. Whether or not unpaid comp time is given priority as
wages will depend on when the comp time was earned and when the bankruptcy proceeding
was filed. Because employees may accumulate up to 240 hours of comp time over a year,
they could lose as much as six weeks' pay if the employer goes bankrupt.
•
The Solution: The President's proposal makes sure all unpaid comp time gets the special
protection afforded to unpaid wages earned at the time an employer goes bankrupt.
, Employees are further protected against employer bankruptcy under the President's proposal
because they may only accumulate SO hours of comp time in a year.
The most vulnerable workers are not protected against comp time abuse. ·
•
Ihe Problem: Under the Ashcroft bill, employers may establish comp time policies for lowwage and other vulnerable workers - the very people who are most likely to have their rights
violated by pressure from unscrupulous employers to take comp time, and who may not be
able to pay their bills if they aren't really allowed to choose overtime pay.
�DRAFT
PRESIDENT WILLIAM J. CLINTON
RADIO ADDRESS TO THE NATION
MARCH 22, 1997
Good morning. I am glad to be back at the microphone this morning. My knee is healing
just fine and I have just returned to the White House after a successful summit meeting with
President Y eltsin in Helsinki.
Today, I want to talk with you about how we can work together to strengthen America's
working families by helping them strike a real balance between work and family. We have made
significant progress in this area with the passage of the landmark Family and Medical Leave Act in
1993. I am proud of the impact this bill has had on the every day lives of working families. Since
its enactment, millions of Americans have been able to take unpaid leave to care for a new born
child or be with a .family member who is sick. Everywhere I go, people tell me "I don't know
what I would have done without the Family Leave Law -- it enabled me to take care of my child
·without hurting my family, without losing my job."
With new pressures on families in the way they work and live, I believe we have to do
even more to give people the chance to be good workers and good parents. That is why I have
proposed expanding the Family and Medical Leave Act so that workers can take time offto
attend teacher conferences or to take a child for a medical check-up. I have challenged the
Congress to pass legislation that will do that this year and I have high hopes that they will.
But this morning, l want to talk about another way to strengthen working families. Last
June, at the Vice President's annual Family Reunion Conference in Nashville, I proposed that we
give our nation's workers and their employers responsible compensatory time legislation that
gives working people the flexibility they need to meet their obligations at home and in the
workplace. I laid out a plan that offers employees this simple choice: If you work overtime you
can be paid time and a half, just as the law now requires, or, if you want, you can take that
payment in time -- an hour and a half off for every hour you work overtime. Simply put, you can
choose money in the bank or time on the clock -- time that can be used for a vacation, an
extended maternity leave or to be there at critical moments for your children. But l have said from
the start that this must be done the right way. Otherwise, it could open the door for employer
abuse. Any legislation must uphold three fundamentaJ principals: real choice for employees, real
protection against employer abuse, and preservation offair labor standards such as the 40 hour
work week and the right to overtime pay.
A Republican bill that was passed in the House this week and a Senate version that will
soon be voted on, both fail that test. Let me tell you why. First, the Republican proposals could
drastically limit the ability of employees to earn overtime pay by allowing employers to force their
workers to take comp time instead of overtime. Second, under their proposals, employees would
lose control over when to take the comp time they have earned. Employel(s could simply "cash
out" any earned comp time with just 30 days notice or they could deny an employee's comp time
request if they claim business would be "unduly dismpted." And finally, under the Republican
�proposal, employers could make employees work extra hours, beyond 40 hours, during the week
they have taken comp time without paying overtime. Under the Senate bill, comp time does not
count as hours worked, leaving the door open for an employer to provide only regular hourly pay
for any overtime work done by an employee during the week that comp time was used. It also
would allow an employer to substitute comp time plans for existing vacation leave plans, leaving
employees worse off.
Employees and their fa¥~,i!i~a.E.eb~ones who should choose if, when, and how they
use comp time. Af.t.ho.ugh-..1--ani=tl"Te~pport and sign a responsible comp time bill, I
intend to veto any legislation that fails to guarantee real choice for employees, real
protection against employer abuse and real preservation of fair labor standards. It is time
for us to join together to give America's working families the help they need to succeed,
both on the job and in the home. Let's pass comp time legislation, but let's do it right.
Thanks for listening.
�PRESIDENT WILLIAM J. CLINTON
RADIO ADDRESS TO THE NATION
MARCH 22,1997
Good morning. I am glad to be back at the microphone this morning. My knee is healing
just fine and l have just returned to the White House after a successful summit meeting with
President Y eltsin in Helsinki.
Today, I want to talk with you about how we can work together to strengthen America's
working families by helping them strike areal balance between work and family. We have made
significant progress in this area with the passage of the landmark Family and Medical Leave Act in
1993~ I am proud ofthe impact this bill has had on the every day lives ofworkil;lg families. Since
its enactment, millions of Americans have been able to take unpaid leave to care for a new born
child or be with a family member who is sick. Everywhere I go, people tell me "I don't know
what I would have done without the Family Leave Law -- it enabled me to take care of my child
without hurting my family, without losing my job."
With new pressures on families in the way they work and live, I believe we have to do
even more to give people the chance to be good workers and good parents. That is why I have
proposed expanding the Family and Medical Leave Act so that workers can take time off to
attend teacher conferences or to take a child for a medical check-up. I have challenged the
Congress to pass legislation that will do that this year and I have high hopes that they will.
But this morning, I want to talk about another way to strengthen working families. Last
June, at the Vice President's annual Family Reunion Conference in Nashville, I proposed that we
give our nation's workers and their employers responsible compensatory time legislation that
gives working people the flexibility they need to meet their obligations at home and in the
workplace. I laid out a plan that offers employees this simple choice: Ifyou work overtime you
can be paid time and a half, just as the law now requires, or, if you want, you can take that
payment in time-- an hour and a halfofffor every hour you work overtime. Simply put, you can
choose money in the bank or time on the clock -- time that can be used for a vacation, an
extended maternity leave or to be there at critical moments your children. But I have said from the
start that this must be done the right way. Otherwise, it could open the door for employer abuse.
Any legislation must uphold three fundamental principals: real choice for employees, real
protection against employer abuse, and preservation offair labor standards such as the 40 hour
work week and the right to overtime pay.
A Republican bill that was passed in the House this week and a Senate version that will
soon be voted on, both fail that test. Let me tell you why. First, the Republican proposals could
drastically limit the ability of employees to earn overtime pay by allowing employers to force their
workers to take comp time instead of overtime. Second, under their proposals, employees would
lose control over when to take the comp time they have earned. Employees could simply "cash
out" any earned comp time with just 30 days notice or they could deny an employee's comp time
request if they claim business would be "unduly disrupted." And finally, under the Republican
proposal, employers could make employees work extra hours, beyond 40 hours, during the week
�they have taken comp time without paying overtime. Under the Senate bill, comp time does not
count as hours worked, leaving the door open for an employer to provide only regular hourly pay
for any overtime work done by an employee during the week that comp time was used. It also
would allow an employer to substitute comp time plans for existing vacation leave plans, leaving
employees worse off.
Employees and their families are the ones who should choose if, when, and how they
use comp tim~. Although I am prepared to support and sign a responsible comp time bill, I
intend to veto any legislation that fails to guarantee real choice for employees, real
protection against employer abuse and real preservation of fair labor standards. It is time
for us to join together to give America's working families the help they need to succeed,
both on the job and in the home. Let's pass comp time legislation, but let's do it right.
Thanks for listening.
�.
PRESIDENT WILLIAM J. CLINTON
RADIO ADDRESS TO THE NATION
MARCH 22, 1997
Good morning. I am glad to be back at the microphone this morning. My knee is healing
just fine and I have just returned to the White House after a successful summit meeting with
President Y eltsin in Helsinki.
Today, I want to talk with you about how we can work together to strengthen America's
working families by helping them strike a real balance between work and family. We have made
significant progress in this area with the passage of the landmark Family and Medical Leave Act in
1993. Since the enactment ofthat legislation, millions of Americans have been able to take
unpaid leave to care for a new born child or be with a family member who is sick. That was the
first bill I signed into law as President, and it was one of my proudest moments. The Family and
Medical Leave Law has had a tremendously positive impact on the everyday lives of working
families. Everywhere I go, people tell me "I don't know what I would have done without the
Family Leave Law-- it enabled me to take care of my child without hurting my family, without
losing my job."
With new pressures on families in the way they work and live, I believe we have to do
even more to give people the chance to be good workers and good parents. That is why I have
proposed expanding the Family and Medical Leave Act so that workers can take time off to
attend teacher conferences or to take a child for a medical check-up. I have challenged the
Congress to pass this legislation this year and I have high hopes that they will.
But this morning, I want to talk about another way to strengthen working families. Last
June, at the Vice President's annual Family Reunion Conference in Nashville, I proposed that we
give our nation's workers and their employers responsible compensatory time legislation that
gives working people the flexibility they need to meet their obligations at home and in the
workplace. I laid out a plan that offers employees this simple choice: If you work overtime you ·
can be paid time and a half, just as the law now requires, or, if you want, you can take that
payment in time-- an hour and a halfofffor every hour you work overtime. Simply put, you can
choose money in the bank or time on the clock -- time that can be used for a vacation, an
extended maternity leave or to be there at critical moments your children. But I have said from the
start that this must be done the right way. Otherwise, it could open the door for abuse of the
existing overtime laws. Any legislation must uphold three fundamental principals: real choice for
employees, real protection against employer abuse, and preservation of fair labor standards such
as the 40 hour work week and the right to overtime pay.
A Republican bill that was passed in the House this week and a Senate version that will
soon be voted on, both fail that test. Let me tell you why. First, the Republican proposals could
drastically limit the ability of employees to earn overtime pay by allowing employers to force their
workers to take comp time instead of overtime. Second, under their proposals, employees would
lose control over when to take the comp time they have earned. Employees could simply "cash
out" any earned comp time with just 3 0 days notice or they could deny an employee's comp time
�President Clinton Wants Flex-Time Legislation that Gives Real Choices
to Employees and Their Families
March 19, 1997
PRESIDENT CLINTON STRONGLY OPPOSES THE REPUBLICAN COMP TIME
PROPOSALS BEFORE CONGRESS BECAUSE:
•
The President believes employees should be able to choose to receive
overtime in income, or trade it in for time off to be with their families.
•
The Republican proposals could drastically limit the ability of employees to
earn overtime pay. Many working families rely on overtime wages to pay for
their rent, food,• and clothing. The Republican proposal could take that
valuable overtime pay out of their pockets. It allows companies to force
employees to take comp time instead of overtime, e.g., by allowing only
workers who will take comp time to work more than 40 hours a week.
•
Under Republican proposals, employees lose control over when to take the
comp time they have earned. The Senate GOP bill allows employers to "cash
out" any earned comp time with just 30 days notice -- even if the employee
was planning to use that time for extended maternity leave. Employers could
also deny an employee's request to use comp time if they claim business
would be "unduly disrupted" -- even if the employee is simply doing
something that's already covered by the Family and Medical Leave Act .
•
•
Republican proposals undermine the 40-hour work week. Under the GOP
proposal, employers could make employees work extra hours (beyond the 40
hour) during a week they have taken comp time without paying overtime.
Under Senator Ashcroft's biweekly work or flexible credit programs,
employees are never entitled to overtime unless the employer specifically
requested it in advance.
HERE IS WHAT PRESIDENT CLINTON DOES SUPPORT:
.,
Flex-time that gives employees more choice, not less -- letting them choose
between time off and overtime pay, whichever is best for them. Under the
President's plan, employees and their families are the ones who choose i.L_
how, and when they use comp time. Under the Republican bill, employers,
, i~r-ofJ~
ru:t
(
VC<-6 -ee- -r
�not employees, make those decisions -- and employees are not adequately
protected from employer abuses of these laws.
•
The President's legislation would Expand the Family and Medical Leave Act
and Give Employees New Choices on Flex Time. The President's plan would
allow a worker to take unpaid hours off -- up to 24 hours annually -- for
parent-teacher conferences, their children's regular doctor visits, or to care
for older relatives' health needs.
�THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
February 1, 1997
For Immediate Release
RADIO ADDRESS BY THE PRESIDENT TO THE NATION
The Oval Office
10:06 A.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. As a parent, I know how important it is to take
responsibility for our children when they need us most -- when they're sick, when they need to go
to the doctor, or when there's a parent-teacher conference at school. Fortunately, Hillary and I
have never have to risk our jobs to be there for our daughter. We've never had to make the
choice between being good parents and good workers.
