-
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/files/original/5da087f99c3d423634721e80cd73f34f.pdf
2c41b429ddd97f41d6bacaf2924e4697
PDF Text
Text
FOIA Number: 2006-0458-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/Office of Origin:
Communications
Series/Staff Member:
Don Baer
Sub series:
OA/ID Number:
10136
FolderiD:
Folder Title:
Commencement 1996
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
s
90
2
6
3
�Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
001. memo
DATE
SUBJECI'ffiTLE
Jeremy Rosner to Don Baer (1 page)
05/17/1996
RESTRICTION
P5
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Communications
DonBaer
OA/Box Number: 10136
FOLDER TITLE:
Commencement 1996
2006-0458-F
db2166
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act- [44 U.S.C. 1104(a))
Freedom of Information Act- [S U.S.C. SS1(b))
Pl National Security Classified Information [(aXl) of the PRA)
P1 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(aX1) of the PRA)
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA)
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA)
PS Release would dlsdose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(S) of the PRA)
P6 Release would constitute a dearly unwarranted Invasion of
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA)
b(l) National security classified Information [(b)(l) of the FOIA)
b(1) Release would dlsdose Internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency [(bX1) of the FOIA)
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) ofthe FOIA)
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA)
b(6) Release would constitute a dearly unwarranted Invasion of
personal privacy [(bX6) of the FOIA)
b(7) Release would disclose Information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA)
b(8) Release would dlsdose Information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA)
b(9) Release would dlsdose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA)
C. Closed In accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misf'de defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
1101(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
~~---------
- - - -
�I
•
UNCLASSIFIED
FAX TRANSMiTTAL SHEET
NA'r:IONAL SECURI:'rY COUNCIL
. OLD EXECUTIVE OFFICE BUILDING
ROOM 491
~HLNQTON,
D.~.
.
!'llOM:
--
20504
o~-.JJ ~~
C
Jill A. Schulter,
Senior
D~rector,
·r4!_ ;-
Communications/Pub1~c
Affairs
.,
vrSteven J. Nap1an,
Associate Director, Communications
PHONE:
202-456-9391
FAX:
202-456-9390
TO:
~A:-
FAX:
PHONE:
NUMBER OF PAGES INCLtmiNG COVER SHEET _ _
2_ _ _ _ __
NOTES: ____________________________________________________
UNCLASSIFIED
�aa'VDCI u: llats/commence.doo
Commencement Line-Up:
as of4/22
principal;
.school:
antidpated subject;
date:
Lake
War College
21st Century military role
June 12
Berger
none at present
Christopher
accepting no invitations, will deliver no commencement addresses
Talbott
Trinity College, Hartford, CN
Tamoff
none at present
Albright
Brandeis
UNasFP tool
May 19
Albright
SAIS
UN as FP tool
Ma.y22
Albright
undecided on Northeastern invitation for June 15
Perry
West Point
White
none at present
Shall
Naval Academy
Deutch
accepted no invitations
Rubin
Columbia U
Rubin
Yeshiva U
Kantor
"unclear" given recent changes
Tyson
Bard College
May 19
preventing, deterring hostilities
June 1
maritime service-boilerplate
May24
"class day"
May 14
Ma.y 22
May2S
�t
...
April 18, 1996
MEMORANDUM FOR:
KITTY HIGGINS
FROM:
ANNE McGUIRE
RE:
COMMENCEMENTS
The following is a list of commencement addresses which have been scheduled by
department:
Treasury
Secretary Rubin
Columbia University
Yeshiva University
5/14
5/22
Defense
Secretary Perry
West Point
6/1
Secretary West
Winston Salem State U.
5/11
Secretary Dalton
U. of Pennsylvania
Trinity College
5/18
5/19
Secretary Widnall
U. of North Carolina
Duke
North Carolina State
Air Force Academy
5/11
5/11
5/11
5/29
Secretary Reno
U. of South Carolina
U. of Missouri-Kansas City
U. of Washington-Seattle
Ohio State Law
U. of California-Davis
Rutgers
5/3
5/10
Justice
Interior
Secretary Babbitt
USDA
Scretary Glickman
5/12
5/18
�-~--
..
Commerce Secretary Kantor
Long Beach State (CA)
Labor
Secretary Reich
Morris Brown College
U. of San Francisco
Pittsburgh Community College
5/20
5/25
6/3
HHS
Secretary Shalala
Florida A&M
Ohio Wesleyan
Skidmore
U. of Wisconsin-Parkside
U. of Wisconsin-Fox Valley
Mt. Holyoke College
Medical College of Georgia
4/27
5/12
5/25
5/12
5/18
5/26
6/8
Director Satcher
Mercer Southern School of Pharmacy
U. Miami (FL) School of Medicine
Rollins School of Public Health (Emory)
U. Wisconsin-Madison Medical School
5/4
5/11
5/13
5/17
Adm. Kessler
U. Washington Medical School (St. Louis)
USC Medical School (L.A.)
Yale Medical School (tentative)
5/17
5/26
5/27
HUD
Secretary Cisneros
Bethune-Cookman-Daytona
St. Augustine College
4/29
5/11
DOT
Secretary Pena
Coast Guard Academy
5/22
Energy
Secretary 0' Leary
Education
Secretary Riley
Governor's State-IL
Midlands Technical
South Carolina
Missouri State-Cape Girardeau
6/2
5/10
Dep. Secy. Kunin
St. Lawrence University
5/18
Asst. Secy. Heumann
University of San Francisco
5/25
Asst. Secy. Tirozzi
Quinnipiac College, CT
Nova University, Ft. Lauderdale
5/12
6/23
VA
Secretary Brown
Kennedy-King College, Chicago
Johnson C. Smith-Charlotte
5/17
5/12
EPA
Admin. Browner
5/11
�..
OMB
Director Rivlin
University of Pittsburgh
4/27
UN
Ambassador Albright
Brandeis University
Johns Hopkins-International Studies
5/19
5/22
SBA
Admin. Lader
St. John's College-Santa Fe
5/19
We are hoping to add the following schools:
Drake University
Pueblo CC
Portland CC
Louisiana College
Tennessee State
University of Kentucky
University of Louisville
�Princeton University
Dean of the Faculty
9 Nassau Hall
Princeton, New Jersey 08544-5264
Tel: (609) 258-3020 Fax: (609) 258-2168
May14,1996
President Clinton
The White House
Dear President Clinton:
I am absolutely delighted that you have agreed to speak at Princeton's Commencement
on June 4, and I therefore look forward to my first graduation as Dean of the Faculty
(and my 20th as a faculty member) more than I could ever have imagined.
Far more important than my personal elation, however, is the fact that you will use this
opportunity to address major issues concerning America's central role in the world. I
hope that you will emphasize your enduring commitment to expanding the zone of
peace, prosperity, and democracy around the world. Your successful efforts to expand
the zone of democracy benefits all Americans at the same time as it aids everyone who
allies with the United States in building a more democratic, and therefore more peaceful
and prosperous, world.
I am faxing to you an essay by Michael Doyle, Professor in our Woodrow Wilson School
and Politics Department, whose work is widely cited as demonstrating the enduring
benefits of expanding the zone of democratic peace around world. Michael is my spouse,
so I cannot claim impartiality in singing his praises. But I can assure you that his work is
highly regarded by the community of scholars in the United States and around the
world, not only (or mainly) by me.
Please accept my personal thanks for accepting Princeton's invitation. I hope that Don
and Mike will feel free to call on me if I can be of any help in preparing for the upcoming
event.
/n lc
cc: Mr. Don Baer
Mr. Michael McCurry
9~
f>
\....
•
II n
CJI-.)C...l(
~&j·
R
�.
···----~----------
CONTRIBUTORS
GRAHAM Au..IsoN, Harvard University
THE AMERICAN ASSEMBLY
Columbia. Universig
GEORGE BALL
joHN H. BARTON, Stanford University
BARBARA A. BICKSLER, Institute for Defense Analyses
THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
RoBERT BLACKWILL, Harvard University
MrcHAEL BoRRus, University of California, Berkeley
DANIEL F. BURTONjR., Council on Competitiveness
DAVID C. HENDRICKSON, Colorado College
Rethinking
America's Security
B.R.INMAN
H~Y A. KissiNGER, Kissinger Associates
Beyond Cold War to New World Order
BARRY E. CARTER, Georgetown University
MrCHAEL W. DoYLE, Princeton University
RICHARD N. GARDNER, Columbia University
••
•I
c
CHARLES K.RAtrrHAMMER
CHARLES A. KUPCHAN, Princeton University
II
!{'
s:
n
. ERNEST R. MAY, Harvard University
joHNj. ME.ARsHmiER. University of Chicago
m
WILLIAM E. OooM, Hudson Institute
PETER G. PETERsoN, The Blackstone Group
Ar...AN D. RoMBERG, Council on Foreign Relations
H. I
(
OJ
'"he
THOMAS C. ScHELLING, University ofMaryland
JAMES K. SEBENIUS, Harvard University
ltE
,.rc
lnl
1io
GREGORY F. TR£VERTON, Council on Foreign
Relations
PAUL D. WoLFowrrz, Department ofDefense
joHN ZvsMAN, University ofCalifornia, Berkeley
ll
IS
IS(j
178
•ke•
-.
··t~
GRAHAM AlliSON
and
GREGORY F. TREVERTON
Editors
CLIFFoRD A. KUPCHAN, Columbia University
-:.. ·-..,....
....
'·.
W· W·NORTON&COMPA.Nr ·
New rork
London
�j06
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER
8G
eighteenth-century world in which mature powen like Europe,
Russia, China, America, and japan jockey for position in the game
of nations. The alternative to unipolarity is not multipolarity but
chaos.
We are in for abnormal times. Our best hope for safety in such
times, as in difficult times past, is in American strength and willthe strength and wiD to lead a unipolar world, unashamedly laying
down the rules of world order and being prepared to enforce
them. Compared to the task of defeating fascism and communism,
averting chaos is a rather subtle caU to greatness. It is not a task we
are any more eager to undertake than the great twilight struggle
just concluded. But it is just as noble and just as necessary.
An International
Liberal Community
MICHAEL W. DOYLE
A
mericans have always wanted to stand for something in the
world. As liberals, we have wanted to stand for freedom,
when we could. In recent times, both Republicans and Democrats
have joined in this cause. In 1982 President Ronald Reagan announced a "crusade for freedom" and "a campaign for democratic developmenL" In the 1988 presidential campaign, Vice
President George Bush endorsed the "Reagan Doctrine." Governor Michael Dukakis repeated President John F. Kennedy's
pledge to "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship,
support any friend, [and) oppose any foe to assure the survival and
MICHAEL W. DOYLE is professor of politics and international affairs
in the Politics Department and Woodrow Wilson School, and faculty
associate of the Center oflnternational Studies, Princeton University. He
was an SSRC/MacArthur Foundation FeUow in International Peace and
Security Studies from •g8s-8g. He is the author of Empires, coeditor with
Arthur Day of EsuWuitm anJ lnlmJtnlion: Mullil4leral Secuti!1 anJ Its A/lmuJIiws, and coauthor with Fred Hirsch and Edward Morse of A.ilmullivu ID
MonelaiJ Disorder. Prof. Doyle would like to thank Peter GeDman and
Hongying Wang for their thoughtful criticisms of this chapter.
�·-
- - --
-~--
--~--
--- -
---
,.• "¢>
308
MICHAEL W.
DOYLE
success of liberty." Since then, President Bush has ordered an
invasion of Panama and announced as a "plain truth: the day of
the dictator is over. The people's right to democracy must not be
denied." 1 He then justified the invasion as a way to protect U.S.
citizens, arrest Manuel Noriega, and bestow democratic freedom
·to the people of Panama.
Realist skeptics, however, have denounced the pursuit ofliberal
ideas in fhreign affairs as a dangerous illusion that threatens our
security. Instead, they say we should focus on employing our national resources to promote our power in a world where nothing
but self-help and the balancing of power against power will assure
our security. 1 Radical skeptics, on the other hand, have portrayed
liberal foreign affairs as little more than a cloak for imperialism.1
Both sets of critics have identified actual dangers in liberal foreign
policy.
What the skeptics miss, however, is the successful establishment
of a liberal community of nations, and in missing the liberal community, they miss what appears to be the single best hope for the
growth of a stable, just, and secure international order.
In this chapter, I want to examine the legacies of liberalism on
foreign affairs and explore their foundations in the liberal community of democratic republican states. After tracing the mixed record ofliberal influences on U.S. foreign policy, I will suggest ways
in which the United States and its allies in the liberal community
can preserve, manage, defend, expand, and (where needed} rescue
the community from the threats it now faces.
A Liberal Comm'Wlity of Peace
For almost two centuries liberal countries have tended and,
now, liberal democratic countries do tend, to maintain peaceful
relations with each other. This is the community's first legacy.
Other democracies are our natural allies. We tend to respect and
accommodate democratic countries. We negotiate rather thanescalate disputes.
During the nineteenth century, the United States and Great
Britain engaged in nearly continual strife. But after the Reform
Bill of 1832 defined actual representation as the formal source of
the sovereignty of the British Parliament, Britain and the United
ric .
..........,. ,_•... ·~Ai"''. m~
· ·'rl" :" f'P#tida~&\J·
AN INTERNATIONAL LIBERAL COMMUNITY
States negotiated their disputes despite, for example, severe British
grievances against the Northern blockade of the South, with which
Britain had close economic ties. Despite severe Anglo-French colonial rivalry, liberal France and liberal Britain formed an entente
against illiberal Germany before World War I, and in 1914-•5.
Italy, the liberal member of the Triple Alliance with Germany and
Austria, chose not to fulfill its treaty obligations under the Triple
Alliance to support its allies. Instead, Italy joined in an alliance
with Britain and France that had the effect of preventing it from
having to fight other liberal states, and declared war on Germany
and Austria. Despite generations of Anglo-American tension and
Britain's wartime restrictions on American trade with Germany,
the United States leaned toward Britain and France from 1914 to
1917, before entering World War I on their side.
Liberal states thus appear to exercise peaceful restraint, and a
separate peace exists among them. This separate peace provides a
political foundation that defines common strategic interests for the
United States' crucial alliances with the liberal powers-NATO
(North Atlantic Treaty Organization}, our Japanese alliance,
ANZUS (Australia, New Zealand, United States Treaty Alliance}.
This foundation resists the corrosive effects of the quarrels with
our allies that bedeviled the Carter and Reagan administrations. It
also offers the promise of a continuing peace among liberal states
and, as the number of liberal states increases, it announces the
possibility ofglobal peace this side of the grave and short of a single
world empire.
