-
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/files/original/53c45fb2f090834c58758e1c72b978d9.pdf
fbbcbc9afae6dc2af30ec42287d80f0b
PDF Text
Text
FOIA Number: 2006-0466-F
FOIA
MARKER
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/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting
Series/Staff Member:
Jonathan Prince
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
10442
FolderiD:
Folder Title:
July 1995 - [Federal Law Enforcement Meeting]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
s
91
7
2
1
�Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
001. note
DATE
SUBJECT/TITLE
Steve to Jonathan Prince; re: Draft Speech (partial) (1 page)
n.d.
RESTRICTION
P6/b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Speech writing
Jonathan Prince
OA/Box Number:
I 0442
FOLDER TITLE:
July 1995 - [Federal Law Enforcement Meeting]
2006-0466-F
1397
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act- [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)l
Freedom of Information Act- [5 U.S.C. 552(b)l
Pl
P2
P3
P4
b(l) National security classified information [(b)(l) of the FOIAI
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIAI
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA[
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information ((b)(4) of the FOIAI
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA[
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA[
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA[
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA[
National Security Classified Information [(a)(l) of the PRAI
Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRAI
Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA[
Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRAI
PS Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors (a)(S) of the PRAI
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRAI
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
�Document No . _ _ _ _ __
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE:.
7/12/9 5
SUBJECT:
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BV: _
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: WELFARE REFORM MEETING FOR JULY 13,1995
ACTION
FYI
_,(AN ETTA
~·~
·McLARTY
0
VICE PRESIDENT
...-fcKES
c..B6WLES
RIVLIN
/
~MANUEL
/
(,PEA RAN
· GIBBONS
./
._pRIFFIN
HALE
VA'ERMAN
HIGGINS
LAKE
Ll~fY
"IKVA
___.A.....,S......A..u.P_ __
~RRY
~
[/
D
0
0
0
0-
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
ACTION
FYI
0
0
0
.o
McGINTY
~
-
RASCO
~
SEGAL
0
~
~·
~EPHANOPOULOS
0
0
0
TYSON
WEBSTER
WILLIAMS
~
""'CURRY
~NCE
~
TZWSn$5'['..,,
~jg~
-N_
0
0
0
0
D
0
0
0
0
0
0
~
. : / o·
0
0
0
D
0
0
D
0
REMARKS:
PROVIDE COMMENTS TO JONATHAN .PRINCE ASAP
RESPONSE:
JOHN D. PODESTA
Assistant to the President
and Staff Secretary
Ext. 2702
�-----------------
PRESIDENT WILLIAM J. CLINTON
REMARKS AT WELFARE REFORM MEETING
THE WHITE HOUSE
.:ruLY 13, 1995
I'm glad to have Senator Daschle, Congressman Gephardt, Governor
Carper and their colleagues at the White House this morning.
I
asked them to come here today to talk about welfare reform.
The American people have made it abundantly clear that they want
the broken welfare system fixed.
It doesn't work for the people
stuck on it, and it doesn't work for the taxpayers who foot the
bill.
.
.We should be able to do this. We've come a long way in this
welfare debate. Not so long go, some liberals opposed work
requirements. Not so long ago, many conservatives opposed
providing childcare to move people from welfare to work.
Now, we
have bipartisan agreement to do both. We agree that we need
stridt time limits on welfare, and we need to demand work from
everyone who can work. And we agree that we. need the toughest
possible child support enforcement, and chi~dcare so parents can
go to work.
Here's the problem: Some· people on the far right are blocking any
act:ion on welfare reform that doesn't cut off children whose
parents are poor, young, and unmarried.
That's wrong.
We
shouldn't punish babies for their parents' mistakes..
I'm not the
only one who feels this way. Yesterday, I met with a group of
Catholic Bishops. who deeply oppose the position of these farright Senators, and they're helping to lead the fight against it.
Number one, they think it's cruel; and number two, they're afraid
it will lead to more abortions.
Look ~- this shouldn't be so hard anymore. We all know what we
have to do. We basically agree on it.
So why isn't it getting
done? Because a few Senators on the far right have decided it's
in their own political interest to block welfare reform. There is
no reason on earth why the U.S. Senate should stand for "just say
no" politics when the broken welfare system is one of the biggest
problems in our country, and we can fix it.
Every week that politics stops real reform, thousands of welfare
mothers stay on welfare instead of going to work, simply because
they can't get childcare. Every week that we don't make our
child support laws as tough as possible, we leave 800,000 people
on welfare who could be off it tomorrow if. they got the child
support they deserve. Every day without welfare reform drains
our economic strength, saps our national spirit, and prevents all
Americans from·being able to truly make the most of our future.
Let's work together and get the job done.
�MAINSTREET
619
DATA
967
0612
Clinton speech cites
O'side E. coli victim
Kansas, insists regulatory reform
is no threat
OCEANSIDE - Ever since
to
safe
13-year-old Eric Mueller died
meat.
of E. coli poisoning from a
Safe food
hamburger in 1993, his story
advocates
has become an important part
like
the
of the fight for safer meat.
CarlsbadPresident Bill Clinton dedibased Safe
cated an entire paragraph of
Tables Our
his weekly radio speech .on
MUELLER
Priority say
Saturday to Mueller, who died
their fight
on November 3, 1993.
In the speech, Clinton criti- has been reduced to partisan
in U.S. Congress.
cized Republican efforts at politics
Inspectors have used the
regulation refonns, saying the same system since 1906, relychanges actually would endan-. ing on touching and smelling
ger peo:ple's lives by stalling the meat but no scientific
his administration's efforts to
improve meat-inspection stan- tests.
"If we live in a world like
dards.
..
How~ver, presidential con~..~ >-- See E. coli, Page1B-2
tender~ Sen. Bob Dole, R-
By Kim Homer
Staff Writer
'
fV6r-jt, Co"""4/
tf) L A-1')£
r
CCTIL-(210
l-19-95
P.02
�I"IH.lN.Oir;.C:.C:.I
J.JHIH
F
Sunday, July 16, 1995
Children depend on
better inspections
By Rainer Mueller
What'!! wrong with this picrun? In the ~a~t 17 ~31"5, the
Unabomber asldlled three
pe':Lle and injured 12. Because
of ·$,the l'o$tal Se:Mce refused to take package& in exce~s of 1Z ottncesMd
. NwrweEk magazine put a
sketch of this d~viM! Cin i!s
tO'\o'er.
In the past 17 yea!"S, accordLng to Centers
Disease Control e&timates, E. coli 0157;H7
bact0ria have kiUed more than
8,500 people (most of them
children) and injured more
then 340,000 pem_le (again,
most of them chi dren).}.nd
now Sen. Robert Dole, R-Kan.•
ha~ introduced le~5lMion that
would compromise the ad·
vance$ recently m11de In 1m.
proving food safety.
Something is wrong here.
Deadly ...ront, •
In Decem er 1992, when &year-old Lauren Rudol~h of La
Costa died after eatin~ an E.
coli 0157:H7-infected am burger at her favorite f!lst-!ood
restaurant, head th.e tragic ec·
count in the North. Coun[!/
Blade-Cirizen ~>nd believed It .
..-as an unfortUnate, isolated inddent.
ror
H>R.~
~e'"'N
~0~~
Rei"\:
Q.A\~
· HU.iSt.t.eQ
were enacted in 1906 based on
19th<entwy !ocien~. These
outdated regulations only petrnit government meat impectors to look at, smell and touch
beef carcasse~ at the time of
slaughter.
According to CDRl1t only
take$10 E. coli 0157· 1 rni·
aobes to lcill a child, and 1 billion of these mkrobes c;~n
dance on the head of e pin.
How In the -rld can a meat
~ector find these deadly
ogens?
p
The answer I$ modern sd·
ence. Micro!<:opes and DNA
testing are recent development$ that can detennln~> if
meat is infected with these
killer bacteria. Unbelievably;
~
The concept of
values
family
means that the food
and water we as
Americans eat and
drink must be safe.
.•.•·
A
the cost for this added Sllfety Is
only one-tenth ro CW~>t<!nd~ of
Iwa~.,.-rong.
a
per/fund of meatabout 1 to
per year per per· Less than a }~e.r later, my
oon
in
this
counay. I don't~
1~~<~N>ld son, Er1:1also died
Ue--e that th.la Is too hlgh a
after eating an E. co · 0157;H7price to ~ey. especially when
infected hamburger at hls fayou COIU der that Eric'!! hosplvorlte fast-food restaurant. M I
·
tal and doctor bills'exceeded a
co
learn
Iacer,
it
wam'l
an
was
quarter of a aUlllon dollan.
, isolated !nddent.
Even our local co~ssional
Unbelievable as it seem~.
representative, Ron Packml.
each and tl\'lliY d<~Y more than
R-0c:ean$lde, vored a~
one child dies from thi& ex·
tremely deadly poison. And it Is lines nther than the
b" valut$ continually expoundan~death.
ed b)' the Republican Pany.
en the t0llin3 productd
This was after prnrtlising he
by this bacteria attack the huwould not. The concept of fami.
m~n bo<ly,lt can cause an insid)y values means that the food
!ous disease called hemolytic
and water we as AmericaM ut
uremic syndrome, for which
e.nd drinl< must be sale.
tbert> is absolutely no C\lle.
Thb is the real rea~n we
HUS atta.cks just about ~ry
organ in the body and begins to elect ~rru:nents. When the
liquefy them.
. Repu licans complain about
the
of television and
One literally dissol'"es from
mo es eomlng from Hollythe inside out -·not a pre%,
sight. And as a parent wat · g w«ld, we can alway• use our
dl.saetion to ch~ the c.han·
my only son undergo thi ~
agony, I wa& crushed by the fact net, walk out of or not see the
particular moo.ie. But we have
that there ...-as nothln~ould
to eat and drink; we ha'-e no
do for Eric but watch · die.
other choice.
Our family has not been the
What's going on here?
same since.
And now members of my !;'<>- Where'!I the reasoning behind
this R~blican. platform? In
lineal ~the Republicans.
led by le and Ho~ Speaker ~mind 1>nd the mind of any
AJnerlcan, there can
Newt Cingrich of Georgia. QJ'9
be abso ut~ no reasonlllg for
attempting to sidetrack- no,
this. Solll- ere alo"8 the Un~.
make that dcnil- the ad·
someone must have been pald
vanCe$ in meat Inspection and
off. Regrettably, the analogy
$8Cety recently propos<:d.
between this and the stOI)' of
.The group I am now associJudas Iscariot and his 30 pieces
a ted \Otlth, the Carlsbad-based
of silver m\15t be made.