Today I want to talk with you about what we have done and what more we must do as a
people to give that same assurance to every American family. One of the things I wanted most to
do when I became President was to help parents succeed-- both at home and at work. That's
why I was so proud to make the Family and Medical Leave Act the very first bill I signed as
President, exactly four years ago this Wednesday. Family and Medical Leave allows people in
companies with 50 or more employees to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave, to care for a
newborn or a newly-adopted child, or to be with a family member who is seriously ill without
fear of losing the job.
Today, over half of all American workers share this important benefit. People like
Christy Sensa first grade teacher from Fairfax, Virginia, who is here with me .today. Christy was
among the first Americans to make use ofthe new Family Leave Law in 1993 when she and her
husband were expecting their first child. She thought she would be forced to choose between the
six weeks her school allowed her for new mothers, or taking a whole year off without pay.
Because of our new law, she was able to spend 12 full weeks at home, recovering from her
pregnancy and spending precious time with her new daughter. Christy used the benefit again in
1995 for the birth of her second child.
Family leave is not only family-friendly, it's employer-friendly as welL Also with me
today is Stan Sorrell, President and CEO of the Calvert Group, an investment firm in
Bethesda, Maryland; and two of his employees who have also used family leave. The Calvert
Group started a family and medical leave program three years before it became the law of the
land. Like almost 90 percent of the businesses covered by the law, they found that family leave
�is easy to administer and costs them little or nothing. So we know it's working for both families
and businesses. After all, in these past four years, American business has created
over 11· million new jobs -- more than any other four-year term in our history.
Now, we must make it even easier for parents to live up to their responsibilities to their
children and to their employers. Today, I call upon Congress to expand the Family Leave Law,
to give parents an additional24 hours of unpaid leave each year to take a child or an elderly
relative to a regular doctor's appointment or to attend parent-teacher conferences at school. In so
doing, we'll make our families stronger and our workers more productive -- building the kind of
country and economy we all want for our children.
We also must address the fact that too many workers still do not know about the Family
· Leave Law. That's why I'm pleased to announce that we're launching a multimedia public
education campaign to spread the word about Family Leave to make sure employers and
employees have the facts and to make sure everyone knows how to make this law work for them.
It's simply not enough to help people have the tools to succeed. We also have to make sure they
know what those tools are.
The centerpiece of this campaign is a new 800 number that any American can call to
learn about Family and Medical Leave. It's 1-800-959-FMLA. That's.l-800-959-FMLA. You
can also get information through our Labor Department's Web Site on the Internet-www.dol.gov. That's www.dol.gov.
By expanding Family Leave to cover children's doctor visits and parent-teacher
conferences and by helping more Americans to learn about the opportunity of Family Leave, we
can enable millions of more of our fellow citizens to meet their responsibilities both at home and
at work. That's how we must prepare our people for a new century full of new promise and
possibility.
As parents, teachers and business people, as members of the work force and members of
our communities, we all share a stake in the strength of our families. Our society can never be
stronger than the children we raise or the families in which we raise them. That's why Family
Leave is more than just a single issue or accomplishment. It is at the heart of our approach to
preparing America for the 21st century by ensuring that we can all meet our obligations and
make the most of our God-given gifts.
Thanks for listening.
END
10:11 A.M. EST
�PRESIDENT WILLIAM J. CLINTON
RADIO ADDRESS TO THE NATION
MARCH 22, 1997
Good morning. I am glad to be back at the microphone this morning. My knee is healing
just fine and 1 have just returned to the White House after a successful summit meeting with
President Yeltsin in Helsinki.
Today, I want to talk with you about how we can work together to strengthen America's
working families by helping them strike a real balance between work and family. We have made
significant progress in this area with the passage of the landmark Family and Medical Leave Act in
1993. Since the enactment of that legislation, millions of Americans have been able to take ,J
unpaid leave to care for a new born child or be with a family member who is sick. ]:llat was tbe""'~~~ll.c.'-'~
~rst bill Lsigned into law as Ptesident, and it was one of my proudest motoents,.. The Family and
MOO-teal Leave Law ha:s had a tret'fleHdousl:PF~·e intpaet on the evCiyday lives ofworking
.JMpiltes. Everywhere I go, people tell me "I don't know what I would have done without the
Family Leave Law-- it enabled me to take care of my child without hurting my family, without
losing my job."
With new pressures on families in the way they work and live, I believe we have to do
even more to give people the chance to be good workers and good parents. That is why I have
proposed expanding the Family and Medical Leave Act so that workers can take time off to
attend teacher conferences or to take a child for a medical check-up. I have challenged the
Congress to pass t!oia legislation this year and I have high hopes that they will.
.
~~cA.~
But this morning, l want to talk about another way to strengthen working families. Last
June, at the Vice President's annual Family Reunion Conference in Nashville, I proposed that we
give our nation's workers and their employers responsible compensatory time legislation that
gives working people the flexibility they need to meet their obligations at home and in the
workplace. I laid out a plan that offers employees this simple choice: If you work overtime you
can be paid time and a half, just as the law now requires, or, if you want, you can take that
payment in time -- an hour and a half off for every hour you work overtime. Simply put, you can
choose money in the bank or time on the clock -- time that can be used for a vacation, an
extended maternity leave or to be there at critical moments your children. But I have ~~id_~!ll.J~~ .
start that this must be done the right way. Otherwise, it could open the door for aou~-r--<-.J
.ex!sting overtime .Laws. Any legislation must uphold three fundamental principals: real choice for
employees, real protection against employer abuse, and preservation offair labor standards such
as the 40 hour work week and the right to overtime pay.
A Republican bill that was passed in the House this week and a Senate version that will
soon be voted on, both fail that test. Let me tell you why. First, the Republican proposals could
drastically limit the ability of employees to earn overtime pay by allowing employers to force their
workers to take comp time instead of overtime. Second, under their proposals, employees would
lose control over when to take the comp time they have earned. Employees could simply "cash
out" any earned comp time with just 30 days notice or they could deny an employee's comp time
�request if they claim business would be "unduly disrupted." And finally, under the Republican
proposal, employers could make employees work extra hours, beyond 40 hours, during the week
they have taken comp time without paying overtime. Under the Senate bill, comp time does not
count as hours worked, leaving the door open for an employer to provide only regular hourly pay
for any overtime work done by an employee during the week that comp time was used. It also
would allow an employer to substitute comp time plans for existing vacation leave plans, leaving
employees worse off.
Employees and their families are the ones who should choose if, when, and how they
use comp time. Although I am prepared to support and sign a responsible comp time bill, I
intend to veto any legislation that fails to guarantee real choice for employees, real
protection against employer abuse and real preservation of fair labor standards. It is time
for us to join together to give America's working families the help they need to succeed,
both on the job and in the home. Let's pass comp time legislation, but let's do it right.
Thanks for listening.
. and WGulEI take the control of when to take oom.p.Jime th~
�L
DRAFT
PRESIDENT WILLIAM J. CLINTON
RADIO ADDRESS TO THE NATION
MARCH 22, 1997
I~
~this
Good morning.
bdat
morning. My knee is healing
just fine and I have just r~thit~fter a successful summit meeting with
President Yeltsin in Helsi~
Today, I want to talk with you about how we can work together to strengthen America's
working families by helping them strike a real balance between work and family. We have made
significant progress in this area with the passage of the landmark Family and Medical Leave Act in ·
1993. I am proud of the impact this bill has had on the every day lives of working families. Since
its enactment, millions of Americans have been able to take unpaid leave to care for a new b~n
child or be with a family member who is sick. Everywhere I go, people tell me "I don't know
·
what I would have done without the Family Leave Law-- it enabled me to take care of my child
without hurting my family, without losing my job."
'
~
.
.
(~
With new pressures on families in the way they work and live, I believe we have to do
even more to give people the chance to be good workers and good parents. Thatis why I have
proposed expanding the Family and Medical Leave Act so that workers can take time off to
attend teacher conferences or to take a child for a medical check-up. I have challenged the
Congress to pass legislation thOt will do that this year and I have high hopes that they will.
--.},~r:~
.
· D
-
f>~
.
H
But this morning, I want to talk about another way to strengthen working families. Last
June, at the Vice President's annual Family Reunion Conference in Nashville, I proposed that we
give our nation's workers and their employers responsible compensatory time legislation that .
gives working people the flexibility they need to meet their obligations at home and in the
workplace. I laid out a plan that offers employees this simple choice: If you work overtime you
can be paid time and a half, just as the law now requires, or, if you want, you can take that
payment in time -- an hour and a half off for every hour you work overtime. Simply put, you can
choose money in the bank or time on the clock -- time that can be used for a vacation, an
extended maternity leave or to be there at critical moments for your children. But I have said from
the start that this must be done the right way. Otherwise, it could open the door for employee
abuse. Any legislation must uphold three fundamental principals: real choice for employees, real
protection against employer abuse, and preservation of fair labor standards such as the 40 hour
work week and the right to overtime pay.
· A Republican bill that was passed in the House this week and a Senate version that will
~
soon be voted on, both fail that test. Let me tell you why. First, the Republican proeo§als c~
drastically limit the ability of employees to earn overtime pay by allowing employers- to1();ce their '
workers to take comp time instead of overtime. Second, under their proposals, employees would (~
lose control over when to take the comp time they have earned. Employers could simply "cash
tA~
out" any earned comp time with just 30 days notice or they could deny an employee's comp time
request if they claim business would be "u~y~sru t d" And finally, under the Republican
�proposal, employers could make employees work extra hours, beyond 40 hours, during the week
they have taken camp time without paying overtime. Under the Senate bill, camp time does not
count as hours worked, leaving the door open for an employer to provide only regular hourly pay
for any overtime work done by an employee during the week that camp time was used. It also
would allow an employer to substitute camp time plans for existing vacation leave plans, leaving
employees worse off.
Employees and their families are the ones who should choose if, when, and how they
use comp time. The moment a responsible comp time bill hits my desk, I will sign it. But, 'I
will veto any legislation that fails to guarantee real choice for employees, real protection
against employer abuse and real preservation of fair labor standards. It is time for us to
join together to give America's working families the help they need to succeed, both on the
job and in the home. Let's pass comp time legislation, but let's do it right.
Thanks for listening.
�::~}~·
.,
T
~[;nhm,1996 .)(4
.1121
.
ler to provide
o IFOR. These
command and
:nt.
participating in
forces who are
.~r participating
~Crations forces,
·rces, air forces,
nphibious force
Mediterranean
p remains availFOR's air oper~ sustained one
·n a soldier was
was also slightly
,n isolated incided after
. inter-.
-iri at a storage
jured, one seri~
1ck a mine. Sev~
rred because of
>ion for 1 year
·hich time it will
:, it is <;mrinten-·····\
~ the withdrawa
~i
.1fter December
, ·'
by NATO com~
safety of troops
tts for an orderly
:mains deployed
tblic of Macedotions Preventive
REDEP). · This
'erves and mon- ·
)order with the
lavia, effectively
' of the region.
helicopters are
mpport to U.S.
required. Most
·.s. soldiers parare assigned to
•lor, 1st Infantry
of U.S. military
Croatia in direct
nsitional Adminttinued, until re~ the U.N.-manmomic san1cti1ons
.
as part of NATO's participation in Operation . suspensions under ·Section 902(a) of the Act
"SHARP Guard." Since the. arms. embargo with respect to the issuance of licenses for
has been terminated and economic sanctions defense article exports to the People's Re~
have been suspended, U.S. naval activities in public of China and the export of U.S.-origin
support of Operation SHARP Guard have satellites, insofar as such restrictions pertain
ceased. Operation SHARP Guard, however, to the Hughes ·~sia Pacific Mobile Telewill not be terminated until economic sane" communications :project. . ·License requiretions are terminated and U,S. naval forces ments remain :il} place for these exports and
will remain on call to provide aSsistance again require review and approval on a. CaSe-byshould economic sanctions be reimposed.
case basis by. the United States Government.