Of course, the outbreak of war, in any given year, between any
two given states, is a low-probability event. But the occurrence of a
war between any two adjacent states, considered over a long period of time, would be more probable. The apparent absence of
war between liberal states, whether adjacent or not, for almost 200
years thus may have significance. Similar claims cannot be made
for feudal, Fascist, Communist, authoritarian, or totalitarian forms
of rule; nor for pluralistic, or merely similar societies. More significant, perhaps, is that when states are forced to decide on which
side of an impending world war they will fight, liberal states wind
up all on the same side, despite the complexity of the paths that
take them there.
A liberal community of peace has become established among
�310
MICHAEL W. DOYLE
liberal states. (More than forty liberal states currently compose
their informal union. Most are in Europe and North America, but
they can be found on every continent.) The finn maintenance of
their separate peace since the eighteenth century offers the promise of a continuing peace, and a continuation of the unsteady but
"'verall increase in the number of liberal states since that time
announces the possibility of an eventual world peace (see Table 1
at the end of this chapter).
Although this banner has recently been waved before President
Reagan's Republican "crusade for freedom," under President
Woodrow Wilson's effort to make the world "safe for democracy"
it fonned the core vision of the foreign policy of the Democratic
party. Wilson's war message of April2, 1917 expressed this liberal
commitment weU: "Our object now, as then, is to vindicate the
principles of peace and justice in the life of the world as against
selfish and autocratic power and to set up amongst the reaUy free
and self-governed people of the world such concert of purpose and
of action as Will henceforth ensure the observance of those principles."
These characteristics do not prove that the peace among liberals is statistically significant, nor that liberalism is the peace's sole
valid explanation.• But they do suggest that we consider the possibility that liberals have indeed established a separate peace-but
only among themselves.
Liberal lmprudeace
Liberalism, as the critics note, also carries with it other legacies.
Peaceful restraint only seems to work in the liberals' relations with
other liberals. Liberal states have fought numerous wars with non·
liberal states.
Many of these wan have been defensive, and thus prudent by
necessity. Liberal states have been attacked and threatened by
nonliberal states that do not exercise any special restraint in their
dealings with liberal states. Authoritarian rulers both stimulate
and respond to an international political environment in which
conflicts of prestige, of interest, and of pure fea~ of what other
states might do all lead states toward war. War and conquest have
AN INTERNATIONAL LIBERAL COMMUNITY
311
thus characterized the careen of many authoritarian rulers and
ruling parties, from Louis XIV and Napoleon to Mussolini's Fascists, Hitler's Nazis, and Stalin's Communists.
But we cannot simply blame warfare on the authoritarians or
totalitarians, as many of our more enthusiastic politicians would
us do.1 Although most wars arise out of calculations and
miscalculations of interest, misunderstandings, and mutual suspicions, such as those that characterized the origins ofWorld War I,
aggression by the liberal state has also characterized a large number of wars. Both France and Britain fought expansionist colonial
wars throughout the nineteen!}l century. The United States fought
a similar war with Mexico in 1846-48, waged a war of annihilation
against the American Indians, and intervened militarily against
sovereign states many times before and after World War II. Liberal states invade weak nonliberal states and display striking distrust in dealings with powerful nonliberal states.
We need therefore to remind ourselves that a "freer world"
does not automatically mean "a more peaceful world." Trying to
make the world safe for democracy does not necessarily make
democracies safe for the world.
On the one hand, democracies are prone to being tempted into
aggressive crusades to expand overseas the "free world" of mutual
security, civil liberties, private property, and democratic rule, and
this has led in the past to enormous suffering and only infrequently
to successful transplants of democratic rule to previously nondemocratic countries. Furthermore, we distrust nondemocratic
countries, sometimes excessively. We regard their domestic oppression as an inherent sign of aggressive intent and downplay the
role of error. In the KAL (Korean Airlines) 007 disaster, according
to journalist Seymour Hersh, our government pronounced horrible error as evil intent, and we were aU too ready to accept that
verdict.
On the other hand, democratic m~orities sometimes succumb
to bouts of isolationism and appeasement, tempting aggressive
states to employ strategies of piecemeal conquest (salami tactics).
Self-indulgent majorities thus undermine what can. be vital collective security interests.
have
�312
MICHAEL W. DOYLE
Foundations
Neither realist nor Marxist theory accounts weD for these two
legacies. They can account for aspects of certain periods of international stability.' But neither the logic of the balance of power
no; of international hegemony explains the separate peace maintained for more than 150 years among states sharing one particular
form of governance-liberal principles and institutions. Balanceof-power theory expects, indeed is premised upon, flexible arrangements of geostrategic rivalry that regard foreign capabilities
(whether democratically governed or not) as inherently threatening. Realist balancing theory therefore expects rational states to
balance against proximate power. It also includes preventive war.
But liberal neighbors, such as the United States and Canada, have
maintained a long undefended border for over a century. Hegemonic states can police the lesser powers but, as hegemonies wax
and wane, the liberal peace still holds. Marxist "ultraimperialists"
(Kautsky-ists) expect a form of peaceful rivalry among capitalists,
but only liberal capitalists maintain peace. Leninists do expect
liberal capitalists to be aggressive toward nonliberal states, but
· they also (and especially) expect them to be imperialistic toward
fellow advanced capitalists, whether liberal or not.
Perpelulll Peace, an essay by the eighteenth-century German philosopher Immanuel Kant, helps us understand the effects of democratic republicanism on foreign affairs. In that essay, Kant shows
how liberal republics lead to dichotomous international politics:
peaceful relations-a "pacific union" among similarly liberal
states-and a "state of war" between liberals and non liberals.
First, Kant argues, republican governments tame the aggressive
interests of absolutist monarchies by making government decisions
subject to the control of majority representation. They also ingrain
the habit of respect for individual rights. Wars then appear as the
direct charges on the people's welfare that he and the other liberals
thought them to be. Yet these domestic republican restraints do
not end war. If they did, liberal states would not be warlike, which
is far from the case. They do introduce republican caution, Kant's
"hesitation," in place of monarchical caprice. Liberal wars are
only fought for popular, liberal purposes. The historical liberal
AN INTERNATIONAL LIBERAL COMMUNITY
313
legacy is laden with popular wars fought to promote freedom,
protect private property, or support liberal allies against nonliberal
enemies.7
Second, in order to see how the pacific union removes the occasion of wars among liberal states and not wars between liberal and
nonliberal states, we need to shift our attention from constitutional
law to international law. Complementing the constitutional guarantee of caution, international law, according to Kant, adds a
second source-a guarantee of respect. l11e separation of nations
is reinforced by the development of separate languages and religions. These further guarantee a world of separate states-an essential condition needed to avoid a "global, soul-less despotism."
Yet at the same time, they also morally integrate liberal states: "as
culture grows and men gradually move towards greater agreement
over their principles, they lead to mutual understanding and
peace." As republics emerge (the first source) and as culture progresses, an understanding of the legitimate rights of all citizens and
of all republics comes into play, and this, now that caution characterizes policy, sets up the moral foundations for the liberal peace.
Correspondingly, international law highlights the importance of
Kantian publicity. Domestically, publicity helps ensure that the
officials of republics act according to the principles they profess to
hold just and according to the interests of the electors they claim to
represent. Internationally, free speech and the effective communication of accurate conceptions of the political life of foreign peoples are essential to establish and preserve the understanding on
which the guarantee of respect depends.
Domestically just republics, which rest on consent, presume foreign republics to be also consensual, just, and therefore deserving
of accommodation. The experience ofcooperation helps engender
further cooperative behavior when the consequences of state policy are unclear but (potentially) mutually beneficial. At the same
time, liberal states assume that nonliberal states, which do not rest
on free consent, are not just. Because nonliberal governments are
perceived to be in a state of aggression with their own people, their
foreign relations become for liberal governments ~eeply suspect.
Wilhelm II of Imperial Germany may or may not have been aggressive (he was certainly idiosyncratic); liberal democracies such
�21=::::=;;:;;;;.;;;~;,_.;...
_________________________~------------~...-----••·rs:Y>.:::·:sa-mc":'···~----~-
MICHAEL W. DOYLE
as England, France, and the United States, however, assumed that
whatever was driving German policy, reliable democratic, constitutional government was not restraining it. They regarded Germany and its actions with severe suspicion-to which the Reich
reacted with corresponding distrust. In short, fellow liberals benefit ft-om a presumption of amity; nonliberals suffer from a presumption of enmity. Both presumptions may be accurate. Each,
however, may also be self-fulfilling.
Democratic liberals do not need to assume either that public
opinion directly rules foreign policy or that the entire governmental elite is liberal. They can also assume a third possibility: that the
elite typically manages public affairs but that potentially nonliberal
members of the elite have reason to doubt that antiliberal policies
would be electorally sustained and endorsed by the majority of the
democratic public.
Lastly, "cosmopolitan law" adds material incentives to moral
commitments. The cosmopolitan right to hospitality pennits th)t
"spirit of commerce" sooner or later to take hold of every nation,
thus creating incentives for states to promote peace and to try to
avert war. Liberal economic theory holds that these cosmopolitan
ties derive from a cooperative international division of labor and
free trade according to comparative advantage. Each economy is
said to be better off than it would have been under autarky; each
thus acquires an incentive to avoid policies that would lead the
other to break these economic ties. Since keeping open markets
rests upon the assumption that the next set of transactions will also
be determined by prices rather than coercion, a sense of mutual
security is vital to avoid security motivated searches for economic
autarky. Thus, avoiding a challenge to another liQc:ral state's security or even enhancing each other's security by means of alliance
naturally follows economic interdependence.
A further cosmopolitan source of liberal peace is that the international market removes difficult decisions of production and distribution from the direct sphere of state policy. A foreign state thus
does not appear directly responsible for these outcomes; states can
stand aside from, and to some degree above, these inevitably contentious market rivalries and b.e ready to step in to resolve crises.
The interdependence of commerce and the international contacts
AN INTERNATIONAL LIBERAL COMMUNITY
----··· ···-
3'5
of state officials also help create crosscutting transnational ties that
serve as lobbies for mutual accommodation. According to modern
liberal scholars, international financiers and transnational and
transgovernmental organizations create interests in favor of accommodation. Moreover, their variety has ensured that no single
conflict sours an entire relationship by setting off a spiral of reciprocated retaliation. Conversely, a sense of suspicion, like that characterizing relations between liberal and nonliberal governments,
makes transnational contacts appear subversive. Liberal and non. liberal states then mutually restrict the range of contacts between
societies, and this can further increase the prospect that a single
conflict will determine an entire relationship.
No single constitutional, international, or cosmopolitan source
is alone sufficient. Kantian theory is neither solely institutional nor
solely ideological, nor solely economic. But together (and only
together) the three specific strands of liberal institutions, liberal
ideas, and the transnational ties that follow from them, plausibly
connect the characteristics of liberal polities and economies with
sustained liberal peace.1 But in their relations with nonliberal
states, liberal states have not escaped from the insecurity caused by
anarchy in the world political system considered as a whole.•
Moreover, the very constitutional restraint, international respect
for individual rights, and shared commercial interests that establish grounds for peace among liberal states establish grounds for
additional conflict in relations between liberal and nonliberal societies.
A Need for New Thinking
In our recent past we have often failed to appreciate the significance of the liberal community. So, like the Russians, we stand in
need of "new thinking." Our record fits the liberal community,
but our debates have failed to understand it. Our failure to understand the opportunities of the liberal community may indeed be an
important source of our frequent experience of the imprudent
appeasement and crusading imperialism of which .conservative
and radical skeptics have warned us.
Before our rise to world power in the 18gos, American princi-
�MICHAEL W. DOYLE
pies seemed to take a back seat to a series of pressing necessities.
Securing our effective independence from England called for a
strategy oflimited involvement (enunciated in Washington's Farewell Address). 10 Acquiring a secure hold on the preponderance of
North America stimulated a doctrine of spheres of influence (the
• Monroe Doctrine) and a policy of frontier colonialism (Manifest
Destiny). Avoiding, succumbing to, then repairing the ravages of
civil war reinforced the drive for continental hegemony and isolation from foreign entanglements. None of these dominant strategies was uncontested. Few of our foreign policy debates have been
as spirited as the disputes over how best to achieve those goals of
national security and economic development, as we can see in the
domestic fights over the jay Treaty (1794), the Tariff(1828), or the
Mexican War (1848).
But the principle of freedom followed behind our national strategy. The United States was too weak to export freedom either
through force or foreign aid as democratic internationalists such as
Thomas Paine had urged and as France and later Bri~r( did.
Americans setded upon an international identity as a secularized
republican version of the Puritan "City upon a Hill. " 11 America
would be a model for democratic republicanism, a laboratory of
democratic experiment, and a refuge for oppressed liberals from
around the world. The American democrats chose "democracy in
one country." Defending our existence preempted exporting our
essence.
The recent post-1945 cold war period is no better guide to our
challenges. Our commitment to freedom was not subordinated to
our security or our prosperity; it wa5, as we then saw it, indistinguishable from them. In 1947 President Truman declared that
nearly every nation had to chose between two alternative ways of
life: democratic freedom or autocratic oppression. He defined our
purposes by announcing that "I believe it must be the policy of the
United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted
subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures." Following the defeat of the Axis powers, the Communist Soviet Union
posed the greatest threat to democratic freedom on a worldwide
basis. But in those yean national security and economic prosperity
pointed in very much the same direction. George Kennan's
AN INTERNATIONAL LIBERAL COMMUNITY
317
geopolitical analysis of the five centers of potential global industrial
power suggested that as long as the United States prevented any
rival from acquiring control over Eurasia, the U.S. would remain
secure. Containing the USSR, preventing it from dominating
Western Europe and japan, effectively satisfied this geostrategic
imperative. 12 Equally, preserving our prosperity seemed to mean
avoiding the spiraling escalation of tariff and investment restrictions, competitive monetary depreciation, and financial expropriation that had accompanied the worldwide economic crisis of the
Great Depression. Protectionism, of course, was widespread as the
industrial and agrarian economies attempted to reacljust to peacetime conditions, but the most serious threat of total restrictioJ.ll
again came from the spread of communism. Having rejected isolationism, we were spared other hard choices. Our principles, our
national security, our economic interests all pointed the same way,
toward containment of the Communist bloc.
Our last age of intellectually difficult strategic choice was thus
the age of our rise to world power, between a8go and 1940. But it
too serves as a poor model for today. Even if we could allow for the
significant differences in political and economic environment, the
choices made then represent not a positive but a negative model,
what we must try to avoid rather than to repeat. We first chose
liberal imperialism toward our weaker neighbors in Latin America
and the Pacific. Then we chose isolationism in the face of growing
demand for our participation in the international organization of
international security.
In a8gg President McKinley grandiloquently proclaimed that
"our priceless principles undergo no change under the tropical
~un. They go with the flag." But from our perspective today, the
racism and arrogance that also shaped those policies render them
unacceptable, even if the imperial variety of international paternalism were affordable.