Safe lables Our Priority, as
well as many o~er consumer
penn?
.
4
.
J
A
:
:
/:l
rc
thlnldnf
'
~
�-;. ... --
~
P002/003
TO 93953047
07-J3;:;9J\
, 01:13PM
'"
::
i
'"'''
........... ,,._,,.,,.,, ·-·
'"
.
'
.. ~ IF eM~1 fh,'.; ~r '{I
.. or ~~ ~~ ocJ- -ewh'rJ '1
/'lu_.
• :11/1
hnf- E/evf-r» cuhC:-vL
:
CA..
~ fl....d-
be'"'-0:
fr. f-evf- ,'., h.wh . .f7-a..._
/,.J711A}L
.d~c~~tt/-M
b?
-h ere~ ..;-hvvt
~
de5tjvt ~
!A/lovt;faN
~ <Svdhvt
/Vt~vt.{-
<;'!~N'M-;
D,-t'nb~
4'
1Wru&w-
(g__1.1 hW!t'vr~
t;vrtl'f. :
tb s114. ~ f.. fre v f!M.Jf- /!.I
o1 d.n~(,ot'VJ. wdev- 5r!fflt't-~
c;.._
rvt &_
c_;.,_fa_J41)...,.}-,,;.
~~
. . c)
..
1-r>~ 1).(r'uwr. aJAd 0~ ~MJ/h~
?1,1/cr~r:1~n('lwt~ A li/::L (k ouHr~k /1-1
lvt I qq_g wJt/c,r(_ IJ.J.over 11 oo• deA,l.
Md L/dJ 1 Do o ~~· u.red;
jtj,·j~J--ee
• fvr ..iJ-u~
Ff?\1,<-t"'t"-
~. 5~
J
~~
WA
lki'!f :
tt'vv
a,vt).
A-
r../.,._ ~· .
fl'fv-ewf- 1'vtjv.n'Bj
-j_
& nu1
I~ I
I
l6j v(J'
(ktvr
~·
I.
~n
vpk.c{1f.u.d 1;/(),<.;,/vr-e. k_ /Ms
It'!:e-ly fu cwht... f::r-e wl.u.. ff {#M~3
/{.tf-
!'(l(fo
[ or :
ct:n'(
fut c-r
~~•.J-t~f
~
t>tVt
q;e(/t.. PI
CtM ~£A. d k ~ ] j
lA tMe-.
I
v;J
I
�TO 93953047
07-J3:·. 95.... 0l : 13 PM
,........
POOJ/003
~
'
p,·rp,_~l/ ,oF /VI f~//-evfvJ
fro
pert,:. :
~
rv ~ ~ w ov tel.. ltlf.£v!at. L. fa>,'e.r lv ;'devv h ·If ~ s..tL IN~ ~ re..
,,·r,J,~ /f-vu.e.n'eat/1 Jfl rrod uch ~
. ;Xre. r:~r~ b7 utpn?tJ-s/
e-•, If..:,
f~l-evtl-5I
4 llld
~1/lAA_rk. s .
�.
·~
PRESIDENT CLINTON.
·On Regulatory Reform
.
.
.
.
Apriz'21, 1995, Eanhpay remarks in Havre de Grace, MD
"Let's not forget there is a right way and a wrong way to reform our approach .... It
would be crazy to throw the gains we have mad·e in health and safety away, or to forg~t the
lessons of the last 25 years. But that is exactly what some· of the proposed legislation inthe
United States ~<?ngrc:ss would do; and you must be cl~ar about it."
I
"Should governmentexamine the cost and benefits of what it.does before it moves?
Of co~rse. . .. And I would support a reasonable bipartisan bill that says-we ought to pay ·
more careful attention to the cost and benefits of what we do. But under the so.:.called 'risk
·legislation' pending in the Congress, every agency of our government would have to go.
through an e~pensive and time.!.consuming process every time they want to move a muscle~ "
'
'
.
"One line in this proposed legislation overrides every health and safety standards on
the books. It ·says rather than our children's health, money will always be the bottom line."
·~
.:-i.'
"Tills bill would let lawyers and special interests tie up. the government forever in
·lawsuits and petitions. The people proposing this bill ... have constructed a bill designed to
give relief to every lawyer in the country that wants to get i~to a mindless legal challenge,
and designed to construct gridlock. "
.·
"It would literaliy give polluters control over the regulations that affect them.. It
would lead to more bureaucracy, more lawsuits, but a whole lot less protection of the public
, health. And it should be defeated." · ·
·
·
'
I'
\
�· EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND. BUDGET
WASHINGTON,'D.C. 20503
·July 10, 1995
(Senate)
STATEMENT. OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY .
{Tms STATEMENT HAS BEEN COORDINATED BY OMB WITH THE CONCERNEp
s.
AGENCIES.)
343 - comprehensive Regulatory Reform Act of. 1995
-
'
(Dole {R) KS arid 29 cosponsors)
'•·
\
The-Administration strongly supports the enactment of cost-,
benefit analysis and risk assessment legislation that woul~
improve the regulatory system.
s. 1 343, however, is not such a
bil·l. Because the qumulative effect of its provisions would
burden the regulatory system with additional paperwork,
unnecessary costsi significant d~lay,,and excessiv~ litigation,
the Secretaries of Labor,. Agriculture, Health and Huma:n Services,·
.Housing and Urban Development,-Transportation, the Treasury, and ·
-the Interior, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency, and the' Director of the Office of Management and Budget.
would. recommend that the President veto s. 3.43 in its present
form;
0
The Administration is particularly concerned 't;:hat S •. 343
could 'lead to: .
•
0
•
Unsound Regulatory Decisions. A regulatory reform bill
should promote the development of more sensible
regulations. OS~ 343, however, c6uld require agencies .
to issue unsound regulations.
It wquld force.· agehcies
to choose ~he.·least cos~ly regulatbry alternative
available to-them, even if spending a few mo're dollars
would yield substantially greater benefits. ·It would
also prevent agenciesoresponsible for protecting public
health, safety~ or the ~nvironment from i~suing
regulations unless they can demonstrate a "significarit"
reduction in risk -- even if the benefits from a small
reduction in ri~k exceed the 6osts.
Both of these
~eatures would binder, rather. than promote, ·the
development of cost-beneficial, cost~effective .
regulations!
In addition, S .. 343 ·could be construed to
con~titute a supermandate that would override existing
sta~titory requirements indiscriminately.
·
Excessive Litigatibn. While it. is appropriate for·
courts to review fin~l a~ency iction to det~rmine
whether, taken as a whole, the-action meets the
requisite standards, S~ 343 would in6rease
opp6rtunities for lawsuits and allow challenges to
-·.
�~
•
I
I .
'2
agency action that is not yet final.
F~rther, by
needlessly altering numerous features of the
.
. .
AdministratiVe P~ocedure·Act~ s. 343 could eng~nder a
substantial number of lawsuits concerning the meaning
of changes to well~established law.
•
•
•
•
A Backdoor'Regulatory.Moratorium. s. 343 would take
effect immediately upon enactment, consequently leading.
to an unnecessary and time-consuming disruption of~the
rulemaking prqcess.
It would require proposed
regulations that have already been through notice and
cominent,_ and are based on cost;-benefitanalysis, to .
. begin the process all over again because of an agency's
unknowing failure to follow one of the many new
procedures in the bill~
The Unproductive· Use of Analytic Resources in Issuing
New Rules •. Since the.mid-1970s, Presidents of both
'parties have selected $100 million as the line of
de~arcation between th~t which warr~nts full-blown
regulatory ana·lysis ·and that which does not.
Because
cost-benefit and ~isk analyses can be 6ostly and timeconsuming, the Administr~tion believes that $100·
' million continues to be the appropriate. threshold.
s. 343, however, _has as its threshold $50
mil1ion --a decision-that would require
.agencies to use their resources
'
unproductively and that therefore cannot
itself _withstand cost-benefit Scrutiny.
Agencies· Overwhelmed with Peti-tions -and· theuLapsing of
Effective Regulations.
s. 343 creates numerous, often
highly-convoluted petition processes that, taken
together, could-create opportunities for special
interests to tie up an agenci in additional paperwo~k
and, in· the prodess, waste valuable resources.
Several
'of these processes allow agencies inadequate time to
conduct the required analyses and prepare the required·
responses to petitions; contain inadequate standards
against which the adequacy _of petitions can be judged;
contain inadequate limitati9ns on who may properly file
petitions;·and contain inadequate safeguards against an
·agency becoming overwhelmeq by large numbers of
-p~titions.
These problems are exacerbated by_
provisions providing for .the sunsetting of regulation~
according to arbitrary deadlines 1 which could-cause
effective regulations tb lapse ~ithout going thro~gh:
th'e notice and comment · process.
Inappropriate us·e of Risk Assessment and Peer Review .
S .- 343 ts risk assessment and peer :r~view provision·s are
overly broad_ in scope afid.would introduce unnecess~r~
�,.
..
----------
/
,.
---- -------------
3
delays into the regulatory process. They would
inappropriately subject all health, safety, and
environmental regulations to risk assessment and peer
review~ regardless .of whether such regulations are
designed to reduc~ risk or whether a risk·~ssessmen~
and a ~eer r~~iew would; from a scientific perspective,
be .useful or appropriate.
•
Slowed Environmental Cleanups.
s. 343 could neeqlessly
slow ongoing and. planned enVironmental cl.eanup
activities, including those at military installations
necessary to make the installa~ion~ being made
available for productive non-military-use.
It would
also invite attempts to renegotiate. cleanup agreements,
thereby hampering enforcement .efforts and increasing ·
public and private transaction c.osts.
•
A Less Accountable and Less Transparent Re~ulatory
Process. Any regulatory ·reform bill should bring"sunshine" to_ the regulatc?ry ~eview process •. , Executive
·Order No. 12866, "Regulatory Planning and Review,"
provides both for centialized Executiv~ branch review ·
of proposed regulations and for'the disclosure of
.
communications concerning pending rulemakings between
peisons outside the Executive branch and cen~~alized
reviewers.
S. 343, however, contains ho such sunshine
provision and could consequ~ntly remove acb6untability
.an~transparericy from the regulatory process.