It is in the U.S. national interest to help
William J. Clinton
bring peace to Bosnia. Through American
leadership and in conjunction with our The White Hou~e,
NATO allies and other countries, we have June 23, 1996. ·
seen real progress toward sustainable peace
relea~ed by the Offic.-e
in Bosnia. We have also made it clear to the NoTE:' This message
of the Press Secretary on Jurie 24. ·
former warring parties that it is they who are
ultimately responsible for implementing the
peace agreement.
Remarks t~ theFamily Re-Union V
I have directed the participation of U,S. Conference in Nashville, Tennessee.
Armed Forces in these operations pursuant June 24, 1996· ·
to my constitutional authority to conduct
..:· _. .. :: ..
U.S. foreign relations and as Commander in . : Thank you very. •much. ~Well, Mr .. Vice
,Chief and Chief Executive, and in accord- President, I kind of hate to talk, that panel
ance with various statutory authorities. I am was so good. I sort of-I think they :were
••u•,.u.ua' this report as parLof my efforts
the keynote, and rn just try to finish it With
keep the Congress fully..informed about a grace note: ,
·. · ·· · :ctle•veioo:me:nts in the former Yugoslavia. I will
I'd like to begin by thanking the Vice
continue to consult closely with the Congress President and Tipper for showing this con·regarding our efforts to foster peace and sta- sistent commitment to the Arrieri~ family.
bilityin the former Yugoslavia. .
·
I mean, it's one thing to .have one of these
Sincerely,
. ..,; ·
conferences, but to have·one every year and
have each· one be better than the :last and
.William J. Clinton
to. be able .to demonstrate to the .American
NOTE: Identical letters were sent to Newt Gingpeople that we are building on it and actually
rich, Speaker of the House of Representatives, doing something with. it-I mean, after that
and Strom Thurmond, President pro tempore of conference last year, I left here with a rethe Senate. This letter was released by the Office newed commitment to make sure that when
of the Press Secretary on June 24.
·
we passed the teleroinmunications bill it had
the V-chip in it. I.left here with a renewed
sense that, because of the media people that
Message to the Congress on Trade
were here, that we could work with the leadWithChina
.
ers of the entertainment industry to develop
23, 1996
a television rating system, and we did. And
I believe we'll be able to get an agreement
To the Congress of the United States:
to increase the quality and quantity of eduPursuant to the authority vested in me by cational time on television. And I believe. a
Section 902(b)(2) of the Foreign Relations lot of good things will come out of this con·Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1990 and ference as well. So, for-we're indebted to
1991 (P.L. 101-246) ("the Act"), and as them for a lot. of things, but this will be a
President of the United States, I hereby re- lasting legacy.
· . . ·
. · .· ·.· './'
port to Congress that it is in the national inI also want to thank Dr. Erickson and Repof the United States to terminate the resentative Purcell, Speaker Naifeh; .Gov-
was
_
June
f
�1122
June 24 I Administration of William]. Clinton,
ernor Wilder, and the other ofTicials that are
here, Attorney General Burson, Attorney
General Humphrey, and State legislators
from across the country. And I thank you for
coming.
I'd like to begin by saying you could probably tell that we're all kind of into this, and
that's a very important thing for me for you
to know. I believe as we move into this new
era that the people of this country are going
to have more chances to live out their dreams
than any generation of Americans before
them. But we have to do it in a way that,
number one, gives everybody a chance to live
out their dreams, not just a few-or not even
just many or most, but everybody who is willing to be a responsible citizen should have
a chance to live out their dreams. And we
have to do it in a way that brings us together,
instead of dividing us.
This is an incredibly diverse country. This
is an incredibly complex and diverse economy. We are being more and more drawn
into a global-not just a global economy but
a global society. And it is absolutely imperative that we have a commitment to dealing
with these challenges in a way that increases
opportunity for all and brings us together.
When Hillary and I and AI and Tipper all
sort of moved into the White House, one of
the things that I tried to do was to kind of
get a Hx on the people who were working
for us. Now, a lot of people who work for
the White House are young people who
haven't started their families yet; and that's
probably good because they work these crazy
hours and they never seem to get tired. I
used to be that way myself. [Laughter] And
then a lot of people who work for us, all their
chil,dren are grown, so they can accommodate bizarre schedules and long hours.
But we have a significant number of people in very responsible positions who still
have children who are either school age or
pre-school age. And one of the things I told
them when we started this was that we were
on a mission to change America for the better, but it wasn't as important as taking care
of their kids, and that if they ever thought
that their families were really suffering, they
ought to quit, because the most important
job any of us have, starting with the President, is to be a good parent. And several of
th'em have taken me up on my admonition[laughter]-sometimes at great personal loss
tome.
One of the most brilliant people who ever
worked in the White House, at Iea5t in the
last several years, Bill Galston-a man who
made an enormous contribution to our administration, full of new ideas and ways to
move America into the 21st century-came
to me one day and he said, "My boy keeps
asking where I am. He's 10 years old. You
can get somebody else to do this job; no one
else can do that job. I have to go home. You
said I could, and now I have to." And he
did. And I think he'll never regret it:
My Deputy Chief of Staff, Erskine Bowles,
whose wife went to college with Hillaryhis wife is a very prominent executive in the
textile industry, and her job got bigger and
bigger and .she was going to have to travel
more. And they just had one· child' left at
home,. and he was going into his senior year.
And Erskine said, you know, he said, "I just
love working here. I love public service, and
I don't need the money. But my boy should
not be at home in his last year in high ·
And I don't want him to ever
,
a single time, for the rest of his life, .
-he was ever the most important thing in the
world to his parents. And I'm goit;~g home."
· And he did. And his son just graduated from
high school, and he's going to Princeton next
year. He made the right decision.
.
So I say that to all of you to try. to put
this into some sort of context and also to try
to emphasize what I was saying earlier. One
of you said--one of the panelists said, "You
know, we don't live to work, we work so we
can live. And we Hope that we find fu!Hllment in our work and we do good things."
Politics, if you will, is one step removed from
that. What is the purpose of the national enterprise? Well, the first thing we're supposed
to do is to give you a safe world to live in,
no eold war but new threats, terrorism and
things like that. The second thing we're supposed to do is try to help give you a safe
country within which to live, safe streets and
a clean environment and healthy food. The
third thing we're supposed to do is to kind
of create a structure of opportunity and· a
structure of fairness, so that everybody has
a chance and we all have a chance to·
tog
stit
his'
stn
me
livi
shr
thE
sio
mf
wo
tht
str·
m)
toe
to
th<
ab
eV•
so;
ch
ch
dr
su
- : ·fh
·
\...
(
4<
bt
gE
of
G
G
th
te
th
st
le
Y'
I
tl
t<
ir
�nistration of William]. Clinton, 1996 I June 24
JSS
'er
he
ho
tdto
·ne
~ps
·ou
>DC
ou
he
es,
:he
md
vel
at
'ar.
ust
md
uld
~~·,..
n
he /
the
·e."
om
ext
put
try
>ne
:ou
we
fill~s."
om
ensed
in,
md
up:afe
md
rhe
ind
:I a
.~.las't.
j
./
11
1123
together. And if you think about the Con- come out every year. You just think about
stitution, the Bill of Rights, and the whole how many channels you have at home and
history of our Nation, it's been one long how many hours a day those channels are
struggle to make this country a country with on and how many different programs are on
more opportunity, more fairness, more unity, them and you get an idea of the staggering
living up to the ideals that the founders en- task that the entertainment industry has volshrined, so that ,people can then make all untarily taken on itself so that parents, by
their own decisions-and most of the deci- the time we get V-chips in all these new telesions made have nothing to do with Govern- vision sets, so that parents will actually have
ment, about how they're going to organize a guide so they'll know what they're doing
work-and hopefully the work will permit to program the V-chip and use it.
them to live good personal lives and build
But it's a move in the right direction. It's
strong families. And that's the way I look at what we were trying to do when our adminismy job.
tration became the first one in history to take
Now, what we have been talking about on the whole issue of the access of young
today are the worries of parenthood. It seems people to exposure to tobacco advertising
to me there are at least three big challenges andsales. Now, it's illegal in every State in
that parents face today. Parents are worried the country for kids to buy cigarettes. But
about-to go back to what Mrs. Jordan said, 3,000 kids a day start smoking, and 1,000 of
even if I teach my kids good values, will them are going to die sooner because of it.
something in the society and the culture There is no other public health problem in
change my child's life or destroy it? Will my America with those kinds of numbers. So we
child be subject to violence, to gangs, to have to try to do something about it.
drugs, to teen pregnancy? Will my child be
I want to say a special word of thanks again
subject, even long before that, to cultural in- to AI Gore, who lost his only and beloved
or other dangers over which I basi- sister to lung cancer, for being a constant
.
have no control, especially if I have to voice of conscience in our administration, for
and my kid is home watching television getting us to come to grips with this. This
4 or 5 hours a day?
·
is what they call in Washington politics a
Dad says, "Cigarettes are bad for you, and character builder. It's no accident that no one
besides that, it's illegaL" Right before you else had ever done this before. And it's not
get out of the car to go to school or get out a free decision. But it was the right thing
of the school bus, you see this great Joe to do, and we're trying to do it, to try to
Camel ad on· the billboard. You know, Joe create a framework within which other peoCamel is more well-known to 6-year-olds ple can build their lives.
than Bill Clinton. [Laughter] And more in~
Even the crime bill itself was designed to
teresting looking. I mean, you know, let's face create a framework: the safe-and-drugcfree
the facts. I mean, it's an interesting, brilliant schools initiative or putting 100,000 police
strategy. Mother says, "Son, you can't be vio- . on the streets in community policing or taklent. Sticks and stones can break your bones; ing the assault weapons off the street or passwords won't hurt you. Don't get mad; walk ing the Brady bUJ,which has kept 60,000 felaway." And then Mom goes to work. The kid ons, fugitives, and stalkers from buying handflips on the television and watches 4 hours guns in just 3 years. That's an important
of ·people killing each other with assault thing. All I can· do is to create a framework
weapons.
within which others are going to be given
So it's a challenging thing. That's what last the opportunity to change the culture of this
year's conference was all about. And again, country community by community.
I want to take my hat off to the people in
But let me tell you, lest you grow faintthe entertainment industry who are coming hearted, we're about to enter the fourth year
to grips with this really tough problem of rat- in a row of violent crime dropping in Amering television programs.
ica. So don't let anybody tell you it can't be
You know, it's pretty easy to rate movies . done: It can be done; we can change this.
There is a certain fixed number of them that But we are a long way from home, an9 we
�/
1124
Adrr
June 24 I Administration of William]. Clinton,
still have breathtaking rates of violence
among juveniles. You go back to what Robert
said about young people needing to be taught
to be parents and to be responsible. So I
thank you for that.
When we set up this.national service program, AmeriCorps, what we were trying to
do was not have a Government program but
to try to give people a chance, to set up a·
structure within which people could go out
in their communities and solve their own·
problems, So I wanted to deal with.that.
The second pressure I think parents face
is increasingly financial. You heard Ms. Allen
talk about that. It's no accident that, on average, families today are spending more hours
at work and less hours at home than they
were 25 years ago. Don't let anybody tell you
that Americans aren't hardworking. We are
working fools. [Laughter] Some of us because we like it, others because we have to.
But we do it; we show up. We show up. All
the surveys show most people on welfare are
dying to go to work. We have 1.3 million
fewer people on welfare today than we did
31f2 years ago, partly because we're giving the
States the ability to create opportunities and
then move people to work. This is a working
country. But you have to be able to create
a strong a:nd secure family. Otherwise, the
harder you work, the more you fall behind·
and the more frustrated people get.
Now, what can the Government do about
that? Well, we can create a framework.
We've cut the deficit in half and got interest
rates down and expanded trade and invested
in technology and infrastructure and education, and the American people produced
almost 10 million new jobs. That's a good
thing. It's a good thing. The interest rates
brought mortgage rates down; we've got almost 4 million new homeowners in the last
3 1/2years.
But that doesn't resolve all the problems.
There's still-this economy chums so much,
and so many of our jobs are now being created in smaller companies where people normally are used to having less security, that
we have to find ways, I believe, to reward
work by giving people lifetime access to education, training, health care; and retirement.
That's what this debate in Washington is
about over the Kassebaum-Kennerly bill. It
would give 25 million people access to health
insurance by simply saying, you •don't lose
your health insurance if you have to change
jobs or if someone in your family has been
sick. That's what insurance is for.