The isolationist response to dealings with other powerful states
created equally costly results. The United States Senate rejected
our participation in the League of Nations, leaving a fatal gap in its
membership. As importantly, our reluctance to pla.y a direct and
active role in European security complicated the management of
the European debt problem (despite the active role played by New
�MICHAEL W. DOYLE
York bankers) and in the 1930s raised anew the problem of who or
what would contain a reviving Germany. Today, even more
clearly, the integration of the world trading system, United States
and Third World international debts and deficits, the resource
dependence of the major industrial nations of Europe and Japan
• make an isolationist strategy reckless in the extreme.
We need to go beyond those two historic alternatives in United
States national strategy-moralistic isolationism and liberal imperialism .., We lack the simple constraints ofpre-1898 weakness and
post-1945 cold war. Today our economic interests are ambiguous.
Can we best revive our sagging productivity through nationalism
or multilateralism?•• President Mikhail Gorbachev's steps toward
detente and democratic reform are depriving the original cold war
of its purpose.,, Looming shifts in the balance of resources and
productivity suggest to some an increase in Japanese, Chinese, and
(if united} European power. But do we really want to regard them
as potential enemies and therefore to play multipolar balancing
against them?
/
Securing and Expanding
the Liberal CoJDJDunity
An important alternatjve to the balancing of enemies is thus the
cultivation of friends. If the actual history of the liberal community
is reliable, a better strategy for our foreign relations lies in the
development of the liberal community.
If a concern for protecting and expanding the range of international freedom is to shape our strategic aims, then policy toward
the liberal and the nonliberal world should be guided by general
liberal principles. At the minimum, this means rejecting the realist
balance of power as a general strategy by trusting the liberal community and therefore refusing to balance against the capabilities of
fellow democratic liberals. At its fullest, this also means going
beyond the standard provisions of international law. Membership
in the liberal community implies accepting a positive duty to defend other members of the liberal community, to discriminate in
certain instances in their favor, and to override in some (hopefully
AN INTERNATIONAL LIBERAL COMMUNITY
3'9
rare) circumstances the domestic sovereignty of states in order to
rescue fellow human beings from intolerable oppression. Authentically liberal policies should, furthermore, attempt to secure personal and civil rights, to foster democratic government, and to
expand the scope and effectiveness of the world market economy
as weD as to meet those basic human needs that make the exercise
of human rights possible.
In order to avoid the extremist possibilities ofits abstract universalism, however, U.S. liberal policy should be constrained by a
geopolitical budget. Strategy involves matching what we are prepared to spend to what we want to achieve. It identifies our aims,
resources, threats, and allies. While liberal democracy thus can
identify our natural allies abroad, we must let our actual enemies
identify themselves.
.
One reason for this is that we cannot embark upon the "crusades" for democracy that have.been so frequent within the liberal
tradition. In a world armed with nuclear weapons, crusading is
suicidal. In a world where changes in regional balances of power
could be extremely destabilizing for ourselves and our allies, indiscriminate provocations of hostility (such as against the People's
Republic of China) could create increased insecurity (for Japan
and ourselves). In a world of global interdependence, common
problems require multilateral solutions. We simply do not have the
excess strength that would free us from a need to economize on
dangen or to squander opportunities for negotiated solutions.
A second reason why we should let our enemies identify themselves is that our liberal values require that we should reject an
indiscriminate "crusade for democracy." If we seek to promote
democracy because it reflects the rights of
to be treated with
equal respect, irrespective of race, religion, class, or nationality,
then equal respect must guide both our aims and our means. A
strategy of geopolitical superiority and liberal imperialism, for example, would both require increased arms expenditures and international subversion and have little or (more likely) a retrogressive
effect on human rights in the countries that are our targets.
Instead, our strategy should lean toward the defensive. It should
strive to protect the liberal community, foster the 'conditions that
an
�;--_:___:.~--_;__;_
J20
_ _ _...,;._ _
~_:_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _,_ _ _ _ _ ,,_ _ _...
lloiiCICftSf~~:!".L..
MICHAEL W. DOYLE
might allow the liberal community to grow, and save the use of
force for dear emergencies that severely threaten the survival of
the community or core liberal values.
Preserving the Commxnib'. Above all, liberal policy should
~trive
to preserve the pacific union of similarly liberal societies. It is
not only currendy of immense strategic value (being the political
foundation ofboth NATO and theJapanese alliance); it is also the
single best hope for the evolution of a peaceful world. Liberals
should be prepared, therefore, to defend and fonnally ally with
authentically liberal, democratic states that are subject to threats
or actual instances of external attack or internal subversion. We
must continue to have no liberal enemies and no unconditional
alliances with nonliberal states.
We have underestimated the importance of the democratic alliance. Our alliances in NATO, with Japan, ANZUS, and our
alignments with other democratic states are not only crucial to our
present security, they are our best hopes for long-tenn pe~ and
the realization of our ideals. We should not treat themas once
useful but now purposeless cold war strategic alignments against
the power of the USSR.
They deserve our careful investment. Spending S2oo million to
improve the prospects of President Corazon Aquino's efforts to
achieve a transition to stable democracy in the Philippines cannot
be considered too large an investment. Placing a special priority
on helping the Argentineans and Mexicans manage their international debts is a valuable fonn of discrimination, if we take into
account that financial decompression in those countries might undennine their democratic governance. With the help of West
European and Japanese allies, a similar political investment in the
economic transition of the· fledgling democracies of Eastern
Europe merits equivalent attention.
M11n~~ging the Communib'. Much of our success in alliance
management has to be achieved on a multilateral basis. The current need to redefine NATO and the increasing importance of the
U.S. relationship with Japan offer us an opportunity to broaden
AN INTERNATIONAL LIBERAL COMMUNITY
321
the organization of liberal security. Joining all the democratic
states together in a single democratic security organization would
sectire an important forum for the definition and coordination of
co~on interests that stretch beyond the regional concerns of
Europe and the Far East. As the cold war fades, pressures toward
regionalism are likely to become increasingly strong. In order to
avoid the desperate responses that might follow regional reactions
to regional crises such as those of the 1920s and 1930s, a wider
alliance of liberal democracies seems necessary. It could reduce
pressures onJapan and Gennany to ann themselves with nuclear
weapons, mitigate the strategic vulnerabilities of isolated liberal
states such as Israel, and allow for the complementary pooling of
strategic resources (combinmg, for example, Japanese and German financial clout with American nuclear deterrence and American, British, and French expeditionary thrust).
Much of the success of multilateral management will rest, however, on shoring up economic supports. Reducing the U.S. budget
and trade deficits will especially require multilateral solutions.
Unilateral solutions (exchange rate depreciation, increased taxation) are necessary but not sufficient, and some (protectionism) are
neither. Avoiding a cosdy economic recession calls for trade liberalization and the expansion of demand abroad to match the contraction of governmental and private spending in the United
States. But we will also need to create a diplomatic atmosphere
conducive to multilateral problem solving. A national strategy that
conveys a commitment to collective responsibility in United States
diplomacy will go far in this direction.
Discovering ways to manage global interdependence will call
for difficult economic adjustments at home and institutional innovations in the world economy. Under these circumstances, liberals
will need to ensure that those suffering losses, such as from market
disruption or restriction, do not suffer a pennanent loss of income
or exclusion from world markets. Furthermore, to prevent these .
emergency measures from escalating into a spiral of isolationism,
liberal states should undertake these innovations only by international negotiation and only when the resulting agreements are
subject to a regular review by all the parties. 16
•. _,.:'.
'~"'-:";
�----;------------------------------"'!1-------------·----------~~~~::::a=:::.:
-
j!lR
MICHAEL W. DOYLE
Prolecling liN Comm11nib'. The liberal community needs
to be protected. Two models could fit liberal national strategy
designed to protect against the international power of nonliberal
states. 17
If faced with severe threats from the nonliberal world, the liberal community might simply balance the power of nonliberal
states by playing divide and rule within the nonliberal camp, triangulating, for example, between Russia and China as the United
States did during the 19701.
If, on the other hand, the liberal community becomes increasingly predominant (or collectively unipolar) as it now appears to be
becoming, the liberal community could adopt a more ambitious
grand strategy. Arms exports, trade,'and aid could reflect the relative degrees of liberal principle that nonliberal domestic and for·
eign policies inc01porate. Liberal foreign policy could be designed
to create a ladder of rewards and punishmenb-a set of balanced
incentives, rewarding liberalization and punishing oppression, rewarding accommodation and punishing aggression. This strategy
would both satisfy liberal demands for publicity--consiste91 public
legitimation-and create incentives for the progressive1iberaJiza.
tion of nonliberal states.
Expanding liN Communitp. There are few direct measures
that the liberal world can take to foster the stability, development,
and spread of liberal democratic regimes. Many direct efforts,
including military intervention and overt or covert funding for
democratic movements in other countries, discredit those movements as the foreign interference backfires through the force of
local nationalism. (fhe democratic movement in Panama denounced U.S. political aid before the invasion and today suffers at
home and abroad from its overt dependence on the United States.)
Much of the potential success of a policy designed to foster
democracy rests therefore on an ability to shape an economic and
political environment that indirectly supports democratic governance and creates pressures for the democratic reform of authoritarian rule.
Politically, there are few measures more valuable than an active
human rights diplomacy, which enjoys global legitimacy and (if
AN INTERNATIONAL LIBERAL COMMUNITY
.~.----~
•··--·-·-,·--··
j!lj
successful) can assure a political environment that tolerates the sort
of dissent that can nourish an indigenous democratic movement.
There is reason to pay special attention to those countries entering
what Samuel Huntington has called the socioeconomic "transition
zone"--countries having the economic development that has typically been associated with democracy.•• For them, more direct
support in the form of electoral infrastructure (from voting machines to battalions of international observers) can provide the.
essential margin persuading contentious domestic groups to accept
the fairness of the crucial first election.
Economically,judging from the historical evidence of the 1920s
and 1930s, democratic regimes seem to be more wlnerable to
economic depression than authoritarian regimes. (fhis is why economic aid should be targeted at the margin toward fledgling democracies.) But in periods of stable economic growth, democratic
regimes seem to accommodate those social groups that are newly
mobilized by economic growth better over the long run than do
authoritarian regimes. Democracies expand participation better.
They also allow for the expression of nonmaterial goals more easily, it seems, than do the more functionally legitimated authoritarian regimes. Economic growth thus may be the liberals' best longrun strategy.
Following World War II, the allied occupation and remaking of
Germany andjapan and the Marshall Plan's succesiful coordination and funding of the revival of Europe's prewar industrial
economies and democratic regimes offer a model of how much
can be achieved with an extraordinary commitment of resources
and the most favorable possible environment. Practically, today,
short of those very special circumstances, there are few direct ,
means to stimulate economic growth and democratic development from abroad. But liberals should persevere in attempts to
keep the world economy free from destabilizing protectionist intrusions. Although intense economic interdependence generates
conflicts, it also helps to sustain the material well-being underpinning liberal societies and to promise avenues of development to
Third World states with markets that are currently limited by low
income.•• To this should be added mutually beneficial measures
designed to improve Third World economic performance. Export
·I
�---.-------------------~-------------~-----~
MICHAEL W.
DOYLE
earnings insurance, international debt management assistance, export diversification assistance, and technical aid are some of these.
In the case of the truly desperate poor, the condition of some of the
populations of Africa, more direct measures of international aid
and relief from famine are required, both as a matter of political
prudence and of moral duty.
ResCNing tlul Communi~. Liberal principles can also help
us think about whether liberal states should attempt to rescue individuals oppressed by their own governments. Should a respect
for the rights of individuals elicit our help or even military rescue?
Historically, liberals have been divided on these issues,20 and the
U. S. public today has no clear answer to these questions. It supported the "rescue" of Grenada and the purge in Panama, but as
many rejected "another Vietnam" in Nicaragua.11
Traditionally, and in accord with current international law,
states have the right to defend themselves, come to the aid of other
states aggressed against, and, where necessary, take forcible measures to protect their citizens from wrongful injury and release
them from wrongful imprisonment. 22 But modem international
law condemns sanctions designed to redress the domestic oppression of states. The United Nations Charter is ambiguous on this
issue, since it finds human rights to be international concerns and
permits the Security Council to intervene to prevent "threats" to
"international peace and security." Given the ambiguity of the
charter and the political stalemate of the Security Council, difficult
moral considerations thus must become a decisive factor in considering policy toward domestic oppression in foreign countries. 2'
Nonintervention also has important moral foundations. It help!!
encourage order--stable expectations-in a confusing world with_out international government. It rests on a respect for the rights of
individuals to establish their own way of life free from foreign
interference.
The basic moral presumption of liberal thought is that states
should not be subject to foreign intervention, by military or other
means. Lacking a global scheme of order or global definition of
community, foreign states have no standing to question the legitimacy of other states other than in the name and "voice" of the
individuals who inhabit those other states. States therefore should
AN INTERNATIONAL LIBERAL COMMUNITY
--·---·-
325
be taken as representing the moral rights of individuals unless
there is clear evidence to the contrary. Although liberals and democrats have ·often succumbed to the temptation to intervene to
bring "civilization," metropolitan standards oflaw and order, and
democratic government to foreign peoples expressing no demand
for them, these interventions find no justification in a conception
of equal respect for individuals. This is simply because it is to their
sense of their own self-respect and not our sense of what they
should respect that we must accord equal consideration.
What it means to respect their own sense of self-determination is
not always self-evident. Ascertaining what it might mean can best
be considered as an attempt at both subjective and objective interpretation.
One criterion is subjective. We should credit the voice of their
majority. Obviously, this means not intervening against states with
apparent majority support. In authoritarian states, however, detennining what are the wishes of the majority is particularly difficult. Some states will have divided political communities with a
considerable but less than a majority of the population supporting
the government, a large minority opposing, and many indifferent.
Some will be able to suppress dissent completely. Others will not.
Widespread armed resistance sustained by local resources and
massive street demonstrations against the state (and not just
against specific policies) therefore can provide evidence of a people
standing against their own government. Still, one wiD want to find
clear evidence that the dissenters actually want a foreign intervention to solve their oppression.
The other criterion is objective. No group of individuals, even if
appan:ntly silent, can be expected to consent to having their basic
rights to life, food, shelter, and freedom from torture systematically
violated. These sorts of rights clearly crosscut wide cultural differences.