·
•
--~
•
An ~nduly tengthy Congressional-Layover.
S. 34j
includes a provision for a cortgressional· la~over of 60
days that go~s beyond the provisions of S. 219, which
provided for a 45-day la~over. · s. 219 passed the ·
Senate by a vote' of 100-0, with Administration support.
Unrealistic, Unmanageable Studiesi s. 3~3 would
a comprehensive ~tudy of and. report on all
risks to health, safety,- and the. environment addressed
by all federal agencies. .It would also require the .
President. to ~roduce annually a highly detailed
e~timate of and report on the costs, benefits, and
effects cif ~irtually all existing regulatory ~rpgrams.
Such studies would not only be unm~~ageabie to conduct
and co~tly to produce, but would require scieniific and
economic. analytical techniques that go beyond the sta'te
of the-art.
~equire
•
Unnecessarily Hindered Enforcement of Reoulations and
. out of Court Settlements.
S. 34 3 could 'create
disincentives for regulated entities to bring
potentially conflicting regulations to the ap·propriate
agencies 1 attent·ion.
It could· also ma·ke _it
·
-·
�'Jtt-' '
4
unnecessarily difficult for agencies t6·settle
litigation out of· court.
•
'
'
Significant Changes in Substantive Law'without Proper
consideration. s .. 343 goes beyond attempting to ·reformthe regulatory process by making changes in substantive.
law -- altering,. -for example,. the Delaney Clause ,and
the community Right-to-Know Act. Whether such, changes·
are appropriate should' be decided only after full
hearings in the committees of -jurisdiction and full
debate on,the merits. ,
The Administration is as concerned with the cumulative
effect of s. 343 as with -its pa-rticular features.
The
Administration. remains committed, however, to improving the
r~gulatory pro6ess, b~th admirli~tratively and through
legislation.
*
*
*
'•
�June 12, 1995
.
.
.
'THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION'S REGULATORY REFORM ACHIEVEMENTS
"I want a government that is limited but effective, that is lean .but not mean,
that does what it should do better and simply stops doing things that it
shouldn't be doing in the first place, that protects consumers and workers; the
environment, without burdening business, choking innovation or wasting the
money of the American taxpayers. "
President Clinton
March 16, 1995
Since taking office~ the Clinton Administration has been strongly committed to
reforming our regulatory system so that agencies produce fe~er, less costly, and more
effective regulations. It has accordingly undertaken the .following administrative and
legislative reform initiatives.
·
·
Administrative Efforts
Administrative achievements ov~r the last two and a half years include:
•
Executive Order 12866. Executive Order 12866, which was issu~d on
September 30, 1993, set out the Administration's. regulatory. philosophy. The
Order calls for the use of good data and sound .science; better analysis of
· ·proposed regulations, including consideration of alternatives to regulation and
cost/benefit and risk analysis; increased public outreach arid involvement; and _
the use of market incentives and performance standards rather than comrriandand-control techniques.
•
Reinventing Regulation Initiative. The Vice Prt?sident has undertaken a review
. of both cross-cutting and sector-specific regulatory issues. The President has
already announced several specific reforms that ·have emerged from. this
process, and additional regulatory _reinventions will follow. Those completed
thus f~r include:
o\
Environmental Protection Agency. EPA will: reduce paperwork
burdens by 25 percent; ·institute a "one-stop" emissions reporting.
·program; give small businesses a six month grace period to ·correct
violations; provide incentives for self-disclosure and correction of ·
violations; create a self-certificat.ion program, beginning with ·
pesticides; allow state, tribal,, and local recipients of EPA grants to
COtP.bine OVer $600 million in air, water, and waste grants in order to
firtd cheaper and cleaner- means of achieving their local environmental
·goals.
~
o
Food and Drug Administration. FDA will: allow manufactures to
make certain changes to drugs without prior FDA approval; exempt
certain categories Of medical devices such as syringes imd oxygen
masks)' from prior approval requirements; eliminate environmental
'
�\
-2assessments for human drugs, animal drugs, and biologics; harmonize.
international standards' for the review of drugs and medical..devices.
· o
o·
/
'
Occupational Safety and Health Administration. OSHA will:
nationalize the "Maine 2000" program, which replaces command..:and·
control regulation with a system that builds partnership between · ·
companies and OSHA regulators in order to improve worker health and
safety in a less burdensome manner; focus inspections on the most
serious hazards at workplaces with effective safety and 'health
programs; reduce penalties for violations that are corrected during an
inspection.
Pension Benefit Reform. The Labor and Treasury Departments 'and ·
the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation will: provide small businesses with vastly simplified plan formats that will ensure coverage
of rank-and-file without requiring complex and costly compliance and
administrative tasks; simplify the nondiscrimination rules for all · .
pensions plans by focusing on the real abuses and minimizing layers of .
rules that generate .unneeded complexity; eliminate rules imposed on
public or multi-etVployer plans that were designed to counteract singleemployer plan abuse; simplify reporting requirements; reduce
· regulatory procedure and delay.
,
·
.
•
•
I
. Paperwork Reduction Initiatives.
o
On March 16, 1995, the President instructed agencies ·to require the
public to file reports half as often.
o
'On May 22, 1995, the President asked. agencies to accept electronic ·
,filing's of forms and reports in lieu of paper or explain to the Office of
'Management and Budget why electronic filing is not appropriate.
Customer Service Initiatives~ On February 21; 1995, the President ordered
regulatory officials to:
o
Reward results, not red tape. Eac;h agency is. to change the way it
measures its front-line regulator's performance, focusing on results
instead of process or punishment.
'I'
o
Get out of Washington. and create grass roots partnerships. Agencies .
were inStfll;Cted to convene groups of front-line regulators and affected
citizens at sites throughout the country, rathe~ than in Washington.
o
Negotiate, don't dictate. Agencies have been directedto submit a list .
of rulemaking proceedings that· can be· changed into negotiations
,between government and affected parties.
I
I
-
�. - 3-
•
Enforcement Programs. On March 16, 1995, .the President asked agencies to
waive up to 100 percent of penalties for small businesses that attempt in good
faith to comply with regulations.
·
•
Review of Existing Regulations. On February 21, 1995, the President asked
major· regulatory (!gencies to revie~, page-by-page, their existing regulations
. in order to eliminate or reinv~nt those that are unduly burdensome, outdated,
or· in need of revision. .These agencies submitted reports to the President on
·June 1, indicating t.hat over 16,000 pages (almost 20 percent) of the Code of·
Federal Regulations will be eliminated and over 31,000 pages (over 35
percent) will be reinvented.
,
Legislative Efforts
The Admiilistration has been instrumental in achieving the following legislative1
reforms:
•
Interstate Banking Deregulation. This legislation, which had been languishing·
in Congress for more than a decade before the Clinton Administration. made it
a priority, will eliminate most of the remaining barriers to efficient nationwide banking by allowing banks to locate branches across state boundaries. It
will not only make banking more efficient, but· will increase the convenience
of banking for priva:te consumers.
•
Intrastate Trucking Deregulation. The Administration championed extending
the interstate deregulation of the trucking industry to intrastate trucking, with
· estimated savings to' shippers and consumers of $3 billion to. $8 biilion per
year.
•
Procurement Reform. The Administration supported the Federal Acquisition
and Streamlining Act of f994, which simp~ifies procedures for Federal
procurement of commercially-available goods, promotes the development of
computer networks for conducting procurement electronically' and provides
additional flexibility in awarding and financing government contracts.
•
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. The Administration,.supported legislation
that would require agencies to perform cost/benefit analyses for all new ·
regulation with an annual, unfunded burden of $100 million or more on the private sector or on state, local, or tribal governments. The Act also requires
agencies to consult with state, local, and tribal governments before issuing
·
regulations thqt impose unfunded mandates.
•
Paperwork Reduction Act. The Administration supp-orted legislation that seeks
to.reduce paperwork burdens by 10 percent per year for twp years and five
percent per year thereafter. It also requires all proposed fqrms to be approved
by the Office of Management and Budget, following two opportunities for the .
public to comment .on: utility of each proposed form and its likely burden.
�Copyright 1994 The San Diego Union-Tribune
The San Diego Union-Tribune
March 12, 1994, Saturday
. SECTION: LOCAL; Ed. 2,3,4,5; Pg. B-1
LENGTH: 582 words
HEADLINE: Tearful parents escalate fight for safer food
BYLINE: John Gaines
·BODY:
Six-year-old Stephanie Rock came to town on a red-eye in the wee hours of
yesterday morning and -- wouldn't you know it -- the airline lost her baggage.
But later that day in Encinitas, where Stephanie and her mother helped
christen a national headquarters dedicated to reducing food-borne illness, you
never would have guessed their bad luck. Stephanie wore a pretty pink dress
with a smiling white bunny on the front that fit her perfectly. The dress once
belonged to Lauren Rudolph.
Just a year ago, freckle-faced Stephanie was in intensive care at a Florida
· hospital, suffering from a virulent illness whose cause was related to the
Escherichia coli 0 157:H7 bacteria. Obviously, Stephanie survived quite nicely.
Lauren, of La Costa, was 6 years old in December 1992 when she ate a tainted
fast-food hamburger and contracted E. coli. Lauren was not so fortunate.
One girl dies, a second lives, and carries something of the other with her.
Usually it is a memory; yesterday a pink dress had to do. Tomorrow, it will be
tougher laws and regulations to reduce the toll of the disease that struck the girls.
That will happen if their parents are heard by enough of us.
Parents came to Encinitas from all over, the lucky ones accompanied by
survivors. They came from Florida and Alabama, from Oceanside and El Cajon, to
dedicate the national office of S.T.O.P. -- Safe Tables Our Priority.
Poised with legislation and education, S.T.O.P. aims to strike back at E. coli and
related infections, which may have left 34 people here ill during an outbreak in
1992-93 and more than GOO in Washington state, where three victims died. E. coli
bacteria are usually found in undercooked meats, but can be spread in other ways.
�S.T.O.P. headquarters is a cozy bungalow, far too small for the emotion it held
yesterday. Emotion burst forth at every chance, from people who have cried
plenty but who now have a vehicle to carry their demand that this not be
repeated.
The most poignant moment came when several parents unveiled a picture wall
of two dozen recent victims, all children. One was shown playing a violin. Another
posed by one of those phony fireplaces that are popular at photo studios .