··That's what the small business package of
pension reforms that we sent to Congress is
all about. It basically says if you're a selfemployed person or you work in a little business and you work for a whole series of small
businesses and you're always changing jobs
or you're out of work for a while, you ought
to be able to take out a pension and keep
it even through the bad times, and you ought
not to have to wait a long time when you
move from one job to the other to know that
that pension is secure and seamless and con·tinuous. As far as I know, there is no opposition in the Congress to this package in either
party, and I'm hoping we. can get that out
.The Secretary of Education and the_ Sec~
retary of Labor worked very hard on a proposal to rollapse all the job training programs
in the country. Somebody loses the!r joh;
they just get a voucher worth $2,600. a year
to go to the local community oollege. or
whatever is necessary to get job training..
these are the kinds of things that .we. think
. · .. : • ··
are very important.
And the last thing I would say is that we
know that the fastest growing essential in
every family's budget in the last 12 years; believe it or not, -was not health care, it was
the cost of college-was the only thing that
went up more rapidly than health care costs.
So we proposed to give families a tax deduction of up to $10,000 a year for the cost of
college tuition and to make the 13th and 14th
years of college universally available in America by giving families a tax credit for the cost
of going to a: community college. So we could
say to people, look, it's just not enough to
have a high school diploma anymore, and if
. you're just coming out of high school or if
you've been in the work force for years and
you want to go back, everybody, 100 percent
of the people ought to have guaranteed access to at least 2 years of education.
Now, these things I think will change the
framework within which families have to live
and work and will give them more income
security and more stability. It doesn't guaran~
tee:
worl
Tl
hear
pie
haw
very
ilies
two
The
worl
timt
ever
a lot
y,
pan
stud
law
whe
WOt;
law
neve
thin
abo··
all t;
.
.
•
~hT~
11
kno
.
.A
I w
WOl
WOl
boo
me:
was
thir
is a
she
oft
life.
for~
Anc
Iw.
you
glac
f
abc
ligh
in 1
ing
her
she
.,h,
�",'1
~~.1\
:h
;e
re
,
:n
'JS
ht
:p
ht
Ill
at
11-
-d-
er
It.
co-
ns
·b;
ve
in
•e-
·as
1at
ts.
IC-
of
Jh
~r-
JSt
tid
to
if
if
nd
:nt
lC-
he
ve
ne
Administration of William]. Clinton, 1996 I June 24
tee any results, but at least it sets up a framework within which families can succeed.
The third thing, though, that we have
heard a lot about today is time. A lot of people say, "I can make money, but if I do I
have to give up all my time." And this is a
very important thing. There are so many families, two-parent families that are working
two full-time job and a part-time job or tWo.
There are so many single parents who are
working two jobs or working so much overtime they're worried about whether they will
ever see their kids. And I think about this
a lot.
.You know, when Hillary and I were young
parents and she had already spent many years
studying all this-she took an extra year in
law school to work at the Child Study Center
where we were in law school so that she
would know a lot about the impact of the
law on children and their interests. And I'll
never forget, one day I was working on some. thing, working like crazy, and Chelsea was
about a year old, and she said, "You know
~I that stuff they tell you about quality time,"
she said, "It's about half not true." She said,
"Time counts; show up." [Laughter] You
know, time counts.
And I can remember a lot of nights when
I would rel).d my daughter to sleep, and I
would fall asleep before she would; And she
would elbow me and say, "Dad, finish the
book. Finish the book." [Laughter] But it
meant something. Even the nights when I
wasn't very good, you know, it meant something. And I'm proud to say that my daughter
is about to be a senior in high school, and
she can still count on one hand the number
of things. that I have missed over her whole
life. But I'll tell you something, she hasn't
forgotten a single one of them. [Laughter]
And sometimes I hear, "You remember when
I was in the second grade; we had such, and
you were-" but I like that. I like that. I'm
.glad she felt entitled to complain.
And when Katherine Wright was talking
about the videotapes-one of the great highlights of my recent life is that we did that
in reverse, Katherine. I was in Russia meeting with President Yeltsin when. Chelsea had
her junior prom, and she did a videotape so
she could send a message to her dad that
she was sorry that I couldn't send her off.
1125
And I thought to myself, well, that's one she
didn't hold against me. And that kind of bothers me. She has reached the age when I'm
not around, she doesn't hold it against me
as much. But at least-[laughter]-at least
I have a film of it.
Every person is entitled to build that memory bank. Somebody who is out there working for 6 bucks an hour in a factory, they
are just as entitled to build that kind of a
memory bank as the President of the United
States. They're just as entitled to it.
•.
And let me ask you also to look at this
from the children's point of view. We did
a great job here. All of these companies and
the pub!ic employees that are here, and the
people in the Federal Government who do
a good job of this, we talk about how it makes
for happier workers, and happier parents
make more productive workers, and you
make more money. And you see that immediately. But let me ask you to think about
· .
this over the long haul.
.·
Think about the cumulative impact of all
those extra stories at bedtime.· :Fifteen years
later you have a more literate Citizenry. Think
about the cumulative impact of the . extra
hour or two helping your child with homework. Fifteen years down the road you have
a more productive citizenry. Think about
what it means to sit at your sick child's beside. By the way, sometimes they'don'tmake
it. Fifteen years from now you have people
who are freed from the bitterness of thinking
that they were deprived of the right to share
what life they had \vith their children. It may
seem small, but it may mean the difference
in whether you raise a whole bunch of productive citizens or self-absorbed and cOmpletely alienated people. It may make the difference in whether people, when they grow
up, live lives of responsibility or lives of rage,
that they still-they never quite understand.
So we talked a lot of about how this can
be done and you can make money today
about it because people would be happy and
more productive, and that's terrible important But if you think about it in generational
terms, which is how we ought to be thinking
about it, it can also shape what this country
looks like way into the 21st century. That's
why in some ways the first bill I signed as
President, the family and medicaUeave law,
�1126
may be the most important, because of the
framework it established for other people to
do things.
I can tell you this, that I still talk to people
all the time-about 10 days ago or so we had
the Children's Miracle Network and all the
children's hospitals, telethon people, in the
White House. And I was upstairs, and they
said, "Mr. President, these people are downstairs and would you like to go down and ·
say hello to them." So I did. And they had
all these children who had been desperately
sick-some of them were well now; some of
them were still sick-and their parents, one
. from each State. And these kids were-they
had been through a lot, and their parents had
been through a lot. And most of their parents
were just working people. And two of them
on the way out, separately, said to me, "I
do not know what I would have done without
the family and medical leave law. it 'enabled
me to take care of my child without hurting
my family, without losing my job." .. ·
. Twelve million people have now taken advantage· of that law. And a recent study by
bipartisan commission on leave said that
9 out of 10 companies involved said the act
had not cOSt them any money Or done anything to their profits. And obviously, since---:.
and let me put it in some larger context. I'm
about to go to Europe in a couple of days
to the annual meeting of the G-7 countries,
the big seven economies. In the last 3lf2
years, those economies have created a total
of 10 million jobs, 9.7 million in the United
States and 300,000 in the other 6. So the
family leave law did not hurt the American
economy, it helped the American economy.
Now, again I say the most important thing
is for us to have a framework. Then, by far,
more significant would be changing the culture of America-have, as Vance Opperman
said, having more companies follow the leads
of the companies that are here. But I do believe that we've had a lot of time now to think
about this and work on this in the last 3 years.
I've listenedto people talk.about it. I believe
there. are two more changes we can make
that would help the American economy, not
hurt business, and strengthen families. And
I want to propose them here today in the
hope that you will bring us the same good
a
Ad
June 24 I Administration of William]. Clinton, 1996
fortune that you did last year with the Vchip and the telecommunications bill.
First of all, the family and medical leave
law ha:; done a lot of good, but it is extremely
narrow in its purpose. In other words, you're
entitled to time off without losing your job
in a workplace of 50 employees or more if
there's a medical crisis involving a parent or
a child, an immediate family member, or the
birth of a child. That's better than it used
to be. But I believe, just based on-and you
heard some of this today-1 believe we
should expand the family leave law.
I would propose that we pass a family leave
II that would allow employees to take up to
24 hours a year-that's not a lot of timefor parent-teacher conferences or for routine
medical care for a child, a spouse, or a parent, because there are a lot of parents who
cannot go to school to see the child's teacher
because the work schedule and the schedule
of the school don't work. And there are a
lot of times when there is a routine, what
at least starts out to be a routine medical
problem, where it really makes a difference
if the parent can go, especially with a young
child, or where there's nobody else to take
the parent.
. So I am very hopeful that we can get some
support for this. I also think it would create
a m()re honest workplace. I mean, I bet every
one of us knows somebody who's called in
sick or said they had car trouble so they could
go meet with their child's teacher or take a
child or a parent to the doctor. So I think
that we ought to pass family leave II, and
I believe it will make a difference.
Secondly, I think we need to make the
workplace more family-friendly, especially
where a lot of overtime is concerned, and
give people more flextime in taking overtime
either in income or in time with their families.
Now, traditionally, overtime has been a
very important way for a lot of American
workers to realize their dreams. Overtime is
really the difference between a good middle
class existence and being in real trouble for
a lot of workers. And I don't believe we
should change that. But with more Americans working more hours, simply spending
tim'e with your family can be a dream in itself: a vacation, a maternity leave that goes
be
.ch
tin
re(
tht
to
wi
OV•
f
jm
qu
pa
.{
W(
a
da
ca·
pu
m·
pi·
At
al
.in
th~
he
as
·
l
[,
wl
ca
d(
m
yo
or
th
of
or
d<
so
C(_
ac
pi
in
th
tu
in
Io
n:
th
th
ar
h:
th
l.m
�'96··,,
A~ministration c~f William]. Clinton, 1996 I June 24
V-
tve
ely
·'re
job
' if
or
che
;ed
~
j
'OU
we
:we
'to
~-
ine
Jarvho
her
'ule
e a
hat
ical
nee
ung • .
ake
:
,1
~--
1me
!ate
·ery
I in
•uld
:e a
tink
and
1
I
the
ially
and
ime
tmin a
ican
1e is
Idle
for
we
1eriiing
l it-
~oes • •
JI
beyond what's mandated by law, or if the
child's in trouble and you just need some
time to spend time with your child.
So today what I'm proposing is that we
redefine compensation in a way that reflects
the value of family and community. I'm going
to send to Congress a flextime initiative that
will give employees this choice: If you work
overtime you can be paid time and a half,
just as you are now and just as the law requires. But if you want, you can take that
payment in time; and for every hour you
work overtime, you can take off an hour and
a half. In this sense, the proposal is fundamental to redefining work time. Workers
can put in time and get money, or they can
put in time and get time. You can choose
money in the bank or time on the clock.
It's important that this be a choice for employees. I should say that most employers in
America would like this option. And there's
a lot of support among employers for giving
this kind of option. But it's also important
how it's designed, because it will only work
as a family-friendly decision if there's a genuine partnership, which means, to go back to
what our friend from Saturn says, this is a
CiJ.Se where the employee has to make the
decision. And that's very important. There
must be complete freedom to choose. If
you're required to work overtime in your job
or you're given the chance to work overtime,
then you, the employee, must get the choice
of whether to take the overtime in money
or time. Otherwise it could simply open the
door wide for abuse of the overtime laws,
so that families that need the overtime income could fall behind. But if it is honestly
administered and fairly given to the employee, think what a difference it could make
in critical family situations.
Now, this is a case where more than any-.
thing else I think we have to change the culture. But we have to write strong protections
into the law. And if you have any doubt, just
look at the front page of the Wall Street Journal today, which talks about, in contrast to
these companies, the widespread abuse of
the overtime laws and how a lot of people
are entitled to it and can't get it. So we'll
have to wnte this law in a way that protects
the employees. Otherwise, we'll have even
more of what is already a problem that is
1127
bigger than the Labor Department can manage with its present resources.
But I believe it's important. We have got
to develop flextime proposals that recognize
that Americans have priorities at home as
well as at work. But if we· do this, if we give
people the opportunity to earn overtime and ·
then take it in cash or time at their discretion
and if we pass family leave II so that people
can do some ordinary work that is profoundly
important over the life of their children or
their families as well as deal with the emergencies, I believe this will be a stronger country. I believe we will have a stronger economy. I know we will have stronger children
in stronger families. And that is the most important thing of all.