Whenever either or both of these violations take place, one has
(1) a prima facie consideration favoring foreign intervention!• But
even rescuing majorities suffering severe oppression or individuals
suffering massive and systematic violations of human rights is not
sufficient grounds to justify military intervention. We must also
have (2) some reasonable expectation that the intervention will
actually end the oppression. We need to expect that it wiD end the
�-
MICHAEL W. DOYLE
massacre or address starvation (as did India's intervention in East
Pakistan and Tanzania's in Uganda). Or, if prodemocratic, it
should have a reasonable chance of establishing authentic selfdetermination, rather than (asJ. S. Mill warned) merely introducing new rulers who, dependent on outside support, soon begin to
. replicate the oppressive behavior of the previous rulers. (fhe U.S.
invasion of Grenada and the covert push in the Philippines seem
to quality; the jury is still out on Haiti and Panama.)
Moreover, (3) the intervention must be a proportional response
to the suffering now endured and likely to be endured without an
intervention. Countries cannot, any more than villages, be destroyed in order to be saved. We must consider whether means
other than military intervention could achieve the h"beration from
oppression, and we must ensure that the intervention, if necessary,
is conducted in a way that minimizes casualties, most particularly
noncombatant casualties. In short, we must be able morally to
account for the expected casualties of an invasion both to our own
soldiers and to the noncombatant victims.
And (4) a normal sense of fallibility, together with a decent
respect for the opinions of the entire community of nations,
re,:ummends a rc1ort wherever fea1ihlc to multilateral urganizations to guide and legally legitimate a decision to violatethe autonomy of another state.
A Uberal Future
If, as is likely, liberal principles and institutions continue to in8uence the formulation of United States foreign policy in the
1990s, what opportunities and dangers might arise?
Where liberal internationalism among liberal states has been
deficient is in preserving its basic preconditions under changing
international circumstances, and particularly in supporting the liberal character of its constituent states. It has failed on occasion, as
it did in regard to Germany in the 1920s, to provide international
economic support for liberal regimes whose market foundations
were in crisis. It failed in the 1930s to provide military aid or
political mediation to Spain, which was challenged by an armed
minority, or to Czechoslovakia, which was caught in a dilemma of
preserving national security or acknowledging the claims (fostered
-
---- - - -
-~--
-
---
-·
AN INTERNATIONAL LIBERAL COMMUNITY
by Hider's Germany) of the Sudeten minority to self-determination. Farsighted and constitutive measures have only been provided by the liberal international order when one liberal state
stood preeminent among the rest, prepared and able to take measures, as did the United States following World War II, to sustain
economically and politically the foundations of liberal society
beyond its borders. Then measures such as the British Loan, the
Marshall Plan, NATO, the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade, the International Monetary Fund, and the liberalization of
Germany and japan helped construct buttresses for the international liberal order.0
Thus the decline ofU.S. hegemonic leadership in the 1990s may
pose dangers for the liberal world. The danger is not that today's
liberal states will permit their economic competition to spiral into
war, nor that a world economic crisis is now likely, but that the
societies of the liberal world will no longer be able to provide the
mutual assistance they might require to sustain liberal domestic
orders if they were to be faced with mounting economic crises.
Yet liberals may have escaped from the single greatest traditional danger of international change-the transition between
hegemonic leaders. Historically,wben one great power begins to
lose its preeminence and to slip into mere equality, a warlike resolution of the international pecking order became exceptionally
likely. New power challenges old prestige, excessive commitments
face new demands; so Sparta felt compelled to attack Athens,
France warred Spain, England and Holland fought with France
(and with each other), and Germany aqd England struggled for
the mastery of Europe in World War I. 26 But here liberals may
again be an exception, for despite the fact that the United States
constituted Britain's greatest challenger along all the dimensions
most central to the British maritime hegemony, Britain and the
United States accommodated their differences. After the defeat of
Germany, Britain eventually, though not without regret, accepted
its replacement by the United States as the commercial and maritime hegemon of the liberal world. The promise of a peaceable
transition from one liberal hegemon to the next li~ral hegemon
· thus may be one of the factors helping to moderate economic and
political rivalries among Europe,japan, and the United States.
�_......_."---·----· ·-·-·- .. -·- ··- ·-
MICHAEL W,
DOYLE
Choices in Liberal
Foreign Policy
In the years ahead we will need to chart our own national strategy as a liberal democracy faced with threats, but now also with
opportunities for new thinking. In order to fulfill the promise of
liberal internationalism, we must ensure a foreign policy that tries
to reconcile our interests with our principles.
We will need to address the hard choices that no government
truly committed to the promotion of human rights can avoid.
Acknowledging that there may arise circumstances where international action-even force-is needed, we need strategic thinking
that curbs the violent moods of the moment.
We will also need to keep our larger purposes in view. Those
committed to freedom have made a bargain with their governments. We need only to live up to it. The major costs of a liberal
strategy are borne at home. Not merely are its military costs at the
taxpayers' expense, but a liberal foreign policy requires adjustment to a less controlled international political environment-a
rejection of the status quo in favor of democratic choice. Tolerating more foreign change requires more domestic change. Avoiding an imperial presence in the Persian Gulf may require a move
toward energy independence. Allowing for the economic development of the world's poor calls for an acceptance of international
trade adjustment. The home front thus becomes the front line of
liberal strategy.
The promises of successful liberal internationalism, however,
are large and can benefit all. The pursuit of freedom does not
guarantee the maintenance of peace. Indeed, the very invocation
of "crusade, as a label for President Reagan's democratic initiative of the 198os warns us otherwise. But the peaceful intent and
restraint to which liberal institutions, principles, and interests have
led in relations among liberal democracies suggest the possibility
of world peace this side of the grave. They offer the promise of a
world peace established by the expansion of the separate peace
among liberal societies.
•
AN INTERNATIONAL LIBERAL COMMUNITY
329
TABLE I. The Uberal Commuaity
(By elate •'liberal")•
Period
18th century
1800-1850
185(H900
Total Number
Swia Cantons"
French Republic 1790-1795
United Statesb 1776Swia Confederation,
United States
France 1830-1849
Belgium 183oGreat Britain 1932Netherlands 1848Piedmont 1848Denmark 1849Switzerland,
United States,
Belgium, Great Britain,
Netherlands
Piedmont-1861, Italy 1861Denmark-1866
Sweden 1864-
3
8
13
Greece 1864Canada 1867-<
1900-1945
Ci928 1936
France 1871Argentina I 88oChile 1891Switzerland,
United States,
Great Britain,
Sweden, Canada
Grecce-1911 dltaly-1922
Belgium-1940;
Netherlands-1940;
Argentina-1943
France-1940
Cbile-1924, 1932
Australia 190 I
Norway 1905-1940
New Zealand 1907Colombia 191o-1949
Denmark 1914-1940
Poland 1917-1935
29
�MICHAEL W.
330
DOYLE
..
Period
Total Number
Period
Lat\'ia 1922-1934
Gennany 1918-1932
Austria 1918-1934
Estonia 1919-1934
Finland 1919Uruguay 1919Costa Rica 1919Czechoslovakia 1920-1939
Ireland 1920Mexico 1928Lebanon 1944Switzc:rland, the United States,
Great Britain, Sweden
Canada, Australia, New Zealand,
Finland, Ireland, Mexico
Uruguay-1973; 1985Chile-1973;
Lebanon-1975
Costa Rica-1948, 1953Jceland 1944France 1945Derunark 1945Norway 1945Austria 1945Brazil 1945-1954, 1955-1964; 1985Belgium 1946Luxemburg 1946Netherlands 1946-Jtaly 1946-Philippines 1946--1972; 1987lndia 1947-1975, 1977Sri Lanka 1948-1961, 1963-1971, 1978-1983
Ecuador 1948-1963, 1979lsrael 1949West Gennany 1949Greece 195o-1967, 1975Peru 195o-1962, 1963-1968, 198oEI Salvador 195o-1961
Turkey 195o-J960, 1966-1971; 1984japan 1951Bolivia 1956-1969, 1982-
331
INTERNATIONAL LIBERAL COMMUNITY
TABLE I. (Omtirulltl)
TABLE 1. (Omlilwld)
1945d....
AN
Total Number
Colombia 1958Venezuela 1959Nigeria 1961-1964, 1979-1984
Jamaica 1962Trinidad and Tobago 1962Senegal 1963Malayaia 1963Botswana 1966Singapore .1965Portugal1976Spain 1978Dominican Republic 1978Hondwaa 1981Papua New Guinea 1982Argentina 1983South Korea 1988Taiwan 1988-
8
1 have
abe
draWD
up thia approximate lisa of "liberal
repma" (through
54
1982) according
tO
rour "Kantian" illlliluliona dacribed .. euenlial: market and private propeny ccono-
mia; politics tlw are externally IOVereign; cilizcns who pouaa juridical rigbll; and "re·
publican" (whether RpUb1ic:an or parliamentary monarchy), representative government.
Tbit latter illduda the requirement tlw abe 1egU1ative branch have an effective role in
public policy BDd be rormally and competitively (either inter· or intrapany) elected. Furthermore, I b&w taken into account whether male suJiia&e is wide (that is, 30 pm:mt) or,
u Kalil -tel have bad it, open to "achic\lement" by inhabitants (ror example, to poD tax
payen or bousebolden) or abe aaliooal or metropolitan territory. (This list or liberal
rqpma Ia thua more inc:luliw than a list of democratic regimes. or polyan:hia. Female
aufliaae is granted within a gaiCI'atioD or its bciDg demanded by an extensive remale
aufliaae IIIIMI1ICJIIi BDd repracutative govemmcnt i1 intemaUy sovereign (lOr example,
includins and apec:iaiJy over military and foreign affain) .. weD .. llable (m existence ror
at leut ~yean). (8anb and <Mntreet (1983); U.K. Foreign and Commonwealth
Office (1980); 1M EarrpG Yarid, 1985; Langer [1968); U.S. Department or State (1981);
Gaalil (1985); Freedom H0111e (1991).
domaaic: varialiona within these liberal regima. For example, Switzerland wu
liberal only in ccnain cantons; the United Stata waa liberal only north or the Mason-Dixon
line IIJiliJ 1865, when it became liberal throughouL There lists also exclude ancient "republia," Iince aonc appear to fit Kant's criteria (Holmes (1979)).
'Canada, u a commonwealth within abe Britilh empire, did not have fonnal control of its
.
roreign policy during thia paiod.
dselectecl list, excludes liberal n:gima with populaliona lea than I million. Thae include aU
atata ca!eprized as "Free" by Freedom H0111e and those "Partly Free" (45 or more free)
1tata with a more pronounced capitalist orimtalion.
b There are
�...
'
.
MICIIAEL W.
DOYLE
Notes
Dtparlmml ojSIIIk Bu~june 1~9·
. .
For an eloquent polenuc defending this VIew! .see the fine e~y by Mearsheimer (19goa). For a thoughtful and thorough cnuque of the po~~uon and prescription, see Ullman (1991), chapter 7·
.
.
.
.
• An important account of the many ways m whach hberal ~deol~~ has served
as a cloak for imperialism in U.~. ~oreign ~licy ca~ ~found m W~hams (196~).
• See the discussion of Kant s antemauonal pohucs and the evtdence for the
liberal peace in Doyle (1g86). Babst (197~) did ~ake a preliminary test of the
significance of the distribution of alliance pannen m World War I. He found that
the possibility that the actual distribution of alliance partnen could have occurred
by chance was less than 1 percent (p. 56), but this assume~ that there was an eq,u~
possibility that any two nations could have gone to w~ wat~ each ~thc;r; and th11 ~
a strong asswnption. Rummel (1983) has a further disct11ston of sagnificance as at
applies to his libertarian thesis.
.
.
.
' There are however serious studies that show that Marxa.st regunes have
higher military,spending j,er capita than non-~arxist regimes. ~ut.this shoul~ not
be interpreted as a sign of the inherent aggresuv~ess of auth~ntanan or totalitar·
ian governments or-with even greater enthuSiasm-the mherent and ~obal
peacefulness of liberal regimes. Marxist regimes, in ~ular, ~resent a mmority in the: current international system; they are stratepcally enarcled, and. due to
their laclt of domestic legitimacy, they might be said to "su.ffer" the twin burden of
needing defcnsca against both external and internal cncnucs.
• See Aron (1g86), pp. 151~, and Russett (1g85,.
.
. ..
• Kant regards these wan as unjust and warns liberab ofthcar susccpubality to
them. At the same time, he argues that each nation "can and ought to" demand
that its neighboring nations cntc;r i?to the pacific ~nion of~beral states. .
1 t'or a more extensive dcscnpuon and analym of the bberal commum~, see
Doyle (1983a). Streit (1939), pp. 88, ~. se~. to have been the fintto poa~l out
(in contemporary foreign relations) the cmpancal ~cndency of d.emocra~acs to
maintain peace among themselves, and he made this the foundauon of hu proposal for a (non-Kantian) federal union of the fifteen leading democracies of the
19301. Recent work by Russett, Maoz, Ray, and Modclski has extended thi~ field
into considerations of wider strategies of international reform and the evoluuon of
the international system.
• For evidence, sec Doyle (1g83b).
.
. .
10 Nco-Washingtonians (to coin a label) such as john Gaddis propose a sunilar
strategy for the 1ggos. See his "Toward the Post-Cold War World: Structure,
Strategy, and Security" (forthcoming in Fortf&n Affairs).
11 See Baritz (19fi4) and discussion in Davis and Lynn-Jones (1g87), p. ~~~" Sec the evidence and argument in Gaddis (1g8~) and (•9n).
.
11 Our record indicates a tendency to succumb to these altemauves, as has
been weD demonstrated in Ullman (197516).
. .
1• See the informative debate between Laura Tyson and Robert Reach m T1rl
Amni&an ProsJx&l (Winter 1991), and for a thorough background to the issues, see
Gilpin (1987).
.
.
.
·
" George Kennan, America's premaer SoVIetolopst, told the Senate Forcagn
Relations Committee on April 4• 198g, that the break-up of the !I)'Stem of power
1
1
--
AN INTERNATIONAL LIBERAL COMMUNITY
through which the Soviet Union has been ruled since 1917 indicates that the time
"has clearly passed for regarding the Soviet Union primarily as a possible, if not
probable, military opponenL"
11
These and similar policies are developed by Bergsten et al. (1978) and Cooper
et al. (1978).
17
For a discussion of strategy toward once-enemies now in a transition zone
toward potential friends. see Allison (1g88).
11
See the comments of Larry Diamond on some suggestions made by Juan
Linz in Diamond (198g).
" Liberal democrats should consider that two serious rival democratic political
economies might emerge. The East Asian national corporatist strategy is immensely successful (e.g., Singapore). It is a crucial minor key in japanese development, it is the major key in Taiwan and South Korea, and it is spreading as a
developmental ideal. Another is social democracy. Social insurance and egalitarianism are too deeply rooted in Eastern Europe (witness Walesa'a trouncing of
Mazowiecki and Yeltsin's defeat in the Russian legislature on land ownership) to
aUow a happy accommodation with the heavily capitalist element in Western
democracy. Furthermore, there are the not as yet very democratic Third World
variants, such as Islamic fundamentalism.