.IVI;ary Rolecki of El Cajon sobbed quietly as she stared at a picture of her son,
Draak Den Dekker, who was 17 when he died in 1992. The emotion swelled up,
and Rolecki thought to herself, He didn't die in vain over a $2 hamburger.
Nearby stood Rainer Mueller of Oceanside, who buried his son Eric in
November. The death has not been confirmed as E. coli-related, but the more
Mueller learns, the more likely it seems. Mueller wore a green basebg.ll jacket,
like the one Eric was buried in.
.
(\ CL . --\-~o. \l~Li ,...c ( 1 '0\- co,,\<' c>1c,\~L~:.. . - .
S.T.O.P. was founded here because of the strong support that arose around
Lauren Rudolph, whose mother, Roni, is a founder. It also is significant in that
California is less prepared than many states to handle E. coli outbreaks.
There is no requirement, for instance, that doctors report E. coli cases to county
health departments, as they must report measles. Reporting requirements now
exist in 26 other states.
On March 22, the county Board of Supervisors is scheduled to take up a
resolution, at Supervisor Pam Slater's initiative, supporting legislation to require
such reporting_ It also calls for laws on minimum cooking tempe-ratures that
would kill the E. coli bacteria.
They are minimal, uncontroversial steps that nevertheless might prevent a lot of
pam.
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
LOAD-DATE-MDC: March 14, 1994
�EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
THE DIRECTOR
July
7~
1995
Honorable Orrin G. Hatch
.Chairman
Committee on th~ Judiciary
United States .Senate
·Washington,. D.'c ... 205,10
Dear Mr. Chairman:
On April 26 1995 the Senate Judiciary Committee reported
11
Comprehensive Regulatory Reform Act of 1995," for
floor consideration., The Congressional ~udget Office estimated ·
that the bill, if· enacted', would impose additional discretionary
. costs of at least ·$180 mil.lion annually .. · We have worked over the
last several .weeks with both the program and the -budget offices
of-agencies with major regulatory programs,· in. order to ar:~:ive at
our. own estimate of the potential costs of the bill as reported
by the Judiciary Committee. ·
I
I.
s .. 343 .the
I
CBO indicated in,...J1ts ·analysis that few of the agencies had
had sufficient time to determine the additional costs that the
bill would impose. Further, .it assumed that the sole feature.of
. s .· 343 that would make issuing new regulations -'more costly was
the lowering 6f the threshold f6r cost-benefit analysis to $50
million.. Our request to the agencies,- however, .asked them to
consider :r;10t only the lowering of the threshold; but also the
many additional. analytic steps -- such as risk asses'sment and·
peer review-- that s. ~43 would require agencies to undertake'in
situ~tions where they are not now carried out . . In add;i.tion, our
analysis,, unlike CBO' s, contemplated the additional costs that S.
343 would impose both by significantly exi;>ariding·existing
litigation opportunities and by subst'antiallyexpanding the
··coverage and the.requirements· of the Administrative Procedure
Act. Our analysis, unlike CBO's, also included the co~ts
involved in implementing themany new petition processes that s.
343 would ·create. for reviewing existing _regulations. ..
Based on ourmore extensive analysis,·we have arrived at a
·cost,figure. that is significantly larger than CBO's .. Our:
preliminary estimate is that S. 343,· as reported by ·the Judiciary
Committee, -'could impose discretionary costs of approximately $1.3
billion annually and, consume .the time <::>f approximat·e~y 4, sao ,
FTEs. Although there have be~n some modifications made to the
bill si.nce it was reported by the- Judiciary Committee, we believe
that this information remains 1;1seful·in light of CBO's estimate.
1
\
i.
�..
I hope this inf6rma·tion is. useful to you ,as S. 343
approaches the floor.
Sincerely;
G2~u.
1h
Alice M. Rivlin
Director
·, cc:
Honorable Joseph R .. Biden
Ranking Minority Member·
Committee on the Judiciary
Honorable Robert Dole
Majority Leader'·
United States.Senate
Honorable Thomas A. Daschle
Minority, Leader
United States Sena.te
\
/
,\_
�Bcptain need for and ob;ectlves
of rule, and sbrtutory authority,
summary or inlial &nattsls, and.
request public comment.
AgencyRY
of Existing
R\Jes;;;ars)
Publistt General
Notice ~ Proposed
RUemakilg §553
Identify bEnefits al'ld
coats of final rule and
flexile alternatives,
and Identify
benefiCiaries al"'d
persons who Ylil bear
costs, ilcluding
subgroups.
Include, to the ~!!dent feasible, quantitable
benefits al'ld costs, ranges of predictions
and margins of error.
~§623onlyl
llgni'CIInt~Ol
r emedllliDfl llu nol
t~eguro
D escrile "poiSt\jates"
(default assumptions,
models, inferences) aoo
. att.
~ulates
Only publsh rule if
least oost lllternatiYe'
Evalsle
aoo if ~kelv to s;g.
SubsUltion Risks
nfficantly redooe risk.
is alt!!malive leas1
cosl per §624
Identify options that
permit ~est .
flmdbility per statiAory
aulhority
Identify
oescrmes llllemalives
"Anat(ze
benefitsalld
;
ideRify
benefiCiaries.
Analyze oosts
and identify
persons 'M1o
will bear costs
Identify performance
based standards, market
mecharlsi'ns, alld other
fle)dble options
that recognizes
differences in
~region& and
persons' resources to
comply
altemativEs that
require no gw.
action,
aocomodate
differences, and
employ volunatry
or flexible
Rulemaking Maze Under 8.343 (Dole)
amend or repeal
--------1..
prohibit
maJor r!Je.
553(1) & §623(c) ~------derliedo~..___......
6888
7nJ96
�---------------~---------------
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
July 10, 1995
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
STEPHEN NEUWIRTH#
ASSOCIATE COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT:
PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE ON
RELIGION IN SCHOOLS
Attached is a draft of the directive that you will announce during your speech this
Wednesday on religious liberty.
The directive sets forth the extent to which the First Amendment permits and protects
religious expression in schools, and directs Secretary Riley to disseminate these principles to
all public school districts by the start of the coming school year. The memorandum also
directs Secretary Riley to provide guidance to school districts concerning the Administration's
·
interpretation of the Equal Access Act.
You agreed to issue such a directive at a recent Oval Office meeting that included,
among others, the Vice President, Secretary Riley and Linda Lader.
I
The Justice Department has approved the form and content of the attached directive.
DOJ has advised us that the principles set forth in the directive reflect settled matters of
Constitutional law. Judge Mikva has similarly approved the directive.
The directive also reflects the agreement reached earlier this year by a broad coalition
of religious groups, ranging from People for the American Way, the ACLU and the
American Jewish Congress on the "left," to the Christian Legal Society and the National
Association of Evangelicals -- both of which favor a constitutional amendment on religion -on the "right."
�·'
DRAFT -- FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
.July _ , 1995
MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
SUBJECT:
THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND
RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Religious freedom is perhaps the most precious of all American liberties -- called by
many our "first freedom." Many of the first European settlers in North America sought
refuge from religious persecution in their native countries. Since that time, people of faith
and religious institutions have played a central role in the history of this nation. In the First
Amendment, our Bill of Rights recognizes the twin pillars of religious liberty: the
Constitutional protection for the free exercise of religion, and the Constitutional prohibition
on the establishment of religion by the state. Our nation's founders knew that religion helps
to give our people the character without which a democracy cannot survive. Our founders
also recognized the need for a space of freedom between government and the people -- that
the government must not be permitted to coerce the conscience of any individual or group.
In the over 200 years since the First Amendment was included in our Constitution,
religion and religious institutions have thrived throughout the United States. In 1993, I was
proud to reaffirm the historic place of religion when I signed the Religious Freedom
Restoration Act, which restores a high legal standard to protect the exercise of religion from
being inappropriately burdened by government action. In the greatest traditions of American
citizenship, a broad coalition of individuals and organizations came together to support the
fullest protection for religious practice and expression.
RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS
I share the concern and frustration that many Americans feel about situations where
the protections accorded by the First Amendment are not recognized or understood. This
problem has manifested itself in our nation's public schools. It appears that many school
officials, teachers and parents have assumed that religious expression of any type is either
inappropriate, or forbidden altogether, in public schools.
As our courts have reaffirmed, however, nothing in the First Amendment converts our
public schools into religion-free zones, or requires all religious expression to be left behind at
the schoolhouse door. While the government may not use schools to coerce the consciences
of our students, or to convey official endorsement of religion, the government's schools also
may not discriminate against private religious expression during the school day.
�.-----------------
------
-
·'
DRAFT -- FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
I have been advised by the Department of Justice and the Department of Education
that the First Amendment permits -- and protects -- a greater degree of religious expression in
public schools than many Americans may now understand. The Departments of Justice and·
Education have advised me that, while application may depend upon specific factual contexts
and will require careful consideration in particular cases, the following principles are among
those that apply to religious expression in our schools:
Student prayer and religious discussion: The Establishment Clause of the First
Amendment does not prohibit purely private religious speech by students. Students
therefore have the same right to engage in individual or group prayer and religious
discussion during the school day as they do to engage in other comparable activity.
For example, students may read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before
meals, and pray before tests to the same extent they may engage in comparable
disruptive activities. Local school authorities possess substantial discretion to impose
rules of order and other pedagogical restrictions on student activities, but they may not
structure or administer such rules to discriminate against religious activity or speech.
Generally, students may pray in a nondisruptive manner when not engaged in school
activities or instruction, and subject to the rules that normally pertain in the applicable
setting. Specifically, students in informal settings, such as cafeterias and hallways,
may pray and discuss their religious views with each other, subject to the same ruks
of order as apply to other student activities and speech. Students may also speak to,
and attempt to persuade, their peers about religious topics just as they do with regard
to political topics. School officials, however, should intercede to stop student speech
that constitutes harassment aimed at a student or a group of students.
Students may also participate in before or after school events with religious content,
such as "see you at the flag pole" gatherings, on the same terms as they may
participate in other non-curriculum activities on school premises. School officials,
acting in an official capacity, may neither discourage nor encourage participation in
such an event.
·
The right to engage in voluntary prayer or religious discussion free from
discrimination does not include the right to have a captive audience listen, or to
compel other students to participate. Teachers and school administrators should
ensure that no student is in any way coerced to participate in religious activity.
Graduation prayer and baccalaureates: School officials may not mandate or organize
prayer at graduation, nor organize religious baccalaureate ceremonies. If a school
generally opens its facilities to private groups, it must make its facilities available on
the same-terms to organizers of privately sponsored religious baccalaureate services.