So let me say again, I'm very grateful to
AI and Tipper Gore for doing this. It means
a lot to Hillary and me just to know that
they're our friends and our partners and that
they share our values about this. There is
nothing more important, I will say again, than
doing a good job of raising our kids. I still
think I did the right thing, even though I .
have lost some valued employees, in telling
every one of them to leave if.· they ·ever
thought their responsibilities at home were
threatened.
The Talmud says: Every blade of grass has
its angel that bends over. it and whispers,
"grow, grow." Our children are those blades
of grass, and we must be their better angels.
Thank you, and God bless you all.
NOTE: The President spoke at 11:30 a.m. in Polk
Theater at the Tennessee Performing Arts Center
to participants in Family Re-Union V: Balancing
Work and Families Conference. In his remarks,
he referred to Martha Farrell Erickson and Representative Bill Purcell, house majority leader,
Tennessee State Legislature, co-sponsors of the
conference; Speaker of the House Jimmy Naifeh;
Lt. Gov. John Wilder and Attorney General
Charles Burson of Tennessee; Attorney General
Hubert H. Humphrey III of Minnesota; and
Vance Opperman, president,_ West Publishing Co.
Statement on the Retirement of
Archbishop Desmond Tutu
June 24, 1996
The world stood in awe as South Africa
overcame apartheid to take its place as a
�... :·
I ;
i'
!
!.
I.
I
,I
·:~ •. ~;:
I
I
-:.
~--:"! :=:<(~. ~~·~i-~:~:~: \~-<~>~~:):,;.·~
j' .
•
::;;:..:~y,·,j-~.K:i~·!·/i~~lk:...;_:_i,\;~:,: :· ·... ·
.·,)
: "1
.
.
' .. •' .••
...
. .
:. ·-·
V Expanded FamilY &.1\nijdi~~.b~~.ave
.
v
..
·.
.
.
.
.
. .
'. i:,
r';':';!'."~;.i.~ff~j?\';:
:
;.
Employee-Choice· f'le:X:-lfiM~· · ·
.·
..:. ·:·:·.
:·:
:·
.
. :. -~~
':
:.·._._:,.· .-.
.
..
June 24, 1996
Nashville Family Reunion Conference Hosted By
Vice President AI Gore
·
.·
I
�Nashville Family Reunion Conference Hosted By Vzce President AI Gore, June 24, 1996
PRESIDENT CLINTON ANNOUNCES NEW
FAMILY-FRIENDLY WORKPLACE PROPOSALS:
o
EXPANDED FAMILY & MEDICAL LEAVE
o
EMPLOYE~CHOIClE
FLEX-TIME
NEW EXPANSION OH FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAW: President Clinton's new proposal would
deepen and expand Family Leave by allowing a worker to take unpaid hours off-- with a maximum of 24
hours a year -- /pr child education, older relatives' health needs, and routine family medical purposes.
Current Family and Medical Leave Law. The FMLA helps families only with a medical crisis or
special limited care-giving needs, such as a birth or adoption. ··But working families often have to care
for children or parents in circumstances for which they cannot use Family and Medical Leave.
New Family And Medical Leave Procedures. FMLA expansion would be limited to 24 hours a
year for the following specific. purposes:
•
ScHOOL ACTIVITIES. Participating in school activities directly related to the educational
advancement of your child, such as parent-teacher conferences or interviewing for a new school;
•
ROUTINE FAMILY MEDICAL PURPOSES. Accompanying your child to routine dental or medical
appointments, such as annual checkups or vaccinations;
OLDER RELATIVES' HEALTH NEEDS. Accompanying an elderly relative to routine medical
appointments or other professional services related to the care of the elderly relative, such as
interviewing nursing homes or group homes.
NEW EMPLOYEE-CHOICE FLEX-TIME: President Clinton's new proposal Would offer American
workers more choice and flexibility in finding ways both to earn the wages they need to support their fq.milies
and still find the time they need to be with them. · The President's proposal would:
•
EMPWYEE CHOICE. Allows employees· to agree with their employers to work overtime in
exchange for paid time-off -- flex-time -- With a limit of up to 80 hours. An hour of overtime
could thus be used for 1-and-1/2-hours of overtime pay or l-and-1/2 hours of flex-time.
•
FLEX-TIME FOR ANY PURPOSE WITH 2 WEEKS NOTICE. Workers could use their earned flex-time
for any reason -- as long as they give their employers 2 weeks notice.
•
EMPWYEES CAN ALWAYS CHOOSE PAY OVER FLEX-TIME. Workers would maintain the right to
choose overtime pay, and even if they choose flex-time, they could still cash out any portion of
their flex-time pay with two weeks notice.
•
FLEX-TIME FoR FAMILY LEAVE. Employees can use their accumulated family flex-time for
family leave purposes at any time.
OPPOSE ATTEMPTS TO REDUCE WORKER CHOICE: In announcing these new familyworkplace proposals, President Clinton made clear that he would oppose any bill that allows for coercion
and uses phrases like "camp-time" as a cover for giving workers less choice in the workplace.
�. .. -~;
. .. ·. .
.
·. ·:-;:;· :·. .~:~. ~;~:(.f.f'/';: __ .:··.:.
...• :
:, ~·
.
· :P.REsm:EN'r:cLoooN ANNoUNcEs ·NEw .
\
'
F~Y-FRIENDLY':WO~LACE PROPOSALS:
- . ~-
~~: ,~.;-r.-).'·). _.: ?·.::.-
.
· · · ·c
... :-.
• t•
.-. ..;·~
.. .-~· :. ·:· ·._ ·. :.. -
.. _.
.EXPANDED
FAMiLY & MEDICAL LEAVE
. •
.
. ·. .:: /~
·~
.•
.-
· ...
:"•
·: .
.
_
.!'~ :. ·; .
. . .. .
.. ......
·'.
..
- --·--;: .·-r
.
~. -~. ·. . .
' ~. .
:·
-·:
·.
·~ ·. ~
.
..
·· ..
..:· ,·
··•·
.·· .·
:·'
~
:··: .
. ,·..
'
:·:-·--: ..
...
-
.
·:-
Page
. · .. -_.·_-7-
New Family Medical Leave 'Expansion
,
1
New
Employee~hoice
.Flex~J;inie
,.. ··.
·.
.
.
., .....
·:
....
'.:
'
.
.
.
:
_.. .
.-·:.
·. .
·-
~
·:
'·
.
.
.
Hew The President's Ne\f: Proj,osais·~vtould Help .Typical Families
'·
..
·.)_.-
'
':
..
:2-3
4-5
6-8
�EXPANDING THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACTTO HELP FAMILIES BALANCE WORK AND FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES
June 24, 1996
"Family and medical leave is a matter of pure common sense and a matter of common decency.
It will provide Americans what they need most: peace ofmind. Never again will parents have
to fear losing their jobs because of their families."
- President Clinton at the signing of the Family and Medical Leave Act, February 5, 1993
PRESIDENT CLINTON DELIVERED ON HIS PROMISE TO PROVIDE FAMILY
LEAVE: In his first month in office, President Clinton delivered on his promise and signed the
Family and ..Medical Leave Act of 1993 into law. The law allows workers at businesses with 50
or more employees to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave to care for a newborn
or adopted child, to attend to their own serious health needs, o~ to care for a seriously ill parent,
child or spouse.
NEW BIPARTISAN REPORT SHOWS THE LAW IS WORKING: The recent_;report on the
impact of the law by the bipartisan Commission on Leave -- chaired by Senators ·Dodd and Craig
- shows that the law is working:
•
•
•
•
•
67 million Americans - over half of workers -- are guaranteed they can take leave
from their job to care for a sick relative or a newborn child without fear of losing their
job or their health insurance.
More than 12 million eligible workers have taken leave since its enactment.
40% of all workers think they .will need to take leave for a covered reason at some
time in the next 5 years. The leading reason is to care for a seriously ill parent
Despite opponents' claims, compliance is easy and costs low for most employers:_
•
9 in 10 employers fmd the law "very" or "somewhat" easy to administer
•
C'.cmpliance entail!; either little or no costs for 89%-99% of bu;;ir..esses
·•
Smaller cove:red worksites found it easier to comply than the larger sites.
Somt; businesses have reported reduced employee turnover, enhanced productivity
and improved morale which they attribute to the Act.
NOW IT IS TIME TO EXPAND THE LAW TO BETTER HELP WORKERS CARE FOR
THEm CHILDREN AND PARENTS. While the law is a major step forward, it does not
cover many situations facing working families. Today, President Clinton proposed expanding the
· law to cover more family obligations to better help working faffiilies care for their children and
elderly relatives without sacrificing their work obligations. Under the proposed expansion,
workers could take up to 24 hours of leave each year to meet additional specified family
obligations, including ro11tine doctors appointments and parent-teacher conferences. Leave could
be taken for the following purposes:
•
Participating in school activities directly related to the educational advancement of
your child, such as parent-teacher conferences or interviewing for a new school;
•
Accompanying your child to routine dental or medical appointments, such as
annual checkups or vaccinations;
•
Accompanying an elderly relative to routine medical appointments or other
professional services related to their care, such as interviewing nursing homes or
group homes.
1
�PRESIDENT CLINTON'S NEW
EMPLOYEE-CHOICE FLEX-TIME PROPOSAL
TODAY, PRESIDENT CLINTON ANNOUNCES A NEW EMPLOYEE-CHOICE
FLEX-TIME PROPOSAL. President Clinton's employee-choice flex-time proposal would
help to make workplaces more family friendly by ensuring worker flexibility while
guarding against abuses by coercive or unstable businesses -- with explicit protections
against coercion. ·• President Clinton's proposal would allow more Americans to have the
time they need to fulfill their responsibilities as both workers and as parents or grown
children of elderly relatives.
0
•
~07
•
•
Workers could agree with their employers to receive. extra paid time-off- "flextime" -instead of working overtime for cash pay. Consistent with existing law,
workers would get time-and-a-half in flex-time -- extra paid time-off -- for each hour
of overtime. There would be a limit of 80 hours that' a worker could accumulate in
flex-time. And all additional overtime work -- beyond the limit -- would have to be
paid in cash.
Employees can choose to use their flex-time for family and medical leave purposes
whenever they need it. At any time, workers can use their flex-time for family and
medical leave purposes -- to care for a new born or adopted child, to attend to their
o~ serious health needs, or to care for a seriously ill child, parent, spouse.
Workers maintain ultimate control of when to use flex-time, as long as they
provide two weeks notice to their employers. Employees can use flex-time for any
purpose as long as the worker gives at least two weeks of notice to his or her
employer, or wit.i. less notice if the employer's operations are not unduly disrupted.
Private-sector employees may elect to ~h out their flex-time for cash due as long as
two weeks of notice is given to their employer.
To pr3tect against abuses by coercive or unstable businesses, the employee-choice
flex-time proposal includes explicit protections against coercion.
...
· ...
...
Employees and employers would have a written flex-time agreement.
President Clinton's employee:-choice flex-time proposal would also require
employees and employers to agree in writing that the worker will receive flextime -- instead of cash pay -- before the worker performed any overtime work.
Private-sector workers can get cash for their accumulated flex-time within
two weeks of notice. With two or more weeks of notice, a worker in the private
sector can cash out their flex-time for cash due.
Protecting workers from businesses that go bankrupt. To ensure workers
receive their accumulated flex-time when their employers seek bankruptcy
protections, unpaid flex-time would receive special protection -- the same as
given to other wages -- in bankruptcy proceedings. For employees in thinly
capitalized businesses, additional protections will be included.
2
�Additional protections to ensure that worker protections:
President Clinton's employee-choice flex-time proposal would not allow
unused flex-time to deprive a worker of unemployment compensation that
he or she has earned.
To ensure protections against coercion, part-time, seasonal, and tempOrary
workers would exempted from this proposal. · The Secretary of Labor would
aiso be able to make recommendations to exclude low-wage workers who
are vulnerable to coercion or certain occupations and industries that show a
·
pattern of abuse.
.,..
Ability to collect from violators of overtime laws are improved. President
Clinton's empl9yee-choice flex-time proposal improves the Labor Department's
ability to collect fines due from violators of overtime laws, including double
damages for certain egregious violations. This proposal also imposes civil
money penalties for violations of flex -time and for· willful or repeated
recordkeeping violations.