10
Liberab also give mixed advice on these matten. Kant argued that the "preliminary articles" from this treaty of perpetual peace required extending nonintervention by force in internal afWn of other states to nonliberal governments and
maintaining a acrupulous respect for the lawa of war. Yet he thought that liberal
atates could demand that other states become libcrai.J.S. Mill said that inlCIVention was impennisaible except to aupport states threatened by-extcrrtal aggression
and by foreign intervention in civil wars. Yet he justified British imperialism in
India.
11
See the ABqWasAilwtan PDSt poD reponed in T11111, November~~. 1g83, and
the WIUAington 1\ut, October q, 19114.
a Cuder (1g85).
• a R~~ (19ll4) suggata a legal devolution of Security Council responsibiliues to mdivtdual states. Schachter (1984) argues that such rights to intervene
would be abused by becoming self-serving. For a carefully reasoned revival of
moral arpments for just war criteria, see Walzer (19n). The policy of sanctions
against South Africa, designed to undermine the domestic system of apartheid. is
an earlier instance of these efforts.
.. Lesser violations of hwnan rights (various lesser fonns of majority tyranny,
for example) can warrant foreign diplomatic interference. The two severe abuses
ofliberal respect call for something more. The two severe abuses, ofcoune, alsO
tend to go together. Democratic resistance to authoritarian or totalitarian governments tends to result in the government inflicting severe abuses of human rights on
the democratic resistance. Governments that systematically abuse the rights of
their citizens rarely have widespread popular support. But they need not go together, hence their independence as criteria. There is one further constraint.
Although the only popular movcmenta for which one might juatly intervene need
not be democraticaDy liberal, it would by these standards clearly be wrong to
intervene in favor of a popular movement committed to a political program that
would involve the aystematic abuse ofbasic, "objective" human rights.
a Kindleberger (1973), Gilpin (1975), and Hirsch and Doyle (19'l7).
• The popular classic making these arguments is Kennedy (1g87).
�- Cv-:_f'~ r - ' c..
-
t.AJ~-..
- .
(/;.
5/19/96 2p.m.
l
cr
~
.
'""" ~~
:-.
-,;..-.,cflc~.~.,
--s"--c
.
PRESIDENT WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON
COAST GUARD ACADEMY COMMENCEMENT ADDRESS
NEW LONDON, CONNECTICUT
MAY22,1996
~ .
-='\.
''"~l· "'-l
:lf:.._
~~
[Ackowledgments: TK]
To the members of the Coast Guard Academy Class of 1996; to your families and friends: this is
your day, and I am very proud to share it with you. We gather before the Coast Guard cutter
Eagle, the largest Tall Ship flying the Stars and Stripes. On its decks and in its riggings, you
cadets were tested and challenged and tested again to ready you for this day -- and for the
important responsibilities you are about to assume as Coast Guard officers. Looking out at all of
you, one thing is very clear to me: you are ready for anything.
On my way here, I was told that the unofficial mascot for the class of '96 is the guinea pig. You
will understand that I suddenly felt concerned about being your Commencement speaker. Then I
remembered the wonderful reception you "Coasties" gave my wife Hillary and daughter Chelsea
when they visited here two years ago -- so I told our pilots to hold course for New London.
The course you're on won't be easy-- but it will be exhilarating. On an average Coast Guard
day, you and your fellow sailors will seize drugs with a street value of $7 million and stop 82
illegale ... you'll respond to 38 hazardous chemical spills and salvage property worth $2.5
million... you'll conduct 180 search-and-rescue missions and save a life every two hours. And
that's just an average day. There's not much I can do to lighten your load. But I will take
./
�2
advantage of my prerogatives as Commander-in-Chief and exempt all ofyou from any penalties
which you may carry with you.
Members of the class of'96, from this day forward, every day, you will be guardians of America's
security. There is no higher calling ... no greater challenge. So as we celebrate today, I ask you to
join me in thinking about tomorrow-- a tomorrow that you will help shape.
What do we want tomorrow to look like... how do we want America to enter the 21st century?
The answer is as straightforward as the path ahead is full of twists and turns. ~erica must enter
the 21st century as the strongest force for peace, freedom and prosperity on earth.
Qr
C>.J--
Ji}[ :
oJ"'4
UJ\M& LtWl , l.LJ~ ~ eA · <,~·
~'ve made a good start at realizing that vision. Compared to four years ago, more people live
free, more countries are at peace and the American people are more secure and prosperous
because we've stepped up to-- not away from-- the world's problems. We've dramatically
reduced the nuclear threat. We've helped people around the world move from conflict to
cooperation. We've opened markets abroad and created good new jobs at home.
Now, to build on these achievements-- to make the future for our children even more secure-we must keep America strong ... continue to steer a steady course... and, above all, know when,
l~~
where and how to lead. \)J ~)
Our first responsibility is to understand the world we live in -- a world that is going through the
most profound, fast-paced change in history.
�3
In so many ways, this change is for the good. The Cold War is over. Democracy and free
markets are on the march. The laptops, modems, CD-ROMs and satellites that are second nature
to all of you send information, ideas, products and money across our planet in seconds. This
political, economic and technological revolution is bringing us all closer together ... and bringing
with it extraordinary opportunities to better share in humanity's genius for progress.
You are well prepared to make the most of these changes. But too many people around the
world -- and here at home -- are not. They fear that their lives are being uprooted ... but not
improved. That this new world lacks logic or justice. We have a duty to give every person willing
to take responsibility for his or her life a fair chance to succeed through education and
opportunity... by strengthening our families and our communities... by rounding off the rough
edges of change.
At the same time, each and every one of us is vulnerable to the very forces that are bringing us
;::9. ~ closer together. The end of communism has opened the door to the spread of weapons of mass
e~
destruction and lifted the lid on religious and ethnic conflicts. The growing openness and freedom
we cherish also benefit a host of equal opportunity destroyers like terrorism, international
organized crime and drug trafficking -- threats that have no respect for borders.
-
~
v~
~ Faced with all this complexity, there are those-- on both the left and the right-- who would have
5~
America retreat from its responsibilities. Some proclaim that we must stay engaged -- but then
~ '1 •would deny us the resources to match their rhetoric.
They would stop us from working with
�4
others to share the risks and costs of leadership. They would gut our diplomatic readiness and cut
our assistance to those who take risks for peace. They fail to recognize that the global trend
toward democracy and free markets is neither inevitable nor irreversible. It needs our support and
our leadership.
Others sound almost nostalgic for the bumper sticker days of the Cold War, when our mission
was clear: contain communism. In t ·
less straightforward but no less dangerous time, they
.
'1
say we should withdraw behi
aa Fortress Americ
. But we can't build a wall high enough to
keep out the threats to our well being-- or to isolate ourselves from the world economy. If we
fail to confront the promise and problems of our time now, we will pay a much higher price for
our indifference later.
The bottom line is that while we're operating in a radically new world, our fundamental mission
endures: to defend and strengthen the idea -- and the reality -- of an open society of free people.
When you cut through all the complex questions of our time, you see a world divided into two
camps: one of peace, prosperity and freedom ... the other of chaos, poverty and repression. lfthe
past fifty years have taught us anything, it is this: the United States has a unique ability to lead the
camp of tolerance, progress and hope. Because we acted on that ability, the world is a better
place: .. and our own people are better off.
Now, the many different and difficult demands on our troops and treasure, make it more
important than ever that we have the judgment to know when, where and how to lead ... and the
tools to lead effectively. That means keeping our military strong while adapting our alliances to
�5
new challenges. Working with others when we can _and alone when we must. Relying on
diplomacy where possible and force where necessary. Rejecting the call of isolationism but
refusing to be the world's policeman.
My job as President is to make those judgment calls-- to match the demands for American
leadership to our interests and our ideals -- and to act where we can make a difference.
Sometimes, leadership requires making deci~io~ff · not come in days or weeks,
but in months or years. But those deci ions aren't difficult if ou understand the alternatives.
Imagine what the Persian Gulf region would look like today if the United States had not stepped
up -- first with our allies, and then alone -- to stop Iraqi aggression. Imagine the ongoing reign of
terror and the flood of refugees to our shores had we not backed diplomacy with force in Haiti.
Imagine the shells and slaughter we'd still be seeing in Bosnia had we not stood up for peace.
Imagine the chaos that might have ensued had we not moved to stabilize Mexico's economy.·
Imagine the tariffs and barriers that would still cripple the world trading system if we had not
passed GATT and NAFTA.
In each case, there was a substantial and sometimes overwhelming opinion against what needed to
be done. But because we did it, the American people will have a safer and more prosperous
tomorrow.
~
j.;fJ
~
�6
Leadership also means standing with those who take risks for peace and democracy. That's what
we've done from the Middle East to Northern Ireland ... from South Mrica to Haiti. Nothing will
strengthen America's security more in the long run than promoting peace and deepening the roots
of democracy. When people live free and at peace, they're less likely to resort to violence to
settle their problems ... or to abuse the rights of their fellow citizens. They're more likely to join
with us to conquer common problems-- from the spread of weapons of mass destruction to
environmental degradation and economic dislocation.
Leadership means keeping our military strong-- even when the enemy isn't as obvious as it was in
the past. Today, after the most successful restructuring of our forces in history, our military
readiness is at a historic high. We are prepared to engage -- and prevail -- in two nearly
simultaneous major regional conflicts.
Don't take my word for it-- just ask the North Korean regime why they finally agreed to freeze
their nuclear program... ask Saddam Hussein why he pulled his forces back from Kuwait's
border... ask the military dictators why they stepped down in Haiti... ask the Bosnian Serbs why
they turned from the battlefield to the bargaining table. Ask those questions, and you'll get the
same answer: the best trained, best equipped, best prepared fighting force in the world has a
special way of concentrating our adversaries' minds.
Maybe most important of all, leadership today means anticipating the problems we will face
tomorrow ... and laying the groundwork for the world we want to pass on to our children.· That's
what we've been doing in three key areas: strengthening our alliances in Europe and Asia; leading
�7
the fight against we~pons of mass destruction, terror, crime and drugs ... and building an open
trading system for the 21st century.
This century has been the bloodiest in history -- and its main battlegrounds were Europe and Asia.
Previous generations of Americans not only had the strength to triumph over tyranny -- but the
vision to reach out in reconciliation to help Europe and Asia rebuild. The end of the Cold War
calls for the same kind of vision because it presents us with extraordinary opportunities: to help
build a peaceful, undivided and democratic Europe ... and to forge a stable community of nations
in Asia dedicated to democracy and open markets.
We seized that opportunity in Europe by reinforcing our ties with our long-time allies ... and
strengthening the continent's new democracies with economic assistance and military
cooperation. Now, many central European nations have moved from aid to trade-- creating
dynamic new markets for our exports. We've opened the door to NATO expansion through an
American idea-- the Partnership for Peace. Now, in Bosnia, soldiers from more than a dozen
partner states are standing shoulder to shoulder with NATO troops.
But we cannot bring Europe together without bringing Russia into the game. Not by pretending
that serious differences don't continue to divide us -- including the war in Chechnya.. But not by
reacting reflexively to the ups and downs of Russian reform, either. We've worked steadily to
help Russia seize the promise of a democratic future. Our assistance has helped bolster
democracy's foundation -- political parties, free elections, an independent media. With our
support, more than 60 percent of Russia'$ economy has moved from the heavy grip of the state to
�8
the hands of its people. And we're working to build a strong NATO-Russia relationship. The
remarkable cooperation between our troops in Bosnia proves.that such a relationship is both
possible and productive -- we must pursue it.
When I took office, my Administration understood that America's vision must extend to the west
as well as the east. The extraordinary changes in the Pacific region -- with so many countries
moving to free market democracies ... with such a concentration of wealth and growth -- means
remarkable opportunities for increasing our own security and prosperity.
That's why we've worked long and hard tore-imagine and re-invigorate our key security
partnerships in Asia, like the one with Japan... and to maintain a strong troop presence in Asia.
That's why we've been so determined to win the commitment of the world's biggest existing
markets, and its biggest emerging markets, to free trade.
And that's why we're engaged with China-- for the long run. Our goal is a stable, open,
prosperous China-- a China that joins the struggle against the spread ofweapons of mass
destruction ... that plays by the rules of free trade ... that cooperates in regional and global security.
To succeed, we must continue to judge each issue between us on its merits ... and refuse the
temptation to drive every nail with a sledgehammer. We worked closely with China to extend the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to freeze North Korea's nuclear program. We warned
China with our actions when it sent it ships to the Taiwan Straits and failed to honor its
�9
intellectual property rights commitments. By continuing China's l\1FN status we will deepen it's
integration into the world economy and encourage the forces of democratic reform.
The end of the Cold War has also presented us with a historic opportunity to step back from the
nuclear precipice -- and we have met it with the most far reaching arms control and nonproliferation agenda in history.
Because we worked patiently and pragmatically with Russia, today there are no Russian missiles
pointed at our cities or citizens. We're cutting our arsenals by two-thirds from their Cold War
height. We convinced Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan to give up the nuclear weapons left on
their land when the Soviet Union collapsed. By stepping in where previous administrations has
stood aside -- with diplomacy backed by force -- we persuaded North Korea to freeze its nuclear
weapons program. We're safeguarding nuclear materials and destroying nuclear weapons so they
don't wind up in the wrong hands. And we're determined to stop an entire new generation of
nuclear weapons by signing a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty this year-- and to control chemical
and biological weapons by approving a Chemical Weapons Convention-- this year .
.
All of these efforts -- and the overwhelming deterrent force of our own arsenal -- focus on
reducing the threat of weapons of mass destruction. But we also need to be prepared to defend
ourselves in the extremely unlikely event these preventive measures fail. That's why my
administration is spending $3 billion a year on a strong, sensible national missile defense program
based on real threats and pragmatic responses.
- - -
-----
�10
Our first priority is to provide effective defenses against existing or near term threats, like short
f,
and medium range missile attacks on our troops in the field or our allies -- and we are, with
upgr~ded
)
Patriot missile, the Navy Lower and Upper Tier and the Army THAAD. The possibility
I
of a long range missile attack on American soil by a rogue state is at least a decade away. The/
I
best answer is to do exactly what we're doing: develop by the year 2000 a defensive system that
I
could be deployed by 2003, well before the threat becomes real. To do otherwise -- to choose a
missile defense system today that could be obsolete tomorrow ... to begin deploying it before we
know what the threat really looks like-- would waste money, weaken our defenses, and violate
arms control agreements that are making us more secure. It's the wrong way to ~c . '
Eliminating weapons of mass destruction, stopping the spread of lethal materials, building the
right kind of missile defenses-- all of these initiatives are making America safer. But their
promise is matched by the peril of a growing web of threats: terrorism, international organized
crime and drug trafficking.