2
�·'
DRAFT -- FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
A school may not extend preferential treatment to baccalaureate ceremonies and may
in some instances be obliged to disclaim official endorsement of such ceremonies.
Official neutrality regarding religious activity: Teachers and school administrators,
when acting in those capacities, are representatives of the state and are prohibited by
the Establishment Clause from soliciting or encouraging religious activity, and from
participating in such activity with students. Teachers and administrators also are
prohibited from discouraging activity because of its religious content, and from
soliciting or encouraging anti-religious activity.
Teaching about religion: Public schools may not provide religious instruction, but
they may teach about religion. The history of religion, comparative religion, the Bible
(or other scripture)-as-literature, and the role of religion in the history of the United
States and other countries all are permissible public school subjects. Similarly, it is
permissible to consider religious influences on art, music, literature and social studies.
Public schools may teach about religious holidays, including their religious aspects.
Schools may celebrate the secular aspects of holidays but may not observe holidays as
religious events or promote such observance by students.
Student assignments: Students may express their beliefs about religion in the form of
homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free of discrimination
based on the religious content of their submissions. Such home and classroom work
should be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance, and
against other legitimate. pedagogical concerns identified by the school.
Religious literature: Students have a right to distribute religious literature to their
schoolmates on the same terms as they are permitted to distribute other literature that
is unrelated to school curriculum or activities. Schools may impose the same
reasonable time, place, and manner or other constitutional restrictions on distribution
of religious literature as they do on non-school literature generally, but they may not
single out religious literature for special regulation.
Religious excusals: Subject to applicable state laws, schools enjoy substantial
discretion to excuse individual students from lessons that are objectionable to the
student or the students' parents on religious or other conscientious grounds. School
officials may neither encourage nor discourage students from availing themselves of an
excusal option.
Released time: Subject to applicable state laws, schools have the discretion to dismiss
students to off-premises religious instruction, provided that schools do not encourage
or discourage participation or penalize those who do not attend. Schools may not
3
�DRAFT -- FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
allow religious instruction by outsiders on school premises during the school day.
Teaching values: Though schools must be neutral with respect to religion, they may
play an active role with respect to teaching civic values and virtue, and the moral code
that holds us together as a community. The fact that some of these values are held
also by religions does not make it unlawful to teach them in school.
Student garb: Students may display religious messages on items of clothing to the
same extent that they are permitted to display other comparable messages. Religious
messages may not be singled out for suppression, but rather are subject to the same
rules as generally apply to comparable messages. When wearing particular attire,
such as yarmulkes and head scarves, during the school day is part of students'
religious practice, schools generally may not prohibit the wearing of such items.
I hereby direct the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Attorney General,
to use appropriate means to ensure that public school districts and school officials in the
United States are informed, by the start of the coming school
year, of the principles set forth
.
_above ..
.
THE EQUAL ACCESS ACT
The Equal Access Act is designed to ensure that, consistent with the First.
Amendment, student religious activities are accorded the same access to public school
facilities as are student secular activities. Based on decisions of the federal courts, as well as
its past interpretations of the Act and the positions it has advocated in pending litigation, the
Department of Justice has advised me of its position that the Act should be interpreted as
providing, among other things, that:
General provisions: Student religious groups at public secondary schools have the
same right of access to school facilities as is enjoyed by other comparable student
groups. Under the Equal Access Act, a. school receiving federal funds that allows one
or more student non-curriculum-related clubs to meet on its premises during
noninstructional time may not refuse access to student religious groups.
Prayer services and worship exercises covered: A meeting, as defined and protected
by the Equal Access Act, may include a prayer service, Bible reading, or other
worship exercise.
Equal access to means of publicizing meetings: A school receiving federal funds
must allow student groups meeting under the Act to use the school media -- including
the public address system, the school newspaper, and the school bulletin board -- to
announce their meetings on the same terms as other noncurriculum-related student
4
�I
J
DRAFT -- FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
groups are allowed to use the school media. Any policy concerning the use of school
media must be applied to all noncurriculum related student groups in a
nondiscriminatory matter. Schools, however, may inform students that certain groups
are not school sponsored.
Lunch-time and recess covered: A school creates a limited open forum under the
Equal Access Act, triggering equal access rights for religious groups, when it allows
students to meet during their lunch periods or other noninstructional time during the
school day, as well as when it allows students to meet before and after the school day.
I hereby direct the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Attorney General,
to use appropriate means to ensure that public school districts and school officials in the
United States are informed, by the start of the coming school year, of these interpretations of
the Equal Access Act.
5
�'
.
J~L-11-1995
14:38
FROM
BAPTIST
JO~NT
COMMITTEE
4565709
TO
P.01
i
. f
::
';
1
i'
:
•
I
:
·,
j:
•
'
: _'
. . •BfPTIST -~OINT CpMMITIEE ..
..
200 MARYLAND A'JENUE, N.E.i WASHINGTON, D;C; 20002-5797 • 202/544-4226 .
I
.
!
I
MEMORANDi~M I,.
;
i·
J. Brent Walker
j
. i
· G.eneral C91Jhsel ·
TO:
,.
,.
,I
r Jonathan M. Prince
FROM: J~-Hrent Walker~
DATE: July 11, 1995
'R,E:
Presiden.,tial Sp~h
·
.
· .
'
Again, great .work on the speech. I think it should be-~ hit. I am taking the i1berty
· of sending
a couple
~ore ·"nuggets"
that are consistent\vith
what
we discu~secUoday.that
you
.
.
.
.
.
I
.
.
may want.to consider,
now
or
later.
.
·
'·
:
1 '·• .
·, .· • ·
. · · .
· ·
.
.
.
. .
I
!
to
• Religious liberty is not just a means an end·;
value.
· ·
·
·
·
·
Jt is t~e quintessential American
··
·
·
·
i
..
i.
• The exercise ofreligipn is free only if it is V91Untary\ an~ uncoerced.·
• We come to our faith freely or not really.
'
' ...
'
i
.
.. .l
.
'
. .
.
.
'
• 'The best thing that government 'can do for religiort isIto; leave it alone'. . '
'· .
.
.
.
.
'
)'
'
.
'
'
• • Fot government to promote someone's religiqn dispaptges anothe~·s religion, and
·relegates those who lack religion ~o second-class citizenfhip. ·
· . ·· . :
• ..·Far from helping religion,· governmental support act~al.ly would :harm relig~on.
.
t:
.
. .
I
I
I
.
I
;
\
. i
'
)
·'
I
- i:
l.
I
;.
·'
·'·
Alliance of Baptists
.
American Baptist Churches in the u.S.A.
· Baptist General Conferen~e .
l".nnnAi'~tivP. R"'nli!:l F&llbwshio
National Baptist Convention of Arfierica
National Baptist ConventiOn U.S.A. Inc.
Nlitional .Missionary Baptist Convimtion
North American BaPtist Confertince
Inc.
Progressive National Baptist Convention,
· · ·.
. Religious Liberty Council
. . :Seventh D~;~y
General Conference
· 5oulhetn Baptist state !conventions & churches.
BaPtist
�Remarks
by
President William jefferson Clinton
At the signing ceremony for the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
November 16, 1993
'Ilian(you very mudi, Mr. '!!ice President, for tfwse fine remo.rfJ,
un.f to t!ie rru:mbas of Cuugre:ss, if~ c!wp::Ui!Z$ vj tf~ Jlouse ana tfie
Senate, and to a[[ of you wfw workJ_d so fuzrd to fze[p this aay 6ecome a
reafity. .Let me especia[[y tlian( the Coafition for the :Free '4_ercise of
~[igwn for the centra[ rofe tfzey pfayecf in arafting tfiis fegisfation and
working so liardfor its passage.
It is interesting to note, as the '!!ice Presicfent saic£, wfuzt a &road
coafition of J1.mer:Cans came together to makJ_ tfiis jji[[ a reafity. It's
interesting to note th..at tliat coafition proauced a 97-to-3 vote in the
'Unitea States Senate and a SiL[ tfuzt liad" o·udi broaJ support it =~~a.;
a.doptecf on a voice vote in tiie :J-fouse.
I'm toM tliat, as many of tfze peop[e in tfze coa[ir.on wor(ed together across ideofogica[ and rdigious fines, some new jnencfsfiips were
formeti anti some new trust was esta6[isfzei. wfiicfi sfwws, I suppose,
tfuzt the po·wer of yoti is sudi th..at even in the [egisfative process mirades can happen.
'He a[{f..ave a sfwreti tiesire frere to protect per/wps the most precivus
of al{:'lmerican [i6erties, reLigious freedom. 'Usual(1f tfi.e signin!J of [egis[atio:-z Sy a president is a ministeria[ act, often a quiet entiing to a turGufe:zt fegis[ative procESs. 'Tvaay, this e:1ent as,;u:r.es a more majesti..c
quatity Gecau..:e of our aGifity together to ~[firm t/re liistoric rofe tfwt
peopfe offaitli fwve pfa_Zfecf in the fiistory of this country anti tfze conJ·tituti.ona[ protections tfwse wfw profess and e.rpress their faith fwve
a[ways tiemantieti anti cfierishei.
'I7ie pozi.!er to reverse Gy fegis[ation a tiecision of the ·Unitea States
Supreme Court is a power tfwt is ri!Jfit{y lie.sitant{y anti infrequent[y
e.1pcisei b_Zf the 'Unitea States Congres.-. 'But this is an is..:ue in wfiicli
tliat ex:_traorainaT}_{ measure ruas dearly ca[feafor.
.% the '!!ice Presiaent saitf, this act rez1erses the Supreme Court's
aecision, T._mpfoyment 'Division a.3ainst Smith, ana re-estaG[isfzes a
stanaa_ra t~: Se~ter protects a[[ 5l.Jner:call$. ~f aryaitfis in the e:t,ercise
-.L LC--- --'·-·--- , .. - -··- .. LC.-L I -- ccr.-"~--ri ·~ jW.'
.£,.~ _..,~. C"n•c:s~ent
V..f
with the intent of the founaers of this nation tfian the Supreme Court
aecision.