PRESIDENT CLINTON WILL STRONGLY OPPOSE ANY BILL THAT REDUCES
WORKER CHOICE IN THE WORKPLACE. President Clinton will strongly oppose
any bill that allows employers to coerce their employees fails to protect true worker choice
and fails to guarantee that workers will "receive the compensation they are due.
3
�COMPARISON OF PRESIDENT CLINTON'S EMPLOYEE-CHOICE FLEX-TIME PROPOSAL
AND
REPRESENTATIVE BALLENGER'S COMP-TIME PROPOSAL
WRIITEN
AGREEMENT
FLEX-TIME FOR
FAMILY AND
MEDICAL LEAVE
PRESIDENT CLINTON'S
EMPLOYEE-CHOICE
FLEX-TIME PROPOSAL
REPRESENTATIVE
BALLENGER'S COMP-TIME
PROPOSAL
• To provide true employee choice,
;employees and employers must agree
in writing that compensation will be
provided as flex-time rather than as
overtime wages.
• No. written agreement is necessary -only an understanding.
• Employees may use flex-time for
family and medical leave whenever
they need it.
• No comparable provision.
• Employees maintain ultimate control
of when to use flex-time, as long as
they provide two weeks notice to
their employers. Workers can use
flex-time for any other purpose as
long as they provide two or more
weeks of notice. They receive flex;.
time with less I!otice, but only if the ·
employer is not unduly disrupted. .
• Employers maintain ultimate control
of when to grant their workers flextime. Regardless ·of the amount of
notice the worker provides,
employers can deny use of comp..;.
time if the firm claims they would
be "unduly disrupted."
• Private-sector employees may elect to
cash out their flex-time for cash due ,
with at least two weeks ofnotice to
their employer.
• Rather thm ensuring payout within
two weeks as the President's
proposal, private-sector employers
would have up to 30 days to payout
the cash due for accumulated flextime.
• Private-sector workers can
accumulate flex-time for overtime
worked (at a rate of \:ime and a half)
in a "Flex-time Bank." There would
be a limit of 80 hours that a worker
could accumulate in flex-time. All
additional overtime work must be
compensated in cash.
• Employees can accumulate up to 240
hours of comp-time.
···
PURPOSES
USE OF
FLEX-TIMK
PAYOUT
OF FLEX-TIME
FLEX-TIME BANK
4
�BANKRUPTCY
PROTECTION
ENFORCEMENT
<
PROVISIONS
TREATMENT OF
FLEX-TIME As
WAGES AND.
HOURS WORKED
EXEMPTIONS
FOR
VULNERABLE
SECTORS
SUNSET
• To ensure workers receive their flextime when firms enter into
bankruptcy, unpaid flex-time would
receive special protection -- the same
as given to wages -- in bankruptcy
proceedings. For employees in thinly
capitalized businesses, additional
protections will be included.
• No comparable provisions.
• Improves remedies against violators,
.; including double damages for
~
overtime that an employee would
have earned, but was not permitted to
work because the worker wanted to
earn pay rather than flex-time. Civil
money penalties for violations of
flex-time and for willful or repeated
recordkeeping violations.
•
• Unused flex-time cannot be used to
deprive a worker of unemployment
compensation that he or she has
earned. Flex-time pay-:outs are
treated as wages for health and
pension benefit plans. Flex-time
used is also treated as- hours worked
for overtime accrual purposes.
• No comparable provisions on
unemployment compensation or
benefit plans. Comp-time used is
not treated as hours worked.
• To ensure protections against
coercion, part-time, seasonal, and
temporary workers would. exempted
from this propOsal. The Secretary of
Labor would also be able to make
recommendations to exclude lowwage workers who are vulnerable to
coercion or certain occupations and
industries that show a pattern of
abuse.
• No comparable provisions.
• Flex-time provision expires in four
years. Bipartisan Commission will
study and report to the Secretary of
Labor and Congress prior to sunset.
• No comparable provision.
5
Do~ble
damages only for willful
violations of anti-coercion
provtstons. Civil money penalties
only for willful violations.
II
�- - - - - - - - - - -
----------------------------------
HOW THE PRESIDENT'S FAMILY-FRIENDLY PROPOSALS
WOULD AFFECT TYPICAJL FAMILIES
NOTE: These hypothetical examples illustrate how the President's proposal co~pares with
current law and the Ballenger bill to create "comp-time." All of these examples
assume the adoption of some proposal allowing the accumulation of flex-time or
"comp-ti.me" in lieu of time-and-one-half pay for overtime.
1.
c
Expanded Family And Medical Leave For Child Education Purposes. Jane
Smith works for XYZ Inc. She has a conference scheduled with her daughter's
teacher for three weeks from today and needs four hours of time off to travel to and
from the school and meet with the teacher. Jane is willing to take unpaid leave .
./
Under the President's proposal, Jane can take unpaid leave to attend the
parent-teacher conference.
Under current law, Jane is not assured she can take unpaid leave to attend the
parent-teacher conference.
181
2.
Under the Ballenger bill, Jane is not assured she can take unpaid leave to
·attend the parent-teacher !tOnference.
Expanded Family And Medical Leave. For Cariug Filr Olrler Relative. While
Jane Smith is tending to her daughter's educational needs, Jane's husband John
needs to help move his grandfather from one nursing home to another. John will
need 4 hours time-off in order t:> do t.'tis. Because h<:; is very involved with his
family, John has not worked any overtime this year and does not have any
accumulated flex-time. Thus; he would like to use unpaid family and medical leave
to take his grandfather to the doctor.
./
Under the President's proposal, Jolm can take unpaid family and medical
leave to move his grandfather from one nursing home to another.
181
Under current law, John cannot use family and medical leave to help move
his grandfather from one nursing home to another.
181
Under the Ballenger bill, John cannot use family and medical leave to help
move his grandfather from one nursing home to another.
6
�3.
Employer-Imposed "Comp-Time." Bill Johnson and his family live on a very
tight budget. The time-and-one-half pay Bill receives for the 10 hours of overtime
he works each month provides just enough money to pay the mortgage on his
family's house. In his latest paycheck, Bill's employer inexplicably did not include
any pay for his overtime work. When Bill complains, his boss explains that this is
the new "comp-time" program and from now on Bill will get extra time off iD: return
for his overtime. Bill fears he will not be able to make ends meet. He doesn't
remember~ agreeing to accept "comp-time."
Under the President's proposal, Bill and his employer would have to had
agreed in writing prior to the overtime that he would accept flex-time instead of time-and-one-half pay. Otherwise, Bill must be paid his time-and-one-half
in~
.
Under current law, Bill would have to be paid time-and-one-half in cash for
the overtime he worked.
Under the Ballenger bill, the employer could say that he had a verbal
agreement with Bill to give him "comp-time." That makes it Bill's word
against his employer's word.
4.
Flex-Time For Planned Family-Needs. Ann's husband Bill has a heart condition
and will require heart surgery within the next few weeks. Ann wants to spend time
with Bill after the surgery to help care for him. Her family's growing financial
worries make it vital that .AJU1 be able !o use her accumulated flex-time to .be with
her husband without lvsing a day's pay. Ann and Bill ·scheduled the surgery three
weeks in advance anrl· An..'l gave her employer two-we~ks notice. Two days before
the !mrgery, Ann's emplo~'er ZYX Co. decides to change their production schedule.
In their view, ~"Ul's absence will "unduly disrupt" the workplace operations.
t/
Under the President's proposal, Ann can use her accumulated flextime to be
with her husbru1<.l without losing pay --as long as she gives two-weeks
notice.
Under current law, Ann is assured only of unpaid family and medical leave
time.
Under the Ballenger bill, Ann cannot use her accumulated "comp time" if it
will "unduly disrupt" her employer's operations. ZYX Co. can force her to
take unpaid leave to be with her husband in the hospital.
7
�5.
Protection of Unemployment Benefits. Al Jones is a construction worker who got
laid off from Builders Inc. after it finished its latest project. He worked enough
overtime to accumulate 80 hours of accrued flex-time. Now, he wants to collect the
unemployment benefits he usually gets when his employer lays him off. This time,
however, Builders Inc. challenged Al's eligibility for unemployment insurance on
the grounds that he is still "working" because he is getting paid for his accumulated
flextime.
;
.!
Under the President's proposal, Al is explicitly protected from this type of
challenge. If he's otherwise eligibl,e, Al should get his unemployment
msurance.
r8l
Under the Ballenger bill, Al is not explicitly protected from this challenge to
his unemployment insurance eligibility.
·~~-·
8
�· By Ellen Neubome . ·
-_.···~-
USA TODAY
]
In'lhe personal econoinl~ of j noinlc Policy Iilstftute wo~
-workers across the USA, :time that those making decisions ·
is worth tar more thim money. · about comp time laws.'- often
Respondents to USA TO- . salaried professionals - d~n't
DAY's fax and e-mail forum understand ._the_ cri~cal role.
support . !he idea _of ·trading 'overtime pay plays for some
overtime pay for timi!-end-a- rainllies.
,..... . half away from .work.
''The people who get over·
_,.....,..
,...... - "lUke money. But there.are time pay are not the highly
some thing; it can't buy me; · paid executives, .they are hour, ·
0),'
,-. says Karen Jones, a· clerical.· ly workerS,". she says. ."About
0)1
employee of Federal Express · 60% of those who get overtime
r. in Memphis. "When my 11· pay In this country make less
year~ld looks out into the audi~. than SIO an hour. That's about
ence at the school play, It's $20,000 a year."
.· · ·
0)
~-:-. 'l
Moinmy's face she wan)s tci . Those. workers who most
·r-.•
, _ , · . see. What can overtime pay do rely. on the extra cash will be
about that?"
pressured into· taking comp
·
L__, ·
~t in Washington the .l~ue · · · time instead, Rasell says.
~
isn't as Simple. Compensatory · .~As an economist 1 know_
<(U
time. - .eomp: time - has th8t thiilgi-th8t are cheap, you
·.
emerged as a major issue in get · more of. If comp _time
<(.
~Congress. putting business and . · hours are cheaper for the em-. _
........-!
labor on a collisioiu:ourse.
ployer than overtime hours,
~-~
I
One bill, with the warm-end· ' you are going to get pressure to
··
~ ~
fuzzy title ''The Family Friend·
take comp time,'' she says.
<(
'
I
. .....,_ ·· ly Workplace Act," was S:p- · ~'The idea is great But in real
I
proved by the Republican:ci>n. . life, workers can be the losers."
<('
r. .
trolled
Senate · -Labor · Both sides have-stacks of
0
·. .
Cominlttee Tuesday along' a studies showing public support
.(/)
'.:
party-line vote of 10-8. A sirnJ.: for their opposite goals.
0
. tar bill is scheduled for consid· , But outside of .Washington,
· e~tion .in the House today.
debates .over legislation mean
Z'
·
The ISSUe could be headed little. ·From all . i'anks .of the
. 0"'
.
for a· stalemate in Washington workforce the complaint is
.. ~ '\.
this year. PI'esident Ointon al· clear:Jhere aren't enough
..._,
ready has threatened to.' veto hours m the day to get every·
~
~e legislation unle:sS substan. · thing done. Some change in the
Jllll"""""
tial changes are made. .
way hours are worked and .
CUrrently, em_ployers ·mUst _Paid for .is in order, •.hey say.. ·
.
pay overtime to hourly em-.-.
. ____
·
ployee5 who work more than a
e>t; t;·
~-- · ' ...Jt
fl.
40-hour week The HouSe bill
'~ i5 ~
.
fS"'
CD
~ I'\ would let them o!Jer up to 240
8. ~I!! iii
·
~ hours a· year in comp time in
· · 0 l3 8. ai'
place or overtime pay. Hourly
-c g e .~
.
employees would ~eive an
_m I!! (/)
.h ,
. ·
hour-end-a-half in time o!J for··
~ "'.S!!
'il . .
0
·. every overtime hour worked. .
·;;; j9 'E ...
Cll m
.: . ~ . •
.
. U~~ comp time would be
. .E ~!~
~..., .: ~ m_0 §.S .
.
pa~dmwagesatyear'send.
~-E.g
.o.~ ..s.S 0 m·
-~. . . . II) 8J1 elfort. to overcome !m:.
.