My administration has made the fight against these forces of destruction a national security
priority. As Coast Guard officers, you will be on the frontlines of this struggle. My pledge to you
today is simple: you will have the tools you need to get the job done.
Already, we're cooperating as never before with countries around the world-- sharing
information and providing military support... initiating anti-corruption efforts ... shutting down
front companies and money laundering operations ... opening FBI training centers abroad. We're
keeping the heat on states that sponsor terrorism with sanctions ... increasing the funding,
�11
personnel and training for our law enforcement agencies ... putting stronger laws on our books like
the tough anti-terrorism legislation I proposed after Oklahoma City that Congress finally passed a
month ago.
And we're getting results. We've busted up drug cartels and brought crime kingpins to justice.
We've arrested and prosecuted more terrorists than all previous administrations combined-including those responsible for the World Trade Center bombing. We've foiled attacks on New
York City and on our airliners. These achievements are real. They have saved lives. But the
forces of destruction never give up. So we must never give in-- and your job, especially, will be
to help America remain vigilant and to renew the struggle against these forces of destruction.
Finally, in this new era, we need to understand that the true measure of our people's security
includes not only their physical safety, but their economic well-being, too. Every day, people on
every continent use products dreamed up in one country, put together in another from parts made
in.a third, and marketed all over the world. These products-- and our ability to move them
quickly and easily through the world trading system -- support millions of jobs and livelihoods.
This is especially true for the United States-- the nation with the most competitive goods and
services on earth. The tallest hurdles to an even more prosperous future for America are the
barriers other countries place on our products. That's why my administration has led the effort to
build a new trading system for the 21st century by opening markets around the world.
�12
Decades from now, people will look back at this period and see the most far reaching changes in
the world trading system since the end of World War II-- changes that have made a dramatic
difference in the lives of the American people. Through painstaking negotiations like GATT,
NAFT A, APEC and the Summit of the Americas -- and through hard-headed persuasion like our
work with Japan on auto parts-- barriers to American products have come down and our exports
have gone up -- creating more than one million new jobs in the last three years alone.
To cite just one example, since 1993 we've completed 21 trade agreements with Japan. The
sectors covered by these agreements -- from computers to medical supplies to rice -- have seen
their exports to Japan grow by 85 percent, three times as fast as exports from other sectors. The
result: more jobs at better pay for Americans, greater choice and lower prices for the Japanese.
We also created a National Export Strategy to help our firms walk through the doors we opened
with trade agreements. Ron Brown, our late Secretary of Commerce, was the Admiral of that
effort, mobilizing the fight for American business and helping secure nearly $60 billion in foreign
business contracts.
Members of the Class of'96, as you go forward from this day, I want to leave you with one final
thought. Those of us responsible for guarding America's freedom must measure our success by
one simple standard: have we made the lives of the American people safer -- have we made the
future for our children more secure?
�13
By living up to the great legacy of American leadership -- by knowing when, where and how to
lead in an increasingly complex world -- we can meet that test. Today, because of our
commitment to American leadership, conflicts long thought to be unsolvable are moving toward
resolution ... our alliances are strong ... the danger of weapons of mass destruction is receding ...
and more markets than ever before are open to our goods and services.
If we build on these achievements, we can make the American people even more secure for the
years ahead.
We can enter the 21st century allied with a peaceful, undivided Europe and a stable, prosperous
Asia. We can enter the 21st century with even fewer nuclear weapons in the world's arsenals and
tough new agreements to control chemical and biological weapons. We can enter the 21st
century with a military whose fighting edge -- in training, equipment, flexibility and technology -is sharper than ever. We can enter the 21st century with terrorists, international criminals and
drug traffickers on the run, not on a rampage. We can enter the 21st century with even more
barriers to American products coming down. We can enter the 21st century with more people
than ever before moving toward a future of hope.
We can do all these things provided -- provided -- we never forget that our nation has a unique
I
ability to shape its destiny. In this American century, we have been a force for freedom and
progress around the world-- and for real security and prosperity at home. If we continue to lead,
that proud history will also be our destiny. And the next century will be an American century,
too.
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
001. memo
DATE
SUBJECTffiTLE
Jeremy Rosner to Don Baer (1 page)
05/17/1996
RESTRICTION
PS
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Communications
DonBaer
OA/Box Number: 10136
FOLDER TITLE:
Commencement 1996
2006-0458-F
db2166
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act -144 U.S.C. 2204(a))
Freedom of Information Act -IS U.S.C. SSl(b))
PI National Security Classified Information J(a)(l) of the PRA)
Pl Relating to the appointment to Federal office J(a)(l) of the PRA)
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute J(a)(3) of the PRA)
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information J(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 PRA)
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA)
b(l) National security classified information [(b)(l) ofthe FOIA)
b(l) Release would disclose Internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA)
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute J(b)(3) 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) ofthe 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 J(b)(9) of the FOIA)
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.
�/
E. Theme for Foreiga Policy Speecb - Su:•diness. Judament. Strength
No longer can a successfUl foreign policy bo run on the basis of
rigid ideology. Toclay's problems. after the cold war. require
stron&th, steadiness. and judgment
:t
-strength when we need it.
-the steadiness to see our poUcies through and protect our vaJues
•the ja:adgmcmt to underatand where we can have intluenc:e oiUld
where it would be a mistake .
l
These three elements must guide our foraign policy loday
support61-27
I
�May 2, 1996
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
DONBAER
MICHAEL WALDMAN
BRUCE REED
SUBJECT:
1996 COMMENCEMENT ADDRESSES
As has been discussed, we propose that the 1996 commencement addresses be
presented to the press and public as a package of speeches that maintain a thematic
consistency. The speeches would be designed to accomplish the following:
•
1. Continue to spell out your priorities for the future, and show with increased
specificity whe~ you plan to lead the country as we move to the Year 2000.
2. Show the continuity of your "story line" - that you ran on certain principles,
have governed on those principles, and believe those are the principles to guide
our country in the years to come: opportunity, responsibility, and community.
3. Reconfigure the challenges in the State of the Union Address around the
subjects of your 1991 Georgetown "New Covenant" speeches:
- Keeping the American Dream of opportunity alive for those who work for it
(economy);
-Coming together around our values (mending our social fabric);
-Keeping America the world's strongest force for peace and freedom (foreign
policy).
We propose that, as in 1991, you start with social policy/values themes. This year,
however, we propose that you give two separate speeches: one on community and the social
fabric, and a second devoted exclusively to strengthening the family. These would then be
followed by a speech on foreign policy, and a speech on the economy.
�I. OVERVIEW SPEECH/COMMUNITY AND RESPONSffiiLITY (Penn State, May 10)
This will be an optimistic challenge to the country to take on the great social
challenges of our time, not through government alone, but through all of us acting together.
"We need a smaller government, but a larger national spirit. I refuse to take the breakdown
of the family, the collapse of community, as a given. Government alone cannot solve these
problems. But we can protect our values, and use them to meet our new challenges. And I
believe we will."
This speech would discuss how we can mend our social fabric and restore the sense
of duty and mutual responsibility that binds our people together.
Overview. The introductory section will frame the era as we move into a new
century. It will outline the values that must guide us as we make that transition: opportunity,
responsibility, community. It will note that old values do not require old institutions, old
ways of doing things. ·And it will describe how, for decades, the bonds that linked neighbor
to neighbor have been frayed, by crime, distrust, economic upheaval. Our goal must be to
recreate strong American communities in a new time -- to use traditional values as we cross
the bridge into a new century.
What we have done. We have made real progress: crime record/accomplishments;
welfare reform, child support collection, teen pregnancy, domestic violence, service
(Americorps), empowerment zone concept.
What we must do now. We must inspire a sense of personal responsibility-- to make
the most of one's own life, and to help America realize its full potential. Our goal must be
to give people the capacity to build strong communities, and to give communities the
capacity to defend themselves and grow, in three major ways. Specific policies could
include some or all of the following:
Crime: When streets are empty and families are barricaded behind closed doors,
crime flourishes. When neighbors work with police on the beat, a safe community is
reborn. "We are putting 100,000 police on the streets. Today, we take the next step:
we are calling for 100,000 new citizen patrols to join them."
Welfare: Discuss principles of reform, and waivers. Call on Congress to work with
you to get the job done once and for all.
Anti-teen pregnancy strategy: Require underage mothers to stay at home and stay in
school; challenge states to enforce statutory rape laws.
Domestic violence. Challenging insurance companies not to cover injuries caused by
spousal abuse. Challenge the American Bar Association to encourage lawyers to
represent victims of domestic abuse without payment.
2
�Civic organizations: Churches, civic groups, and informal associations used to the
backbone of our communities. These local organizations have too often been replaced
by government, even when private charity or community organizations can do the job
better. Our job should be to help these institutions of "civil society." The speech
would endorse elements of the bill proposed by Senator Dan Coats, possibly including
the adoption tax credit and incentives for charity.
Service: The national service program has shown the benefits, both to society and to
those who serve, when young people work for their community. "Colleges give
scholarships for football, for cheerleading, for tuba playing. I challenge colleges to
give scholarships for those who have given service to their community." (We are
working with Senator Wofford to propose the "next phase" for Americorps.) A
specific and inspirational call to service among young Americans.
ll. FAMILY AND RESPONSffiiLITY (Washington University, St. Louis, May 17)
This speech will deal with personal responsibility within our families -- how parents
should take seriously their most important responsibility, raising their children, and how we
can help families do the right thing. Because your Georgetown speeches did not include this
topic as a distinct issue, its inclusion will be noteworthy. (This speech will encompass much
of the "families" challenge from the State of the Union Address.)
Age of possibility/time of change. The family is our most important institution -- it is
how we raise our children, build character, build economic security. It is the way we
exercise our duties toward our parents and our children. And for decades, the American
family and its values have been under assault-- rocked by seismic social changes, increased
work pressures, deteriorating schools, TV violence, advertising and mass culture. These
days, even the healthiest of families need help. We need to help families help themselves to
live out their values.
What we have done. We have made progress: saving Medicare/Medicaid, education,
environment; Family and Medical Leave Act; anti-smoking; V-chip/TV ratings.
What we must do. Now we must continue with a new family agenda that helps parents
protect their children and raise them into their traditional values. Elements could include:
-: families and work I family friendly workplace (flextime, corporate citizenship)
- marriage initiative: a firm statement that two parents are better than one. Other
steps could include a cooling-off period in divorces; reducing or eliminating antimarriage provisions in tax code; etc.
-encouraging adoption;
- more to say about TV programming and parental responsibility with regard to TV
violence;
3
�- challenge parent~ to read to their children for 112 hour a day;
- challenge parents to talk honestly to their children about drugs, drinking and
tobacco.
ill. FOREIGN POLICY (Coast Guard Academy, May 22)
Summary to be provided by the National Security Council.
IV. ECONOMY/COLLEGE EDUCATION (Princeton, June 4)
Age of possibility/time of change. This speech will set forth a concrete, detailed
discussion of the move into a knowledge economy. But churning change creates uncertainty,
threatens to wash away our moorings. People have to work harder than ever to keep up.
What we have done. Put in place an economic strategy to address this moment of
change: cut deficit, invest in people, trade, reform and shrink government. Result: 8.5
million jobs, etc.
What we must do now. Must press forward with a strategy of opportunity and
responsibility. 1) Keep economy growing (need to balance budget, etc.). 2) Give all workers
the chance to face the forces of change that the most successful in our society now enjoy,
and the means to make the most of their own lives: portable and secure health care,
pensions, training. 3) And challenge Americans to a renewed ethic of mutual responsibility
for economic growth: Every employee has a responsibility to make their company more
profitable, and every employer has a responsibility to make their employees more valuable.
Above all, education. Education reform at all levels. President will travel the
country to persuade every state to enact education reform challenges as issued at NGA. In a
knowledge economy, we must make the single greatest element of success available to more
people than ever before: college. We must make higher education more available than ever
before. $10,000 college tax deduction; 1 million in work study. Our goal: just as, after
World War IT, society made a decision that a lOth grade education was no longer enough,
and set a goal of 12 years of schooling for everyone, now we should have as a goall4 years
of schooling -- i.e., at least community college for everyone who wants it. This goal should
enlist energies of business, educators, communities, and government.
4
�V. ALTERNATIVE ORDER FOR TilE SPEECHES
If this ordering does not work, for reasons we should discuss, an alternative order for
speech topics and settings would be as follows:
·
•
Economy/education (Penn State, May 10)
•
Foreign policy (Coast Guard Academy, May 22)
•
Community/responsibility (Princeton, June 4)
•
Family/responsibility (a high school graduation in California, around June 10)
5
�·~
. -..;--
..
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(University Park, Pennsylvania)
May 10, 1996
For Immed1ate Release
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE SCHOOL COMMENCEMENT
Bryce Jordan Center
Pennsylvania State University
3:11 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen,
thank you for that very warm welcome.
Thank you, President
Spanier. Thank you, Mr. Arnelle, Dr. Brighton, Dr. Erickson, Mr.
Hollander. I thank the University Brass for playing so well for
me. It made me want to take them back to the White House.
Ladies and gentlemen, I am delighted to be here for many very
personal reasons, many of which are obvious. I'm very honored to
receive the University Scholars Medal and to be the first non-Penn
State alumnus to receive it.
As it was said earlier, my family has a long history with this
state and with this great University.
Hillary's family is from
Scranton and both my father-in-law and brother-in-law attended Penn
State and ·both played football here. Back in the '30s, according
to. my father-in-law, he had to play offense. and defense.
(Laughter.)
That's sort of what I do, so I understand that.
(Laughter and applause.)
I have had some other good personal associations with this
University, and for all those I am very grateful. I am grateful
for the establishment of a scholarship at the College of Education
in my late father.-in-law's name. It .means a great deal to my wife
and to me and to our daughter.
And I am grateful to be here
because of what Penn State represents.
This school was made a land grant school in the darkest hours
of our nation's history, because President Lincoln and his
contemporaries knew even· then that our nation's future depended
upon the widest possible dispersion of knowledge.
Though faced
-more-
�-r
2
with the.possibility of the very union of our states breaking up,
our leaders were still thinking about the future. And to all the
graduates here with advanced degrees, I say, a great ..nation must
always be thinking about tomorrow. Therefore, even as you relish
this day, I ask you to join me just for a few moments in thinking
about tomorrow, for you will live a great deal of your lives in the
21st century, the most remarkable age of possibility in human
history.
I have been told that today every student at Penn state is
given an e-mail account and that more than one million e-mail
messages are sent every day. That is just a taste of the world to
come -- a dazzling, new global economy, giving more and more people
a chance to work with their minds instead of their backs throughout
a career, many of you in jobs that you have not even invented yet.