:More tfwn 50 cases fwve 6een aecitiea agai!Z$t inaiv'iauaf.s ma/(jng
-re[{gious daims against government action since tfwt aeciswn was
lianaecf aown. 'Iliis act v/iu he(p to reverse tfiat trena- Gy fwnoring
tlic pn'ncipfe tfuzt our faws ana institutions s/iou{c{ not impecfe or fiinaer, 6ut rather ..:fwuM protect ana preserr'e funaamenta[ rdigious fiGertie.s.
'Ilie free e;cercise of rdigion has Geen ca[[d tfze first freeaom - tfiat
wfiicfi origina[!y spar/Q!a the aevewpment of tfze fuu range of the '}3i[[
of 1?.jgfits. Our founaers carecf a wt a6out rdigion. 5ina one of the reasons they wor(ecf so fwra to get the :first 5l.Jnendment into tfr.e 'Bi[[ of
.'1\igfit..: at the fr.eaa of tlie da.>s is tfwt they we[[ unaerstooa wfwt couM
fi.appen to this country, fww 6oth re!igion anagoverwnent c.ouM Ge pervertecf if there were not some space createa and some protection provicfed. 'Ifzey (new tfuzt reCigwn he(ps to give our peopfe the cfuzracter without wfzicfi a aemocracy cannot sur-Jive. rniey k!zew tfuzt there neecfeti to
Ge a space offrceaom Gcr.vccn gov'ermr..ent andpeopfe offaith tliat otherwise government might usurp.
'Ifzeyliave seen now, a[[ of us, tfuzt rdigion ana rdigious institutions
fi.ave Grougfzt forth. faith ana aiscipfine, community ana responsiGifity
"-1'-<.-J..I
1"-'-'tJI-VJt. "-''-
U
Wf.+:J
1-IU...'-
W.ll'"
•v4.-JJ.L-(...0+
k1
/lkl/t..
v
h.'
t.
"'
over two centuries for ourseCves and ena6fed us to five together in wa_Zfs
tfuzt I Gefieve woufa not fwve 6een possi6fe. ·}~~ are, after a[[, tfie owest aemocracy now in history, ana pro6a6[y tfie most tru(Zf muftiethn~
society on tfze face of the 'Earth.. ."lmf I am convincecf tfuzt neitfzer one
of those tfiings woufa 6e true toaayliaa it not been for the importance
of the :first :J.mendment ana tfze fact tfuzt we fuzve kJpt faitfi witfi it
for 200 years.
'H1fiat tfiis faw Gasica[[y says is tfuzt the government shoufd 6e fze(J
to a very fz.[gli fez:e[ ofproof before it inte~feres with. someone's free e.r_ercisc of rd:_gion. 'Iliis }Uif;-ment is siiarei Gy tf..e peopfe of the 'U.nitd
States as wel[ as Gy the Congress. 'H1e 6e[ie~'e strong!y tfuzt we can never
- we can never Ge too tigi!ant in this war!(
.Let me ma(e one other comment if I migfit before I dose ana sit
aown ana sign tfiis Gi[f. 'Ifure is agreat ae6ate now aGroaa in tfze fanc£
wfiidi. finas itse[f injectea into severa[ po[itica[ races about the e.r_tent
to wfi.icii peopfe offaith can see/( to ao (jod.'s wil[ as po[itica[ actors. I
Wou(J {i(_e to COme aoWn Oil tfze .:;itfe of encoura_qin!J every6otf:t to act on
wfiat t/zey Gef£eve is the rig/it thing to tio. 'T!iere are many peop[e in tiii.:,·
countT}_{ wiio strenuous(Zf aisagree with. me on wfwt t/rey 6dieve are tfi.i
strongest grountf.s of their jaitfis. I encourage them to speaf( out. I
encourage aL[ :'Vnericans to reacfi aeep insicfe to try to aetermine wf.at
it is tfiat arives their fives most tieep[y.
.% many of you f0ow, I fuzve Geen quite movea Gy Ste:'en Carter's
Goof(. 'Ifze Cufture gf 'DisGefz4 :J{e ma(es a compeffing case tfuzt toaa_Zf
;::Jmericans ~fa[[ pofitica[per.;uasio!Z$ anti a[[ regwns fwve created" a dimate in this countT}_{ in wfzicfi some peopfe 6e[ieve tfwt tfiey are ::mGarrassecf to saH tfuzt t!Uy aavocate a course ~faction simp{y because they
Gefieve it is the ngfit tfzingi Gecause theH Gefieve it is aictated 6:r tfzeir
faith., Gy wfuzt tfiey discern to Ge, witfi their Gest ~ffort5, the u~H ~{ yoi.
I suGmit to you toaay, my fd[ow .,'Vnencans, tfwt we can stana tliat
f;jna of aeGate in this country. 'We are fiving in a c.ountT}_{ wfiere tlze
..,.......,.;:;.. c~M-Q( ,"n,("#-'.1-trl-:.-,....,
0.{
.,_(., .{,..__.;~, f:"''" ~_,,.,...., .,_tf",.,...,
w,..,.--, ...
')
v,.,.,,r
.........r,.,r/rJ'Y
assauft for 30 years. we are fiving in a country in wfzicfi 160,0<XJ sclwo[
clr.iMren aon'tgo to scfioo[ every aay6ecause they're afraia someone u..'iu
shoot tfzem, or beat them up, or f(nife t.fr.em.. 'U1e are fiving in a c.ountT}_{
now where gun sfwts are the singfe feaaing cause of aeath among teenage Gays. 'VVe are fiving in a country where peopfe can find tfzemsefves
shot in the cross fire of teen-a.3ers wfw are often Getter armea tfian tf..e
pol?ce wfw are tT}_{ing to protect otfzer peopfe from i[fega[ conauct.
It is fiigfz time we fwa an open ana fwnest reaffirmaH.on of tlie rofe
of 5l.Jnerican citizens offaith- not so tfuzt we can· agree, Gut so tfuzt
we can argue ana tiiscourse ana see!( the truth ana see( to fiea[ this trouGfetf fane!.
So totiay I as(you to afso thin( of tfuzt. 'VVe are a peopfe offaith.
'V~e fuzve Seen so secure in tliat faith. tfuzt we fwve ensfirinei in our
Constitution protection for peopfe wfw profess no faith. 5l.Jzdgooafor
us for aoing_ so. 'Iliat is wfwt the :first JUnen.ament is a[[ a6out. 'But
fet us never 6e[ieve tfuzt the freecfom of rdigion imposes on any of us
some responsi6uity to run from our convictWns. Let us insteaa respect
one another's faitli.s, figfit to the aeath to preserve the rigfit of every
5l.Jnerican to practice wfi.atever convictions fze or she has, 6ut 6n"ng our
vafues Sac( to tfie ta6fe of5l.Jnerican aiscourse to hea! our trou6rea faruf.
'Ifwnf(you very mucfi. Ll
ll..v.J._
(.,1,..,..1
.,.
.. .....,.,_ ....
VL..;..(....,.
1
.,.,~
)..._,.,.,_.._'11
i-i+.)
V'-.._.,.,..
.,.., ...... ._.,
�..
~
..................................................
~
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
SUBJECT/TITLE
001. note
Steve to Jonathan Prince; re: Draft Speech (partial) (1 page)
DATE
n.d.
RESTRICTION
P6/b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Speechwriting
Jonathan Prince
ONBox Number: I 0442
FOLDER TITLE:
July 1995- [Federal Law Enforcement Meeting]
2006-0466-F
1397
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act- [44 U.S.C. 2204(a))
Freedom of Information Act -(5 U.S.C. 552(b))
Pl
P2
PJ
P4
b(l) National security classified information [(b)(l) of the FOIA)
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
b(J) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(J) of the FOIA)
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or. confidential or financial
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA)
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA)
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes ((b)(7) of the FOIA)
b(S) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions ((b)(S) of the FOIA)
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA)
National Security Classified Information [(a)(l) of the PRA)
Relating to the appointment to Federal office ((a)(2) of the PRA)
Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(J) of the PRA)
Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information ((a)(4) of the PRA)
PS Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors (a)(S) of the PRAI
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
·personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA)
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
�Jonathan:
Here is a draft speech. (It is about 1 a.m. Saturday morning, so please know I've been
making a genuine effort to help out.)
On the disk, it is the document called "speech" (I think it is the only one).
I've also attached some additional Madison quotes in case you feel they would be helpful.
I'm still looking for more.
You can reach me all day Saturday, until about noon on Sunday, by calling 1-800-SKYPAGE, PIN# 2074730.
:'i1
[aou
AlSo, you should call upon Kevin Sullivan at Education for assistance. He knows these issues
very well, helped
· help on facts, etc. His work number
is 401-0831 and
He can be paged at 1-800-SKY-PAGE,
PIN # 1157100.
Thanks. Please don't hesitate to beep me.
Steve
�-
-
------
--
------------ - - - - - - - - - - - - -
of religion. That careful balance, uniquely American, is the
undeniable genius of our First Amendment.
}i e.igious
freedoni is
First Amendment.
l
our "first freedom." That's why it opens
And today, we are the freest nation in the
rld when it comes to religion. We have the freedom to enjoy and ~
express our own beliefs. We have the protection that government
cannot be used to coerce people's conscience or suppress people's I
ith. To preserve our religious freedom, we must preserve the__J
reful balance that allows it.
·
l
r--That balance has helped us to build the most vibrant and diverse7
\ religious culture in the world. There are more than 250,000
houses of worship in America. More people go to church, and more
people believe religion is important, than in any other Western
nation. At the same time, America is home to more different
religions than any other nation. I don't think that's a
coincidence. Religion thrives in America precisely because
, ~~;igion is allowed to grow however it will, and is free to grow
~fettered by the e~icts of government.
__j
r
But around the globe, that is not always the case. Religious
differences continue to split nations ·asunder, repressive regimes
persecute religious minorities in God's name, and whole
communities are destroyed because of their beliefs. For more than
200 years, oppressed people have been able to look towards
America and be heartened by the certain knowledge that religion
does not always make us enemies. My fellow Americans, let us take
a moment to thank God -- in whatever manner each of us wants -for the wisdom of our founders, who created a nation precisely to
prevent such things from ever happening upon these shores.
The legacy of religious freedom has certainly been a precious
gift for me. My faith is the source of my greatest strength.
Everything I do, everything I believe, has been shaped by it.
gained my faith as a boy; it sustains me as a man. When I am
afraid, my faith helps me find courage. When I am unsure, my
faith gives me conviction. When I am proud, my faith gently
chides me to be humble. And my faith joins me to all of
humankind. Faith ties us together.
It connects us.