§:.s ';0 • 8'
oS &! ~ - -~ : ·
~ pon~nts' objections, House Re. -~ o.·m _U>
il· !ii >- jP:! g.~ 111 .: ._
.,Jj ·publican leaders are prepared _
5i 'g ~ I!!
il: i5.!, :C i e11 _g 15....: .
\o~ to back a series of amend·
E ~ • . ~ E e11 !!.a 5 i!: ii al .,
ments to limit the scope of the
£ C1i
111 8 ,E
Iii "' 2! o -o · il:
8 ~!!? :2
·
bill; SUCh, as ~_!)[elUding certain
'g ~ ~ ~ _! ~ ~ i .~
111
· .
. ·. construction m_d,.....,_
employ.!:!
3: Tl
· 8.
&.!!::> .s!a.:cc ..r
il:
0 ...
~ .. J
= 8.
a..;
l:S
.. ' >
Ill 0
r 1\ ees and ~-nal workers and .
s ::::~ c "'
111 • ~
111 o E -o 111 =
\If.I. reducing the maximum num· .
.s (/) ,g u;
a: ., - a:-:w: 111 ·"' :1:_.2
_
ber of COf!lP time hours to 160,
_- ~% ~ ~
the Associated Pi'ess reports.
. >-CD c- 111
fl. ~i
#
. Proponents _say. the bill ~- -§..s c 5
· CD i ~
.
would remake 59-year~ld Ia·
• E g. I!! (/) .CD S.f
bor laws tci rel!ect the time
· a>:... ::g "'
·.
: ~~
Cft·.
pr~s~':'r_e_s _raced _!IY ~ual~in:. C1) ~ :~ ~-~
,c c .
. ...~o
-~1
·.come work~g. fainllies. Crytics
C ~ ::l !; .iz·
. c. "15.
r AI\ say that wh1le comp ume
!!l ~
,S!~
... I!!DI
- ":szc .
'#.I. S?unds like a great idea, the. bi~ ·
::! Eg_~
=- ='fie~·
c ·-u -~
·.
· g~ves employers an opporturu·
~ e11 •
. ~- ty to skimp on overtime pay - .
<II f3. .§
.i1
-~~, .QOI: ·,G'Ji
.
cf'\tical financial support for
._ ~e>S ~o u
-·.=
.
. llWIY hourly_wor~~!:S: _ __
Q £ ~ {l E . i -~ .i~~ .. s~i
,.,.
The politics: : .· · .
.·
.
c:" !!!,= .5
:1s=
s~i~ ~!<I
\e~ .· In Washi~on, .the debate
G) -§,!!l 8..!!!
!ij.OIO :J::C-gg~
-ga!Cil co"g_ o-_:
-~ over comp time splits along "
~ 111
IIIDII JlBr!:Y lines.' RepubliCans and
· ·. J~ ~ 'fl ¥
g_S'~ -~a; ID
~
~US!ness-leaders back changes . · - ~'Eo:£ •• Zl o.:sz ~ '2 ~ ci ~ ;
._ ~ ~ m the laV.:. USA TODi\Y's toc g!
a:~!_ ~·::o ii:Z h!'
0
..,., rum rece1ved · dozens. of re-· ·a>
....... sponses from business owners,
who were urged by the U.S.
.
Chamber of Commerce to slip..
· port r,ewriting the'law.
.
,..,.,._ . "This bill represents an irri:
~ portant ~ep in· providing em,-. '\ ·· ployees m the private sector
...,., greater latitude 'to balance the
conl!icti.ng demands· of work ·
. . . and family;" says Sen. James
.. Je!Jords, .R·Vt, chitirman cif
· -··
the Labor _Cominlttee.
. ~
But Edith Rasell of. the Eco-
.
e
·o·
0
.>- :J:,
oa:
.
0
I·
(/) >- '
~
:::>
w
w
s
-Q .·
·. ·=
8
~
g-"'
e. •
0 ·:::
E.
::ll
8.
~=~1-~=:
e
E ,;
·I-
=
·. Q
'i
·I!!
.
0
~
i :
§'
=:
=
.,
Cl
S"'
J
te
!· :H l
�---
,_.
•'.
---,..
'MONEYL-INE
THE TOP MONEY NEWS OF THE DAY.
. ----'--'----:----·
Some·ar~·
·
.
'
. eXpecting
_=
.. .~~~?~f200ds
USA TODAY..
-~.
. . sandbags topped Jerry Berg-
6920
i
'""""'!""""!''''"
~~--
688o
686!l
··· :.; ·•-
sa:sztu~sday
f
i-
J.,..:_;---1--
Nasdaq composite. 1269.34 •
10.09 ·789;66 •
6.05 T-bond, 30~year yield
6.96o/. • . '0.01 ·
T·blll, 3-mo. discount rate
5.13%
0.01
.
Gold, oz. Comex ·$349.90 -ft. $2.00 -Lt. sweet crude oii,II.Y. Mere. ; $22.06- •
$1.14- '-··-·· MarketScoteboard.3B.
.
. SIP 500
*
HOUSING STARTS JUMP: .Housing starts
'rose 12:2% in February to a seasonally adjusted annual.rate
ot 1.53 million, up: from . 1.36 million • in January, the
Commerce Department said. That's the highest rate since
:March 1994. The-construction of new homes and apart·
ments was higher in every region except the Northeast,
whe~ell 26.9%.
.
·
.,'"COMP TIME VOTE: A bill that wouid letworkers
swap overtime PaY for time _orr is expected to .come to a.
· ... ···---·"""'" .
.·
yoteintheHouseofRepkUS. A · · ·
.resentatives today. A
~com
similar bill was approved by .the Republl·
can-controlled Senate
Labor Committee
day on a 10-8 party line
vote. A USA TODAY
forum found many work·
ers want the ·option of
. comp time instead of
overtime pay_. (Work·
USAcom, 4B.)
·
wor
lUes-
"The water is trying to llow
quist's shopping list 1Uesday.
north, and. it can't llow very
The Stutsman County, N.D;,, well beCause it's colder up
emergency mailager was deS- ·north," said Tom Richels, a
perately seeking 100,000 _sand-, Wilkln County higllway · engi. . bags. .. That would bring the . neer. on the Minnesota side of
.e ~ . ·. county's total to about 165,000, the Red River about 80 miles
enough. be llgured, to keep the' . east of JamestOWn.
.. ·. ·
.
James River in check an_d save ·1 ''That's our problem here_ ,"
Jamestown,. the county seat. · sil.ld Ricbels ''the river !lows in
. Tuesday. the -National . tlie wrong dlrection."
A Fedeial-Emergency Man·
· · :_Weather Service-predicted rna-·
jar spring llooding in·the Dako- · I agement Agency spokesman
tas and Minnesota. Emergency said his ·agency will send per.
management omcials expect sonnet whtm the llooding ap.
· · · the highest water levels to ar· pears imminent
. rive in the llrSt or second . . But local llood lighters can't
~"
weeks of April. Twenty inches 'I wait
.
.
~ of !!"ow havthaeyetht~ mla·el~ Inthdi-· · . "We're actually starting to
cations are
t IS te m e · · fill some sandbags," said Pat·
year it will melt quickly.
· rick Richards of the North Da;
· "Because it refuses. to be- · kota Division of Emergency
corne spring up here, ith~ giv- ·:.Management "This is a pretty.
0
e~ us time to. ~o things we hardy group-of folks up ~ere.
trught not hav~. time to. do oth· · We tend to take ·the potential
~ '\
erwise, Whether we have .a · · for I!O<ids very seriously.';
,.....,
llood,_ of course, depends o_n-- · Today, the state will start
~
how 1t melts. All we can do IS · putting sand atop the 2-foot
-,_.,
wait and see,''.Bergquist said.· . thick ice on the Red'and Shey-'
-~-. · He found hiS 100,000 nylon enne rivers. If the sand is
sandbags late 1Uesday. ·
. ; warmed by the sun, it can help
. I_n South' Dakota, Gov.. Bill 'I' melt th. ice. Jl!at could redu.ce
Janklow. broadcast a 95-minute the threat ofice jams. which
. · · message on public television . can back up water and cause
·.
Mo~day ~d 1Uesday nights, more llooding.
. ·. _·
asking res1dents to. get ready. · In South Dakota, Ralph Bor:
.
·. H; compa~ed the. si~uation . kowski, city ·administrator in
,With dama!llng floods 10 .1952 Huron, said city workers are
. .
building dikes. to protect the
and 1969.
In 1969, Fargo, .N.D.; on the _city's· wastewater treatment
Red _River set its llood record· , plant Huron is about 180 mile5
at 37 feel That is 20 feet above . south of Jamestown. Two years
·ftood stage.
.
ago, -James.River llooding cost
This year, Janklow said, · the city $65,000 when it wiped.
"holds · the potential for the' out a park and damaged other
..
most enormous lloo<ling we've . city property.
ever had."
.
"For us, it's not a matter of
In the spring of 1994, despite whether or not · it's going io.
ihe heaviest snowfall· on re-' llood; but how much it's going
cord, llooding was minor be-·. to llood," ·Borkowski said.
cause temperatUres· hovered
just above and below 32' df. . I> Flood warning, 1A
grees, slowly melting the snow.
But last year temperatures
stayed cold into April and then
·=.
e
.
0
~
e
·climbed ·ss-iii8Ji ·liStiie6oS.
melting the snow in a few days.
The Red River·Basin flooded.
The James Ri.ver. fiows
· south, into' the MisSouri River.
The Red River !lows- riorih, ·
into Canada
-USATODAY
.
WEDNESDAY,
MARCH.l9,
.1997
'
. .
.
.
.
.
�. Foreign-aid·_~gency chief
cites reforms, •cutbacks ,.
·Atwood -lists· clos4Igs, :staffreductions
l
- . · - - . --
Hou·"s. e··.·
~arshan
----,~-
By WASHI'
rani fTON TIMES . .•
_ _ __.. .. ·
Tl<E
.
.
J. Brllm Atwood, administrator
.
·
'
of the- Agency for. Internauonal
.
DeveloPment, said- yesterday ·his :
agency ~as done an ab~ut-face. to · • . · .
·
become one of the most aggressiVe
.
. .
. reformers in government.
'
. In 1992, the AID· was "hams.trung by ~aste, p~or co_~unic:anon and· JUSt pl!pn llllsmanagement," according ·to· the Ferris
Commissio_n appointed by Presit' 0
.
'
·
d~nt Bush to oversee the foreign .
·· rud agency.
"The _combination· of misman. _agement arid an unpopular program could have •meant its [the
· agency~s] ·demise," Mr. AtWood
· told a coilferimce of former senior
public officials.
·
.
''We had to be' efficient and economical, while setting a strategic
Bv Laurie Kellman
framework for the agency."
...... ~wASHINGToN TIMEs ,
. Over the last four years, Mr. At·
wood said; the AID has closed 26 '·
When· Io:Wa :resident Peter · tion can be used or who would set
overseas missions, with three
Faust's foster· daughter needed an the days comp time must be taken.
more to close this year; reduced · eye exam this year, he took vacaMr. Jefford's panel sent his bill ·
total staffby 2,738; reduced proj~
tion time from his $20,000-a-year yesterdaytothefloorforconsiderect design time by 75 percent; and
job to drive her· three hours to a ation next month. The House is' exdeveloped a new electronic acqui"
specialist._pected to debate and vote•on the
·sition and procurement planning
"When I saw her crying from billtoday.
.
system that replaced 65 different · some of the tests,let me tell you, it
GOP leadership sources said ·
systems.
· . ·· , ..· .
·
. was no vacation,'' said the 37-year- they· expect support from 220 to
But Mr. Atwood now has to jUffip
old health care worker: "If I could . 240 members, including roughly
the hurdle: of the Senate Foreign
have taken comp time instead ·of 20 Democrats. About 25 Republi. Relations Committee's attempt to overtime,Iwouldhaveinaminute. Calls a:re:expected to vote against·! .
merge the AID with the State De- . Then 'we could take a real vaca- the bill.
'·
'
paronent.
· · ·.
tion."
· ·
. One of them, Rep. ·John · M..
'IWo years ago,-the AID was tarHouse lawmakers ex-Pect to vote Shi.nlkus of Illinois, has about
geted for elimination by Republitodayonabillthatwouldallowhim 65,000 union members in his. discans in a bill that would consoli- . and millions. of other American trict,whichstretchesfromSpring. . date most of its duties into the State · workers to choose overtime pay•or· field to the St. LoUis suburbs. He
!Jepartment. But... the pl'lm, op- time off for working more hours opposes the bill, numbered HR 1,
posed by the administration, did than their jobs require.