You will have incredible choices in where you live and how you
work. You will be able to raise your children in greater peace and
freedom and in the most diverse and vibrant democracy history has
ever known. At least that's what I want our country to be like as
we move into the 21st century.
Almost five years ago at my alma mater, Georgetown, I gave
three speeches about my vision of America's future in the 21st
century and a strategy for how I thought we ought to achieve that
future. I said then and I'd like to repeat now that my vision is
pretty simple and straightforward: I want an America in which all
Americans, without regard to their race or their gender or their
station in life, who are willing to work hard have a chance to live
out their dreams.
I want an America that remains the world's
strongest force for peace and freedom and prosperity. And I want
an America that is no longer being driven apart by our differences,
but instead is coming together around our shared values and respect
for our diversity.
As my wife says in her book, I really believe it takes a
village of all of our people working together to make the most of
our lives. To build that kind of America, we have to be able to
honestly meet our challenges and protect our values. We have to
find ways to create these opportunities for all Americans. We have
to find ways to build strong communities and we have got to find
ways to get more personal responsibility from all of our citizens.
Opportunity, responsibility, community -- these are values that
have -.made....our country- strong, that--have. built great institutions
·like Penn State, that guide my actions as President.
I believe
they must guide our nation as we prepare for the tomorrows of the
21st century.
What I want to do here and in the other commencement addresses
I will be making is to talk about what has occurred in the last
four years and, even more importantly, what must still occur if we
-more-
...
�~·
3
are going to realize this vision -- to give opportunities to
everybody willing to work for them, to keep our country the
strongest force for peace and· freedom, and to rebuild our s>"ense of
unity and community around a shared ethic of responsibility.
Compared to four years ago, there is clearly more opportunity,
a much lower deficit, increased access to education, a renewed
commitment to a clean environment and safer streets, 8.5 million
new jobs, low inflation, record numbers of new exports in
businesses. But we all know there are also a lot of problems in
this new economy, a lot of uncertainty, and much more to do to give
all our people a chance to succeed.
Compared to four years ago the world is more peaceful and
safer. The nuclear threat has diminished. Peace and freedom are
taking hold from Haiti to South Africa to Northern Ireland to
Bosnia to the Middle East. But there is a lot more to do to make
the American people safe from the 21st century threats of
terrorism, organized crime and drug-running, weapons proliferation
and global.environmental threats.
In future speeches I'll discuss both these things at greater
length. Today I'd like to ask you to kind of travel along with me
as we look at America's present and its future in terms of that
third objective -- inspiring a stronger, more united American
community,
rooted
in
a
greater
commitment
to
personal
responsibility and community service.
What you have done here today is in and of itself an act of
responsibility. By getting this advanced degree you have honored
yourselves and your families, and you have helped America. We need
more people --many, many more people --with much higher levels of
education and, even more importantly, with the developed ability to
learn for a lifetime. we need this kind of personal responsibility
from all of our citizens, doing the best to make the most of their
own lives.
And we must apply the lessons of your success as
individuals to our common work as a nation.
I believe we are living through a period of most profound
change in the way we work, the way we live, the way we relate to
each other and the rest of the world in 100 years -- since we moved
from the agricultural into the industrial age. At the turn of the
century- -about .100 years .ago, people _who for generations had lived
their lives by the rising and the setting of the sun moved from the
country to the city, where they woke to the din of the streetcar
and went home to the sound of the factory whistle.
That time
presented enormous opportunities, but also great challenges. ·A
hundred years ago many people's lives were uprooted, but not
improved. And for many, not only their livelihoods but the values
by which they lived were threatened by the changes of the day.
-more-
�•
4
In response to the challenges of that time, a gifted
generation of reformers, led first by Theodore Roosevelt and then
by Woodrow Wilson, worked to harness the power of our nation's
government so that it could extend the benefits of the industrial
era to all Americans, curb the excesses of the era, and enable our
people to preserve their family and community values. . They
launched what we now call the Progressi:ve Era. They brought us the
antitrust laws, the earliest environment protection laws.
They
were all designed to harness the positive forces of the new age to
give everyone a fair chance to protect the values of the American
people.
Think what has happened in the 100 years since.
The
progressives built the foundation of what became known as the
American Century -- a century in which America won two world wars
and the Cold War, overcame the Great Depression, achieved decades
of sustained economic growth, scientific breakthroughs, more
opportunities for women and minorities, a cleaner environment,
remarkable security and good health for senior citizens, and the
largest and most prosperous middle class in human his~ory. It all
began in the Progressive Era.
Today we're living through another time of profound change.
Like the dawn of the Industrial Age, the Information Age offers
vast new opportunities.
Today technology and information are
dominating every form of work including agriculture, as I'm sure
anyone in the College of Agriculture here can attest to.
But this time also presents great challenges -- people whose
lives are uprooted, but not improved; and cherished values strained
by the pace and the scope of change. I'd like to talk about that
a little today.
When I was growing up, Americans could pretty much walk the
streets of any city without fear of being hurt by violent crime.
Having children out of wedlock was rare and a source of shame.
Welfare was a temporary weigh station for widows and their orphans.
It was far from a perfect time, the '40s and '50s and early '60s.
Women and minorities didn't have the opportunities they have today.
But in neighborhoods all across America, people knew it when you
were born, cared about you while you lived, and missed you when you
died.
·
For too many young people growing up today, that world exists
only in black and white reruns on television.
In our toughest
neighborhoods.and our meanest streets, we've seen a stunning and
simultaneous breakdown of community, family and work -- the heart
and soul of a civilized society. We've seen a buildup of crime and
gangs and drugs, as young people turn to things that will destroy
-more-
. r-
�.
.
~.
5
them, ultimately, in part because they are ·raising themselves
without enough to say yes to.
We've seen so much of this now we've almost become numb to it.
A lot of us may even be resigned to it. But I want to ask you to
think today about what you want America to look like in the 21st
century, and I want you to say to yourself, I refuse to accept this
as a normal and unavoidable and irreversible condition. I believe
we can mend our social fabric. We've done it before, and we have
to do it today.
If we're moving into an era in which we will be judged and our
success will be determined by how well we use our minds, we must
first be able to function as orderly, law-abiding, decent human
beings. We have to, in short, not only meet the changes of the
day, but reaffirm our enduring values.
In this, to be sure, our government still has a role to play.
But it's not the same role that government had to play in the
beginning of the 20th century because the problems are different.
The world of today has moved away from big, centralized
bureaucracies and top-down solutions.
So has your federal
government. Indeed, there are 240, ooo fewer people working for the
United States government today than there were the day I became
President of this great country.
But we still need a government that is strong enough to give
people the tools they need to make the most of their own lives, to
enable them to seize opportunities when they are responsible.
That's why I have fought so hard for things like the student loan
programs, the Pell Grant programs, the scholarship programs, the
research programs, beca~se we cannot, on the one hand, tell the
American people, go out and be responsible, and on the other hand,
jerk the rug out from under them. We have to give people the tools
they need to make the most of their own lives. (Applause.)
And whenever we fight for a strong economy, or a clean
environment, or safe streets, or investment in research and
technology, or give a child a chance with the Head Start program,
we are doing nothing more or less than giving people an environment
in which they still have to make the most of their own lives.
---And-so-what ·I ask you today is-to think about that. What is·
the role of the individual citizen in making the America of our
dreams in the 21st century? What is the role of the individual
citizen in making sure that we will move into this global society,
with everyone.having the chance to live up to his or her dreams?
It is clear to me that government alone cannot solve this problem.
(Applause.)
-more-
�.
6
If you look at any society's most fundamental requirements -strong families ·and safe streets -- and you ask yourselves, what
are all the causes for the stresses on those things in our country,
you may come up with a whole laundry list of things th~t gdvernment
can do about them. I know I have. But in your heart of hearts you
know that many, many of the things from which we suffer are caused
by the lack of personal responsibility on the part· of millions of
American citizens.
The teen mother who leaves school for a life on welfare, a
father who walks away from or abuses a family, a criminal who preys
upon the rest of us, the neighbors who turn their backs on the
children in need -- I say to you we cannot tolerate this anymore if
you really want your vision of the 21st century to become real. We
have to be willing to give people a chance to escape lives that are
destructive for them and costly for the rest of us. That is our
responsibility.
But we most also insist that people help
themselves and assume responsibility for making their own lives and
the life of this great nation better.
If you just take the welfare system, for example, you can see
the point I'm trying to make. I took office believing that a lot
of people on we.lfare were dying to get off it and were trapped in
it.
I still believe that.
It's a system that is too weighted
toward
a
lifetime
of
dependency
instead
of
demanding
responsibility; too willing to let fathers bring children into the
world, turn their backs and walk away and load all the burden onto
the young mothers who are left behind; too willing to give the
young mothers a check to move out on their own if they have a child
instead of staying at home, staying in school and strengthening the
family.
For 15 years, going back to my service as governor, I have sat
in welfare offices, talked to people on welfare, asked them what it
would take to turn their lives around, asked them what had
happened. I have worked to reform and change welfare from a system
that encourages dependency to one that encourages independence,
from one that does not encourage work to one that insists upon
work, but also supports responsible parenting.
If you look at all these people here with their advanced
degrees, why are we so proud of them? Because we believe they will
be .. able .to.~ succeed. not only in _the world of work, but they will. be
good role models for the American society. Their children will be
able to succeed. They will be able to look at their children and
their children will be able to look at them, and they will be able
to do great things together.
That is what we should want for
people on welfare -- the simple ability to succeed at work and to
succeed at home, to be able to contribute their portion of the
American Dream.
-more-
--~
�....
7
Now, in the past three years, by executive actions, we've been
working on what The New York Times called "a quiet rE!volution on
welfare." We've cut red tape for 37 states and now let 75 percent
of the people in this country on welfare be a part of welfare
reform experiments with little fanfare and no new legislation.
We've done things like impose time limits and require work, and
we've worked much harder to enforce the national government's role
in child support enforcement across national lines.
And you know what? The welfare rolls have dropped by more
than a million. The food stamp rolls are down by a million and a
half. Child support collections are up 40 percent to $11 billion
a year. And the teen pregnancy rate has even started to go down
a bit. (Applause.)
What does all this have to do with you? They are part of your
country. If their children wind up in your prisons, you will pay
for them instead of investing more money in scientific laboratories
at Penn State, or giving children a chance to work in a program to
earn a scholarship, or otherwise building our future. When others
regularly and systematically violate the values we all say we
share, it weakens America and it weakens the future of your vision
and your dreams.
We still have a lot to do. Nearly a third of our babies today
are born out of wedlock; a whole lot of them end up on welfare. A
few days ago, we took an action which should force more
responsibility. Every state will have to require teen mothers to
stay in school and to sign a personal responsibility contract and
to stay at home unless the environment is abusive, so that they
must work to turn their lives around if they want to keep those
benefits.
I'm still working with members of Congress in both parties to
pass legislation to overhaul the entire welfare system. And I hope
we can do it even though this is an election year. There's really
no call for a work stoppage, and by the time November comes around
you' 11 have more politics than you can stand. Meanwhile, you ought
to be working to give those people what we want for ourselves -independence, work and responsible parenting. (Applause.)
. But .what I want :to say.to allof_you --you say, well, what's
that got to do with me? I'll never be on welfare, I've got a Ph.D.
today.
(Laughter.)
They are your fellow Americans.
Those
children are your future. And what I want to say is, it doesn't
matter what laws we pass or what programs we put in place, we
cannot reverse decades and patterns of behavior unless more of our
citizens are willing to take some responsibility for other people's
kids in the near-term. (Applause.)
-more-
�·•
8
We have to inspire our communities to support programs and
adults to participate in programs that we know now will
dramatically reduce teen pregnancy.
They're out there, ·they're
just not in every community. The hard truth is, too many of our
young people don't have the kind of discipline or love, guidance or
support that it takes to grow up into responsible adults. Church
groups and neighbors and parents all need to send a clear message
to all children, not just their own: We car_e about you, but you
have to take care of yourself.
Don't get pregnant or father a
child until you're ready to take responsibility. But if you do,
we'll help you as long as you are responsible.
(Applause.) And
you can't walk away from that responsibility.
If you do, we'll
make you assume it. (Applause.)
Let me say that, in addition to welfare, I have the same view
of the crime problem, and it's remarkably similar. Only if we take
responsibility for our own communities can we really achieve our
objective in crime •. We' 11 never thoroughly transform human nature,
but even if you have a Ph.D., you don't want to be a victim of a
crime; you don't want your children to be unsafe going to and from
school; you don't want to have to worry your heart out if your kids
drive to a city to see a play; you don't want to have any kind of
country other than one in which crime is an exception.
Someone said to me the other day, Mr. President, you talk
about all this all the time, but you will never eliminate crime.
I said, that's not my goal. My goal is to create an America so
that when people turn on the evening news and they see a report of
a serious crime, they are surprised and shocked, instead of yawning
about it. (Applause.)
Now, there are things that government can do.
There are
things that government can do. In 1994, we passed a crime bill and
a Brady Bill. The Brady Bill has already stopped 60, 000 felons and
fugitives with criminal records from getting handguns -- 60,000.
(Applause~)
We took 19 deadly assault weapons off the street and
not a single hunter in Pennsylvania or in my na·tive state of
Arkansas missed a deer season or a duck season or had to have a
different weapon. They didn't lose anything. (Applause.)
We said to repeat violent criminals, three strikes and you're
out.
We ... said. if__.you kilL law. enforcement officials, the death
penalty is there. (Applause.) But we also said what every police
officer in America knows, the best way to fight crime is to reach
young people before they turn to crime in the first place.
(Applause.)
Now, you all clap for that, but if you believe it, what it
means is that you cannot leave the work of making our streets safe
-more-
�..
9
to the police alone. citizens have the responsibility. Citizens
have a responsibility.
You can take advantage of oppor~~nities
provided in our education bills to keep schools open late so teens
have someplace to go besides the streets; or to launch community
drug courts to give nonviolent offenders a chance to get off drugs
before they end up in jail; or to make community policing work,
something that's making the rounds in Pennsylvania today •
•
our crime bill fulfilled a commitment I made to the American
people to put 100,000 new police officers on the street in
community policing. It's an old-fashioned idea, really. It means
put the police back on the street, in the neighborhood, working
with neighbors to spot criminals, shutting down crack houses,
stopping crime before it happens, getting to know children on the
street and encouraging them to stay away from crime. But community
policing only works by definition when there is a community for the
police to work with. (Applause.)
Now, whenever this happens crime comes down. Violent crimes
have dropped in this country for three years in a row now because
we're finally getting enough police out there on the street and
because people are working with them.
In Lancaster County, a
two-hour drive from here, our community police program put 12 new
officers into the downtown area -- listen to this -- they patrolled
on foot, bicycle and horseback, they worked with the community, the
crime dropped by 67 percent. Pretty soon they' 11 be surprised when
they hear a report of crime. (Applause.)