I
So I am deeply troubled that many Americans today believe their
faith is threatened by the very mechanisms designed to protect
it. Over the past decade, we have seen cultural tensions rise in
America.
Some people even say we have a "culture war." Much of
this tension stems from a growing concern that religious
expression is no longer welcome in the public square. Americans
feel that, instead of celebrating their love for God in public,
they are being forced to hide ·their faith behind closed doors.
That is wrong; no American should ever have to hide their faith.
But some Americans have been denied the freedom to express
religion that is theirs by right. That must stop. It is crucial
to freedom of religion that government does not dictate or demand
3
�Document No. _ _ _ _ __
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE: --~O...L7.~.-/d...ol9,w,/:.....9~5~--
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY: _ _A_S_A_P_ __
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT MEETING on 07/20
SUBJEC~-------------------------------
VICE PRESIDENT
PANETTA
ACTION
FYI
0
0
~
ACTION
0
0
McGINTY
NASH
QUINN
ICKES
RASCO
BOWLES
SEGAL
RIVLIN
SOSNIK
EMANUEL
STEPHANOPOULOS
GEARAN
TYSON
GIBBONS
WEBSTER
GRIFFIN
WILLIAMS
HERMAN
LINDSEY
MIKVA
McCURRY
0
D
D
0
::::-~
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-~-~_:_:_~P_R_I_N_C_E_~_
"~ ~
HALE
LAKE
0
0
~0
McLARTY
HIGGINS
FYI
0
0
0
0
D
0
REMARKS:
Pls provide any comments directly to Jonathan Prince or Don Baer.
RESPONSE:
JOHN D. PODESTA
Assistant to the President
and Staff Secretary
Ext. 2702
�7/19/95 8:15pm
PRBSIDBlfT WILLIAM J. CLINTON
LAW BNYORCBKENT KBBTIHG
BLAIR HOUSE
~BDBRAL
JULY 20, 1tt5
g5WI.,;
n1 1 IS
p 9 1 01
'Thank you Director Bowron. I'm glad to have this chance to meet
with all of you. I wanted to come here because there is nothing
more important to restoring our community than your work.
America's law enforcement officers risk their lives to protect
~ lives, and to help our communities come together, instead of
continue to pull apart. We owe you our enduring thanks and
respect.
That's why I am so angry about recent attempts by some people to
attack police officers for doing their job. People may disagree
with certain laws -- like the ban on assault weapons -- but that
doesn't give them the right to willfully ignore the law. And it
certainly doesn't give them the right to assault, and even kill,
police officers who are doing their duty. Whatever you believe,
you have no right to attack the people who uphold the law.
The police are on our side. When they act to uphold our laws,
they are acting for us. There i~ no moral equivalency between the
criminals in waco who stockpiled illegal weapons and the police
who tried to protect the innocent people in Waco by disarming
those criminals.
Nothing is more irresponsible than. for elected officials to
perpetuate the falsehood that the police are soma kind of armed
bureaucracy·, acting on private qrudges and hidden agendas. That
is wrong; that is reckless; and anyone who does it ought to be
ashamed of themselves. Federal law enforcement agents got
involved in Waco because dangerous people were amassing dangerous
weapons and committing crimes against innocent children. Period.
we know that people made some mistakes, and we've made the
appropriate changes because of that. But anyone in congress who
equates mistakes by federal police officers with the criminal
misdeeds of a violent cult is out of line. Police officers
sacrificed their lives trying to stop what turned out to be the
suicide and mass murder of a religious leader gone wild. It is
wrong to profane their memory.
The American people want our police to get rid of drugs and guns
and gangs. They want our streets and our schools to be safe.
They do not want criminals to be emboldened because some people
are running down police officers for their own political ends.
That's why Americans in Oklahoma City are wearing shirts like
this. "A society that makes war against its police officers had
better learn to make friends with its criminals." That's a fact.
And nobody -- nobody -- is going to make war against America's
police officers on my watch. Thank you and God bless America.
1
�'
ROUTING SLIP
DATE:
jQ_j (L{ / Of c;-
FROM:
Billy Webster
Director of Scheduling and Advance
.
SUBJECT:~-~ +d'ciU-0 lJw 'C_n-{;,tc8n01,+ (Y)ci'\\H~ {Y)~o-e:hfl!i(:j
Mikv~
Don Baer
Abner J.
Erskine Bowles
Laura Tyson
Rebecca Cameron
Leon Panetta
. John Podesta
Peg· Cusack
Jack Quinn
Rahm Emanuel
,/
Mark Gearart
Carol Rasco
Jack Gibbons.
Lee Satterfield
Pat Griffin
Patti Solis
Marcia Hale
Doug Sosnik
Alexis Herman
G.
Nancy Hernreich
Anh Stock
./
Kitty Higgins
Stephanopoulo~
Stephanie Streett
Harold Ickes
Kim_ Tilley
Anthony Lake
Jodie Torkelson
Bruce Lindsey
Melanne Verveer
Mike·McCurry
Anne Walley
Anne McGuire
Maggie Williams
Mack McLarty
FILE:_\[)-""'._
ACTION
FYI
REGRET POTUS, suggest a surrogate /is
}
COMMENTS:
u
]X:£ \o I\~
.rv.L~.
.
~ .\
~W\ $'-'
'{
needed:_~--.
0OA!Vt•JL v~r ~'/._c.·!'//
.JrcpJv
·n-1>,,.
I
·jlJy_
ctalij -
./J)
rL
j /)
L
~--
�cl'l;S"(:J 'vc:L~;
clo1Y1..J...-~.:s\J.-C
06/12/95
95 JUN I 2 P I : 0 I
TO:
William Webster
Deputy Assistant to the President and
Director of Scheduling and Advance
FROM:
Kitty Higgins
Assistant to the. Pr~ident for Cabinet Affairs
REQUEST:
Drop by Federal Law Enforcement Community Monthly Meeting
PURPOSE:
To thank the federal law enforcement community for their dedication
and commitment.
BACKGROUND:
Eljay Bowron, Director of the United States Secret Service, will host
this month's meeting of the heads of the federal law enforcement
community to update one another on current issues of mutual interest.
A-(~
Discussion at this meeting will include Oklahoma City, the White
House security review and the upcoming campaign year.
PREVIOUS PARTICIPATION:
DATE and TIME:
DURATION:
LOCATION:
PARTICIPANTS:
see attached list
OUTLINE OF EVENTS:
TBD
REMARKS REQUIRED:
Yes
MEDIA COVERAGE:
No
PROPOSED ATTENDANCE:
IZJ President
D
Vice President
D
lstLady
D
2nd Lady
RECOMMENDED BY:
U.S.S.S.
CONTACT:
LeeAnn Inadomi
x62572
�Federal Law Enforcement Heads
The Honorable Janet Reno
Attorney General
Department of Justice
The Honorable Jamie Gorelick
Deputy Attorney General
Department of Justice
Ms. Shelly Altenstadter
Chief
INTERPOL - U.S. National Central Bureau
The Honorable Lee Brown
Director
Office of National Drug Control Policy
The Honorable Thomas A. Constantine
Administrator
Drug Enforcement Administration
The Honorable Louis Freeh
Director
Federal Bureau of Investigation
The Honorable Eduardo Gonzalez
Director
U.S. Marshals Service
The Honorable Kathleen Hawk
Director
Bureau of Prisons
The Honorable Doris Meissner
Commissioner
Immigration and Naturalization Service
The Honorable Ronald Noble
Under Secretary for Enforcement
Department of the Treasury
The Honorable Eljay Bowron
Director
U.S. Secret Service
The Honorable John w. Magaw
Director
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
Mr. Stan Morris
Director
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
�- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Honorable Margaret Richardson
Commissioner
Internal Revenue Service
Mr. Charles Rinkevitch
Director
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center
The Honorable George Weise
Commissioner
U.S. Customs Service
The Honorable Kenneth Hunter
Chief Postal Inspector
u.s. Postal Service
Admiral William Kime
Commandant
U.S. Coast Guard
Major General Peter T. Berry
Commander
U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command
Brigadier General Robert A. Hoffmann
Commander
Office of Special Investigations
U.S. Air Force
The Honorable Roy Nedrow
Director
Naval Criminal Investigative Service
�WACO SPEECH
In the last few weeks, I've tried to spell out my vision for
our American society.
It is a three fold vision: opportunity,
responsibility, and community. Opportunity, the helping hand
government provides. Responsibility, the need to take charge of
our own lives and help ourselves.
Community, our duty to each
other.
Fundamental to the concept of community is the idea of law,
the rules and regulations we must all obey. We enforce these
laws by consensus among our people and respect for the idea of
order and majority rule.
Prisons, police, and judges do not enforce our laws.
It is
rather the common agreement of citizens to obey the laws and
respect the institutions of justice that enforces our laws.
Prisons, police, and judges are there to deal with the few
exceptions, the few who do not self-police, and who break the
laws the rest of us obey.
But recently, this societal respect for laws and the duty we
owe to our police in their efforts to carry them out, has been
challenged. This challenge is a fundamental attack on the very
idea of majority rule, the very concept of a nation regulating
its own existence.
Stemming from an interpretation of the Constitution shared
by no Supreme Court or credible legal authority, they disregard
and disobey the laws which prohibit the ownership of certain
types of deadly weapons.
Some of the laws they flout have been
part of our legal system for a long time, the bans against
machine guns in private possession, the bans against hand
grenades and other articles of war. Others were just recently
passed by a majority of the people's representatives and signed
into law by the President of the United States -- the ban on
assault weapons.
But they are laws. They are morally just and legally
constitutional. They are the laws of the land.
But now, some act as if they are little more than opinions
in an ongoing national debate. Those who enforce them are not
seen as public servants making our legal system work, but as
agents of those opinions. The warrants they carry do not seem to
command obedience, but rather rebuttal, their instructions are
often met with disregard and even violence as with compliance.
Most dangerously, even some of our own elected
representatives in our own government seem to regard the police
who carry out our legal instructions as little more than a
contending bureaucracy, one that acts according to private
grudges and hidden agendas, not the laws of our land.
�--------------------
You will, however, recall that your administration received
some criticism early on for its appointments. and its appointment
record with respect to Hispanic Americans. Since then, there have
been gains and some losses, particularly within the White House
itself.