. because. it· would give employers
not pass Congress..
_·
, The. Family Friendly Workplace. too much say_ over when workers
.This year, the agency faces the Act, however, has-stumbled across take tiine off.. . .
.
same concerns.
..
.staunch objections by powerful
"My vote against HR 1 reflects
"AID's days are numbered,'' said unions, which have pressured law- my proiJlise to the working fam- .
,Marc Thiessen, a spokesman for · makers primarily in industrial dis- ilies of my district to keep the ·
the Senate Foreign Relations Comtz:icts to oppose it.
·
labor/management relationship cin
mittee, headed by Jesse Helms,
Th circumvent their influence, a level playing_ field,'' he said in a
.. North Carolina Republican. .
. . 'the bill's supporters expect-to in- . statement issued by his spokes. "We want to put aid, decisions in
traduce an amendment that woUld man. ·
the .han9s of people who
mak'
exempt some seasonal and conBut Republican leaders are
ing poliFies. Merging seems_ to be :I . struction .industry workers. from pushing back by saying other conthe general consensus.
1.· the legislation. ·
,
· · stituents, like Mr. Faust, need to
"The~argument is that develop~ ·
Another amendment due for take time they have earned to be
. ment aid should not' be political.
floor action would cancel the law. with their families.
··
"Who is going to go home and
But'if it isn't, tlien we are giving : in five years unless C_ongress reinternational welfare. Why should
news it at that time.
tell any working man or woman in
we be giving welfare abroad, when
Unions and the Cliriton adminis- their district that they were willing
we are ,fighting so hard with the
tration oppose the measure.
· to wte against it?" said Hciuse Maissue here?"
' ,, .
. "Workers, not-employers, must jority Leader Dick Armey of
Rep .. Sonny. Callahan, Alabama · · be able to decide how best to meet · Thxas. "I. can't imagine that."
~epublican and chairman of the
the_ current rieeds of their fa:mily,''. · Included in the Republican.
influential· Appropriations. subacting Labor Secretary Cynthia A: drive for the bill iS an element of
committee. on foreign operations, ·.Metzler wrote in a Feb. 26 message revenge against unions who inwould not comment yesterday on · 'to the bill's Senate sponsor, James .fused the 1996 campaigns With ..
the AID because Mr. Atwood is .M. Jeffo:ds,IVermont Republican moneythe·GOPsayswasimp'rop_scheduled to testify today in ,front· and cha1rman of the Labor and · erly spent on Democratic causes.'
of the subcommittee, a-spokesman. .··Human Resources Committee.· .. . ·· "We have not found a single per·. said.· ·
··
·
. Opponents ali;o say the bill son who has protested· or sug-.
Mr. Atwood noted that "diplo- would not protect workerS from gested we not do it other than a few
·macy and development are not the ·. employers who would raise the.r'e- random labor leaders out of touch
same."
·
: · ·
I quired number of. weekly work . with their members- again,'' Mr.
<"The State· Department deals · ,hours before gvertime compensa- Armey ~aid.
·
.
.
with crises," he said. ~'Development is interested in the long term.
· The skills of, experience of devel. opment and diplomacy are differ1
n. ear v·o·te
on comp
IDle
Backers counter
union objectionS
I
are
ent:'
AID officials say that a merger
could denigrate the mission of de-.
velopment assistance, taking away·
U.S. ability to. administer long-·
term ~dprograJllS._
I
~JC l'~lJinRt~n ~inte~
·WEDNESDAY, MARCH 19, 1997. ·
�...
·Senate
· ·~:won't cap·
:·campaign.
spending_.
didates for federal· offices spent a .for .a ~paign comes from (ieople
within that district; arid limit the
·· total of about $800 million. The Re,
. publican National ~l!mmittee· .arilaunt of money corporations and
raised about $278 million, com- · others cbuld give to national com,
· pared With the Democrati<:·· ~a~
mittees. ·. ·.
.. . .
· tiona! Committee's $140 million,
. BOth Mr. McCain and Mr. Fem. and much of the· fUnding on both . gold voted against· the constitu·
· sides Clime from special interestS.
tiona! amendment yesterday. ·
Senate MinoritY. Leader. 'Ibm - ·
DemocratS desperately want to ·
find a way to level the p~aying field. .. Daschle, South Dakota Democrat,
But it will be-difficult m the wake
said there will be another day for
of a Supreme Co_urt ~g . ~t campaign-finance reform.
"This issue will not go away, n!>t
held it \mconstitutional·to limit m- ·
dependent . spending by· p!Jliti~ . when our sons and daughters will
action .. committees (PACs), busl·. ·be speil.dirig_$145 million in 20~
nesses and organized. labor. . ·. , just to walk m the door and vote,
Several Democratic senators. he said.
· ·
But Sen. Arlen Specter of Penn·
. yesterday announced ·a: new bill
. '1\iesday that seeks public financ· . ·sylvaniil, the . ·.only Republican ·to
ing of eongressional campaigns.
· support Mr. Ho.llings' Pf!!POSed
Sens. ·John McCain, Arizona Re· . amendment, · sa1d . campalgn-~publiean, and Russell D. Feingold,
nance reform will'not occur until
Wisconsin Democrat, have an apthere_ is ''a.public uprising!' . .
.
· proach short of amen~g the Co~· ·.
He. suggested that congress1onal
stitution. They have wntten a bill investigations intoimpro~er camthat would abolish PACs, require · paign finance practices IIDght prothat60percentofthemoneyraised
voke such'an uprising.·
·,'
Republicins cite .
free~speechcurbs.
By Nancv E. Roman
n<E WASHINGTON TIMES
.
2nd·Iawmaker hints··
atilnpeachment plan·
. The Senate yest '1'~1 ay crushed a
proposed constitutional amend·
ment that would have capped cam,
paign spending. · . .
·
·. "The amendment's failure today
.
will ensure that special-interest
. . spending sprees will. coritfuue to
· pollut~e· tu.re elections and kill off
. On the Chinese trade issue, top · · .·, ..
· .voter · 'volvement;• said .S. en. Er,
By Ralph Z. Hallow ·
GOP., leaders iri both chambers_
. ' nest F. Hollings, 'South. carolina
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
.
,, ~ide .wi~ the. Clinton administr~- ,.
.. Democ at and sponsor of the proThe GOP chairman of the House tion and· hundreds of U.S. corpora-·
. posal.
· .
. .
.
· · . Rules Committee yesterday urged .·· tions that want what they see as
· . Rejected in a 61 ~38 Senate vote, · preparation for . possible
hugely profitable access to China's.
the • proposed ·amendment . never · peachment of the. president or the vast markets.·
These ·leaders mclude House
· had a cilance of passing and was 29 ·. vice president for. "breaches of na~ .
votes .short. of the two• thirds ma- · tiona!· security" and lashed out at Spe8ker· Newt Gingrich of Geor~
· jority needed to win Senate apbOth parties for "appeasement to- gia; Majority Leader Dick Armey.
proval. It did, however, allow · ward C!Jmmuilist.China!'.
· . an(! Majority WhiP 'Ibm' DeLay,
.Democrats.· to portray themselves
Rep. Gerald B.H. Solomon, New .. both of'Thxas; and Sena~e Majority
as caring more about controlling
York Republican, is the second Leader 'Irent Lott of :Mississippi.
ever-increasing campaign costs
member of the House leadership
. Mr. ·Solomon· has become the
than Republicans mud the giow- : to discuss impeachment publicly.. . :most vocal spokesman for a grow~.
ing Democratic fund-raising scanRep.· Henry J. Hyde of Illinois, · ing nUmber of lesser ,leaders and
dal.
·.
the Judiciary Committee chair· rank-and-file Republicans who ar. Throughout the day yesterday,
man, said on Monday that he has gue that conservative and GOP
Mr. Hollings decried.the $30 mil, . ordered a study of impeachment· principles should forbid rewardlion spent by former Rep. Michael . procedures in case there is
ing a major 'violator of human
Huffmgton in running for a Cali-· . ·~smoking gun'~ in the fund-raising · rightS' and the biggest-potential ~n-.
fornia Senate· seat in 1994 as an
inquiries involving President Clin- emy of the United States.
.
. ·example of campaign excess. Mr.
ton and Vic'e President AI GOre. Hilffmgton, who spent. more than
"A Chinese .political operative
"Hardly day goes .by. without ..
any other Senate cahqidate in hiswas platied in the .Commerce De- reading of. yet another act of agtory', lost his bid to unseat. Demopartmentto conduct economic es- gl'ession, another act of duplicity,
cratic Sen: Dianne Feinstein.
pionage. and even breaching na- . -or, another affront· to humanity
. Republicans .used yesterday's · tiona! security, while at the same committed.by the dictatorship in.
vote to blunt criticism that they are time -having free aceess to the Beijing;• Mr. Solomon said.
stonewalling oil campaign-fmance . White House;• Mr. Solomon said at
"If ever a policy .were .out of
reform, and .to attack Democrats . · a joint news conference ciilled .by touch with reality;• he added; "it is ·
for seeking to curb First ·Amend- · an ad hoc coalition opposing the our current. policy of appeasement
' mentrightS to free speech.
· · extension of most-favored-nation toward communist China,"
"JuSt think ofthe irony that the . (MFN) trade status to China. · .
Mr.· Solomon said he had beeri
[Democratic] senators'would vote
."We must begin the process ,of
against a constitutional· amend- .· . preparation that migh_t lead to the invited 'to meet later yesterday ..
~
bal
d b d
b t
with Mr. Gingrich and would try to '
ment ,or ·a.
ance
u get; u · impeachment of someone ·.in .the. persuade him not to support the .
they .woUld turn around and vote White House [because] the odor of
for an amendment limiting free economic espionage, of breaches administration's policy. toward
speech," .said· .Senate Majority of national security evidently con- . China. The ·speaker plans to visit
Leader 'Irent Lott of Mississippi.-· doned by the White House.has.re- China next wee~.
.
. In the Senate, only two·co~it' ..
"I 'don~t believe that's the Way .the cently · spread over the entire
American peopl~ would want us to [fund-raising] debate;: he said;
tee chairmen are know -to oppose
·. be goin·g."
· · · House RepublicanS; like their the Cliriton China policy. One of
-Political campaigns increas- Senate counterparts, show sigris of them; Sen. Robert C. Smith, New .
ingly have used TV ads..:.:. and the . leading their. leaders on. every~ . Hampshire .Republican,_ said yes-.
cost of air time has raised the costs · thing from taX cuts to foreign pol- terday, "China should not be· reof ciunpaigning .. Such costs have icy, and Mr, Hyde and Mr. Solomon warded for repressing its citizens;
forced· politicians to continually took· up impeachment only after . bullying Taiwan, spreading· sensicampaign for funding.
.,
Rep. Bob Barr, a second-term Re- tive nuclear technology and failing
.. In the latest election cycle, can':. publican from Georgia, requested · 'to protect U.S. intellectual prop- ·
an impeachment inquiry.
erty. "
·
•
•
<
'
•
.But QOP leadership won't upset China
im-
a.
a:
(,:'
~~e l'tW~inRton ~intt~
. WEDNESDAY, .MARCH
19,. 1997·
.
.
.
'
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Terry Edmonds
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Office of Speechwriting
James (Terry) Edmonds
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1995-2001
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
<a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/36090" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7763294" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0462-F
Description
An account of the resource
Terry Edmonds worked as a speechwriter from 1995-2001. He became the Assistant to the President and Director of Speechwriting in 1999. His speechwriting focused on domestic topics such as race relations, veterans issues, education, paralympics, gun control, youth, and senior citizens. He also contributed to the President’s State of the Union speeches, radio addresses, commencement speeches, and special dinners and events. The records include speeches, letters, memorandum, schedules, reports, articles, and clippings.
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
William J. Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
635 folders in 52 boxes
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Working Families Flexibility Act and Info. For Radio Address (3/97)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Office of Speechwriting
James (Terry) Edmonds
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0462-F
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Box 17
<a href="http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/assets/Documents/Finding-Aids/2006/2006-0462-F.pdf" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7763294" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
William J. Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Reproduction-Reference
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
12/9/2014
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
42-t-7763294-20060462F-017-002-2014
7763294