Furthermore, there is a perception that you have not
enjoyed the benefit of frequent consultation with Latino community
leaders on key issues of importance to the Latino community. Will
you commit today to begin to practice affirmative action for
Hispanics within your own administration -- (applause) -- and
particularly in the White House itself? And further, what steps
are you prepared to take to improve the quantity and the quality
of your consultations with the Hispanic community.
(Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, let's deal with the facts
as they exist.
Our administration has appointed more Hispanics
than any administration in history, more than twice as many as
either of the previous two, and several hundred.
We also have a
major domestic policy considerations in the hands of Secretary
Cisneros and Secretary Pena.
I've also had the privilege, as you know, to have the regular
counsel of the head of the EEOC, Gil Casellas; Norma Cantu at the
Department of Education; Maria Echaveste at the Department of.
Labor; Nelson Diaz at HUD; George Munoz at Treasury, Aida Alvarez
at HUD, Fernando Torres-Gil at HHS, Katherine Archuleta at
Transportation and Joaq Otero at Labor,· among others.
And at the White House, as you know, we have lost some people, '·
but we still have an awful lot of talented Latinos on our staff.
In fact, one of them made history this afternoon. Carolyn Curiel
personally helped me craft my affirmative actions speech. She had
more to do with drafting it than anybody else.
And she is the
first person of color, and more importantly, the first Latino in
the history of our country to write SP.eeches for the President.
And it may be that the one she wrote to§ay will go down as one of
the two or three most important I have ever delivered. (Applause.)
In the White House, as you know, she's joined by Rick Hernandez,
Janet Maguida, Ray Martinez, Liz Montoya, Suzanne Ramos, Suzanna
Valdez, Vicki Rivas-Vasquez, Aracel Ruano, and others.
Now, I want to answer you two questions here.
Number one, I am always looking for more good people for
important appointments to boards and commissions and other things.
But I want to point out again, if you look at my record on judges,
I have appointed more than three times as many Hispanic judges in
the first two years of my presidency as Presidents Reagan, Bush and
Carter combined did in·the first two years of their presidency.
And in only two years, I have appointed more.judges than any other
administration in history. So I think my record is pretty good on
that.
(Applause.)
I do want to continue to do better. And I do
believe that there is more we can do.
�Even when police give their lives to enforce our laws, they
are criticized for malfeasance and, increasingly, for selfish
motivation.
A certain moral equivalency seems to be bestowed upon those
who flout the laws with those who enforce them. A notion that
each is at fault, as if they were two legitimate points of view
seems to be creeping into our public dialogue.
There are times when unjust laws must be opposed by just
men.
In South Africa, in our own American South of years ago, in
the slavery system of the last century, good men and good women
had to stand up for decency ·and, in so doing, break the law.
But the right to bear machine guns and hand grenades and
assault rifles does. not rise to such a moral level. They provide
no legitimate occasion to flout the rule of the majority and seek
to impose one's own will. They offer even less of an occasion to
disregard, dishonor, and disobey -- and in some cases to kill -the men and women we charge with enforcing our laws.
Yet, in the Congress there are some who place the
administrative mistakes of a. federal agency on a moral par with
the criminal misdeeds of a religious cult.
There are those who would equate the self-sacrifice of
federal police officers doing their duty with the suicide and
mass murder of a religious leader gone wild.
I would call on them to beware.
Law enforcement is an
indivisible notion. We cannot respect the efforts of our agents
to rid the world of drugs and disrespect their colleagues who
would rid the nation of illegal guns. We cannot demand honor for
the warrants for arrest and imprisonment of street criminals
while allowing dishonor for the warrants, from the same courts,
of those who would confiscate machine guns.
The raid on the Waco compound was, finally, justified by the
need to enforce respect for the law. We could not have an island
of illegal weaponry, of blatant child sexual abuse, and of overt,
open disregard for the rule of law and still maintain the decent
regard for law which is at the basis of all organized, democratic
government.
�Document No. _ _ _ _ __
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
DATE:_~7~/=1~3/~9~5~---
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY: _ _ _ _ _..:___
RADIO ADDRESS TO THE NATION (TAPED JULY 14,1995)
SUBJEC~
ACTION
VICE PRESIDENT
PANETTA
McLARTY
ICKES
BOWLES .
RIVLIN
EMANUEL
GEARAN
GIBBONS
GRIFFIN
HALE
HERMAN
HIGGINS
~~·
LAKE
LINDSEY
MIKVA
McCURRY
0
D
D
D
D
D
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
D
,0
0
FYI
~
D
~
D
0
·.~
·~
D
D
D
D
D
\/
·~
ACTION
D
NASH
D
QUINN
D
RASCO
D
SEGAL
D
SOSNIK
D
STEPHANOPOULOS
D
TYSON
D
WEBSTER
D
WILLIAMS
D
CURRY
D
WALDMAN
D
KATZEN
D
JOHNSON
D
BAER
D
PRINCE
··~· D
D
McGINTY
FYI
D
D
D
D
D
-0
tfit'
0
0
~
~
.:%
;I'
D
REMARKS:
PLEASE FORWARD ANY COMMENTS
~0
JONATHAN PRINCE.
RESPONSE:
JOHN D. PODESTA
Assistant to the President
and Staff Secretary
Ext. 2702
�\
I
I'
7/14/95 12:20 pm
PRESIDENT WILLIAM J. CLINTON
RADIO ADDRESS TO THE NATION
THE WHITE HOUSE
JULY 15, 1995 (TAPED JULY 14, 199.5)
Good morning. My job is to make America work well for all people
who :~;ork hard. I ran for President because I believe we have to
create more opportunity, demand more responsibility, and come
together as a community so we can face our challenges as we move
into a new century.
One of the things we must do is cut regulations that impose
unnecessary red tape. But as we cut, we have a responsibility as
a community to protect our citizens from things that threaten
their safety. I'm sure those are goals we all support, and I know
we can accomplish them in a reasonable, responsible, and
bipartisan way.
But right now, Republicans in Congress are pushing legislation
that poses a real danger to the health and safety of American
families._ They call it regulatory reform, but it isn't reform at
all. It will force us to jump through all kinds of hoops, wasting
time and risking lives, whenever we try to protect people's
health.
It will slow down, tangle up, and seriously hinder our
ability to look out for the safety of American families.
If 'the Republican Congress' bill.had become law years ago, it.
would have taken much longer than it did to get airbags in cars.
School buses might not have had to install side-view mirrors to
help drivers see children crossing in front. The longer we waited
to do these things, the more lives it would have cost. Let me
tell you what the world would look like in the future under these
extreme proposals.
You probably heard about the Cryptosporidium bacteria that
contaminated drinking water in Milwaukee, making 400,000 people
sick and killing 100.
It will be very difficult to pr~vent that
kind of danger from finding its ·way into our water, and to.
control it when it does. It will take much longer to impose new
safety standards to prevent commuter airline crashes, like the
five that happened last year. And it ·will be far less certain
that we can use microscopes to examine meat, and stop
contaminated meat from being sold. If we lived in a world like
Congress is suggesting, there would be more tragedies like what
happened to Eric Mueller.
In 1993, Eric was a 13-year old living in California -- president
of his class, captain of his soccer team, an honors student. One
day, he ordered a hamburger at a fast-food restaurant. He died a
few days later. Eric was poisoned by an invisible bacteria, eColi, that contaminated the hamburger.
Dozens of other people
also died. Ju~t last week, five people in Tennessee, including· an
11-year old boy, got sick because of e-Coli.
1
�Contaminated meat could be sold because the federal government
has been inspecting meat the same way since the turn of the
century.
Inspectors basically use the same methods to inspect
meat that dogs use -- they touch it and smell it to see if it's
safe, instead of using microscopes and high-technology. That's
'crazy. For the last two years, we've been working hard to reform
meat inspection so Americans can be confident they're-protected.
We want to bring meat inspection into the 20th-century, but this
Congress wants to leave it in the last century. We're trying to
make our drinking water cleaner -- this Congress is willing to
let polluters control the rules that affect them.
In the last six months, we've seen these so-called regulatory
reform bills being written by lobbyists for the regulated
industries. Republicans even brought the lobbyists in to explain
what the bills did. Specific companies got specific loopholes.
That is all wrong, it is not in the best interest of the American
people, and it should be stopped.
No one has done more than our Administration to .streamline and
reform our regulatory system. We're cutting 16,000 pages of
federal· regulations -- enough regulations to stretch five miles.
We've said to small businesses trying to fix problems: If you
have a problem and you fix it right away, you can forget the
fine.
In some cases, you can apply the fine to fix the problem.
I signed the Paperwork Reduction Act and I signed the Unfunded
Mandates Act which requires cost-benefit analysis.
'
This is where I stand. Full-scale reform? Absolutely. Foolhardy
rollback? Not a chance. We cannot imperil our children, risk
our families, or jeopardize our environment. The House passed a
dangerous bill. The Senate has made progress, but the bill still
needs significant improvement. If Republicans send me legislation
that destroys our ability to protect food safety, airplane,
safety, or environmental safety, I will veto it without a second
thought.
~
I want to sign a regulatory reform bill, and there is a
bipartisan alternative sponsored by Senators Glenn and Chaffee
that provides a good starting point. The Senate is voting-early
next week. I call on Democrats and Republicans in Congress to
show Americans that we can cut red tape, reduce paperwork, and
make life easier for business, without endangering our families
or our workers. We have a responsibility to cut regulations. We
have a responsibility to protect our families. We can and should
do both.
Thanks for listening.
2
�
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
Jonathan Prince
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Office of Speechwriting
Jonathan Prince
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1993-1998
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
<a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/36296" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7763293" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0466-F
Description
An account of the resource
Jonathan Prince served in various capacities during the two terms of the Administration. He was one of President Clinton’s speechwriters, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, and directed the public relations effort related to the fallout from the bombing of refugees by NATO forces during the war in Kosovo. This collection consists his speechwriting files which contain speech drafts, handwritten notes, memoranda, correspondence, publications, and schedules. Prince wrote most of President Clinton’s radio addresses from 1993-1997. He also specialized in dealing with domestic issues such as crime, gun control, unemployment, urban development, and welfare.
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.
187 folders in 11 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
July 1995 – [Federal Law Enforcement Meeting]
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Office of Speechwriting
Jonathan Prince
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0466-F
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Box 6
<a href="http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/assets/Documents/Finding-Aids/2006/2006-0466-F.pdf" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7763293" 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.
12/15/2014
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
42-t-7763293-20060466F-006-007-2014
7763293