This can be done.
But I have to tell you, there's a big
hurdle up the road and it can't be solved without more citizen
help. Because in spite of the fact that the crime rate had dropped
for three years in a row, the violent crime rate by people under 18
is still going up. And any of you who are in education know that
there is a huge group of young people under 18, now coming into
grade school, coming up through our system of education -- a higher
percentage of them than any previous generation, born out of
wedlock, born without the guidance of two parents, born into
difficult family situations, out there having to raise themselves.
So even if you have a Ph.D., you've got to care about these
kids. They're your kids; they're coming home to your roost and
they wil-l- affect your-· country-·.and your children's future and what
kind of America we live in. And we cannot solve the problem of
rising crime among young people-- even with our antidrug strategy,
even with our antigang strategy, even with 100,000 more police -unless there are citizens who are willing to step into the gap in
those children's lives to teach them right from wrong, to give them
a good future to look forward to, to give them the character and
values to walk into that future, to make it possible for them to
-more-
�...
10
imagine that one day they might get a degree from a place like Penn
State.
You have to be willing to do that wherever you live.
(Applause.)
I will just give you one simple example.
There are 20,000
neighborhood crime watch groups in America-- 20,000. If 50 people
join each one of these groups we would have a citizen force of a
million new community activists to work with those 100,000 police
officers -- not just to catch criminals, but to keep kids away from
crime. Fifty people in every group, a million Americans reaching
out to children, stopping crimes, catching criminals.
If that
happened -- and no government program can make it happen -- if that
happened in community after community after community in the United
States, people would be surprised when they heard at night a news
report of a serious crime. And America would be a better place.
We'd be a lot closer to our shared vision of America in the 21st
century. (Applause.)
And that brings me to the last point I wish to make. We have
a lot of challenges as a people to rebuild the strength of our
communities and our national community. We're still too divided
over racial matters.
We're still too divided over religious
disputes. We still have other problems that are simply unmet that
can't be met by government. Helping children on welfare to move
off of welfare, helping communities to reduce the crime rate -these are not the only areas in which we desperately need more
citizen involvement to make America the place it ought to be.
Those of you have college degrees, those of you who may earn
a great deal of money will still find that in too many ways where
you live the bonds of community have been weakened. There are too
many places where people are working harder, moving more often,
spending less time with each other and more time exhausted in front
of the television. Even prosperous, happy neighborhoods often find
that not everybody knows their neighbors.
So I say to you: With this wonderful, precious commodity of
a fine education, I hope you will go out into your community and
find some way to give back some of what your country has given to
you. No matter what you do or how busy you are, there is always
a way to serve a larger community. The story of your generation
should be the story of we restore broken lives and shattered
promises through citizen servi.ce. ·
We're going to balance this budget over the next six years.
We're going to have a big fight about how to do it, as you know.
(Laughter.) B.ut don't let that obscure the fact --this deficit is
less than half of what it was four years ago.
And it's coming
down. Don't obscure the real fact.
(Applause.)
And that's very important because as we move to balance the budget,
-more-
�11
we can keep interest rates down and we can keep investment and
create jobs for the American people -- and get incomes rising
again, which has been the source of constant anxiety in ..plac~s like
Pennsylvania where people lost really good jobs and couldn't get
other jobs paying at the same or better wages. It's an important
thing to do.
I will do my best to protect our investments in education, in
the environment, in the quality and character of the Medicare and
Medicaid programs.
But make no mistake about it: As we shrink
government, until we balance the budget, there will be even more
reliance on citizen servants to meet the needs of the American
people because we can't shrink from our challenges on the grounds
that we're shrinking the deficit.
There's an emerging consensus in Washington, believe it or
not, across party lines that we ought to do more to help charities
and religious institutions and families and individuals to step in
where government can't anymore or where it shouldn't. I'll give
you just a few examples. Leaders in both parties, from. Senator Joe
Lieberman, a Democrat of Connecticut, to Senator Dan Coats, a
Republican from Indiana, have proposed reforms to encourage private
citizens to assume responsibilities that are not and cannot b
e fulfilled by government agencies alone. For example, making
sure every child has a loving home is a national priority. But
government doesn't raise children, only good parents can do that.
That's why earlier this week -- (applause) -- earlier this week I
urged Congress to enact one of these bipartisan proposals, a $5,000
tax credit to help families, working families, adopt children.
(Applause.)
And just a few hours ago, that proposal passed with an almost
unanimous vote in the House of Representatives.
It is going to
become the law of the land. (Applause.)
We created AmeriCorps, the national service program, in 1993,
so we could give our young people a chance to earn their way
through college by giving something back to their community and
their country.
Since that time AmeriCorps has given more than
40,000 young people all across this country a chance to serve, to
work with troubled teenagers, immunize children, help seniors who
don't have enough support, clean up the environment, do countless
.other things •. I have.met so . many .of .. these young people around the·
country who tell me that the experience literally changed their
lives, and they'll never spend another year of their life without
taking some time to rebuild their community. That is the kind of
spirit we need to create in all of.America.
I want to thank your former Senator, Harris Wofford, for
agreeing to head the AmeriCorps program and for ensuring its
-more-
�12
continuation.
(Applause.)
I want to thank our constructive critics, like Senator Charles
Grassley of Iowa, the Republican Senator from Iowa, wha-worked with
senator Wofford to strengthen the AmeriCorps program and to
preserve it.
Let me just suggest three other things that we could do to get
more young people involved. First, I've asked Congress to increase
funding for work-study programs for students so that we can have a
million students earning their way through college by the year
2000.
(Applause.)
Today I'd like to ask Penn State and every
other institution of higher education in the country to consider
using more of this money to promote service -- to put thousands of
college students to work in community service.
If it's good for
students to earn money by putting books back in library shelves or
working in the Dean's Office, surely it makes sense for them to
earn money helping teen mothers handle their responsibilities,
helping older people get around, helping young people to look to a
brighter future.
(Applause.)
Second, I challenge every high school in America to mak~
service a part of its basic ethic. Every high school student who
can do so should do some community service.
There are some
schools, both public and private, that require community service as
a part of their curriculum. I say, good for them. Commitment to
community should be an ethic we learn as possible so we carry it
throughout our lives~
(Applause.)
And third, I challenge every community to help those high
school students answer the call of service. Today I'm prepared to
make an offer and challenge any school district or civic
organization in the country to match it: If you will raise $500 to
reward a high school student who has done significant work to help
your community, the federal government will match your $500 and
help that student go on to college.
(Applause.) That would cost
~s, by the way, about $10 million if every high school in the
country did it.
It would be the best $10 million we ever spent.
We would get hundreds of millions of dollars -- of improved quality
of life and service to people as a result of it.
(Applause.)
This fall I'll announce the winners of a nationwide
competition to . _identify __schools ...that have done the best job in-encouraging this kind of service. students at those schools will
become National Service Scholars. A year from now I want it to be
even bigger. I want every principal in America to be able to stand
up before a g~aduating class and announce the name of a National
Service Scholar. We should make service to the community a part of
every high school in America and a part of life of every dedicated
citizen in the United States.
(Applause.)
-more-
�13
So, my fellow Americans, in spite of all we have to do to
create more opportunity, we also must find a way to urge,··cajole,
plead, generate, demand more responsibility for ourselves, our
families, our communities and our country.
This summer in Atlanta we will celebrate the centennial of the
Modern Olympics. It's a great honor to host those Olympics in the
United States. But I ask you to think when you see these young
people come out about more than medals and who will win and lose.
The real meaning of the Olympics is what miracles happen to people
when they make a deep and profound commitment to take personal
responsibility for just becoming the best that they can be, and
when they're willing to work with teammates to make their common
endeavors even greater.
That is the great strength of America.
(Applause.)
You know, the president mentioned earlier that -- or maybe it
was the chairman of your board -- about Pennsylvania's role in
starting this country. And I want you to think about this as I
close. our founding fathers, who did so much of their work right
here in Pennsylvania, would not be surprised that in this new era,
with all of its possibilities, there are still a lot of tough
problems. They were very smart. They knew there would never be a
perfect problem-free time. They wouldn't be surprised at all. But
they would be very surprised and bitterly disappointed if we were
to give into pessimism about these problems, deny their existence
and walk away from them.
They knew -- you can read it in the
Federalist Papers, you can read it in the founding documents -they knew that freedom requires responsibility and service for
personal prosperity and for the common good.
You graduates have been blessed with the richest educational
experience the world can offer. As Americans, you've been blessed
to inherit the greatest country on Earth. Now you have to honor
that debt by asking yourselves, what do I ~ant my country to be
like in the 21st century and what am I prepared to do to make it a
reality?
I will do all I can to give you the opportunities to make the
most of your lives, but you must do all you can to assume
responsibility for yourselves, your families and your communities.
If you_.do__ that,. I _believe ... your life. will be a lot happier and.
richer, and you will surely make the 21st century America's
greatest days.
Thank you.
END
God bless you, and God bless America.
3:25 P.M. EDT
(Applause.)
�r.c./C.:
U.S. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
WASHINGTON,
D.C. 20416
May 6, 1996
OFFICE OF' THE ACIMINIST"'A'tOR
MEMORANDUM FOR DON BAER
Assistant to the President
FROM:
Jonathan Kaplan
Special Assistant
Wendy Goldberg
Press Secretary
RE:
One-Paragraph Summary of Phil Lader
Commencement Address Message
Per your request at the meeting on Friday regarding
commencement addresses, the following is a one-paragraph summary
of SBA's commencement themes.
One of the seven challenges issued to the American people by
President Clinton in his State of the Union address is the
challenge on economic security. We must provide new
security for the American family in the new economy. At the
Small Business Administration, we are committed to meeting
this challenge by increasing access to capital for small
businesses and by improving and expanding education,
training, and counseling for small business owners across
the country.
'
I
�May 6, 1996
MEMORANDUM FOR DON BAER
HIGGINS~J1
FROM:
KITTY
RE:
COMMENCEMENT SPEECHES
Attached are the speech themes which will be used at commencements in the coming weeks.
We have received information from the following agencies: Treasury, Justice, Interior, SSA,
Labor, VA, HHS, UN, Education and HUD. I will forward the remaining departments
shortly.
�Ill 001
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
•
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20220
May 3, 1996
MEMO~UMFORDONB~
KI'ITY HIGGINS
FROM:
CALVIN MITCHELL ill '
SUBJECT:
Commencement Addresses
Currently, Secretary Rubin is scheduled to deliver commencement addresses at Columbia
University (Class Day, May 14) and Yeshiva University (May 22). Below is a brief
description of his May 14 address to Columbia University. We have not decided on the
topic for the Yeshiva University address,
Secretary Rubin will discourse on the role of government in maintaining the social fabric in
the nation at a time of debate on the scope of the government's role in society and a time of
enormous change in the economic structure of the nation. He will give examples of how the
Clinton Administration's economic policy makes a difference and how government can and is
changing (reinvention). He will challenge the graduates to participate, through direct service
. in government, volunteerism, backing candidates they believe in, speaking out and
re-establishing respect for government.
�_________ -·
---·-•• .... •
'""'
u
uu'
lJUL-t2U24562363
U•£tlllll'
U.S.DeparbnenlofLabor
;# 21 2
Chief m Starr to thtl
Secrotary of Labor
Washington, n.c. 20210
May 3, 1996
MEMORANDUM POR KITIY
lGGINS
JA~.,J.r
r~- f
FROM: .
VINCB TRIVEU.I
RE:
Commencement Addre~
As of this moment, Secretary Reich does not haw: a commencement addreas
on his schedule. However, that may change. In order to be as helpful as ~te
with Don Bael's request, here Is a brief synopsis of the Secretary's message for the
amunencement season:
The overall economy is humming along, with wtcmployment down and Job
growth continuing at a healthy pace. Now that President Clinton has brought the
economy bade.• we are setting our sights on the next challenge - restoring wage
growth and making the Americtln dream of opportunity a reality for all who are
willing to work for it. How do we do it? By working together -- business.
government. labor, the academic community - to ensure that working Americans
can get the skills they
to make the transition from the old economy to the new.
need
In an era of economic dynamism, when workins Americans are expected to clumge
jobs more frequently, we must work to ease thar transition from job to job by
maklng health care and pensions more portable. And we must increase the
mlnlmum wage :so that America's Jowest·pa1d workers have a chance to pull
themselves out of poverty.
Additionally, .here is the commencement achedule for sub-cabinet off"tdals
at the Department of Labor:
May 16
Pittsburgh Community College TBD (Bernie Anderson. Assistant
Pittsburgh. PA
Secretary for Employment Standards)
June 15
Stanford University/Chicant>
Graduation Committee
Ceremony
Maria Echaveste, Administrator,
Wage and Hour Division
June 19
Empire State College
New York. NY
Maria Echaveste, Administrator,
Wage and Hour Division
TBD
Ranken Technical College
St. Louis, MO
TBD
mm Barnicle. Asst. Secretary
Employment and Training)
�Office of Public Affaire
~ Department of
~Veterans Affairs
Dste
Washington, D.C. 20420
Telefax Transmission
Office of the Secr~tary
May 3, 1996
To: Ann McGuire
Fax# 456-6704
From: John Hanson, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Intergovernmental Affairs
Phone:
Subject:
(202)273-5760
VA Approach to Spring
•gs Commencement speeches
VA Secretary Jesse Brown•s scheduled commencement speeches
(correctly listed In your consolidated schedule) are to historically black
colleges and universities (HBCUs). He will comment on the Importance of
HBCUs, and note the Admlnlstration•s outstanding record In support of
them. In an earlier drafting session the SecretarY, had already determined
that he would focus on •opportunities, responsibilities, and communltyu -the general themes outlined at the May 2 meeting. These will be discussed
at some length, with references to progress the Administration has made in
the economy, protecting the environment, fighting crime and supporting
.education. The Secretary will observe that progress in his own area -paying the nation's debt to veterans -- reflects the· kind of solid progress -and fulfillment of promise -- seen throughout government.
.
/
�lU
(l
.
~ll~OfU~U
t'UUL/UUZ
DIP4RTMENT Of HEALTH a. HUMAN SERVICES
.....
,.,.,.,,.
Office of 1h8 Secre~ary
Washington. D.C. 20201
MBMORANDUM
To:
From:
Subject:
H-1-f-S
Anne McGuire
Laura Schiller, HHS
secreeary Shalala's Commencement Addresses
Date:
5/3/96
She has six commencements ~- one of which (Florida A&M)
she already gave on April 2?. It was a speech that
Secretary Brown was supposed to do -- and so she paid
tribute to him and tried to impart the challenges she
thought he would have posed (family, international,
economic, community).
In her other commencements, overall she will talk about
the distance we have traveled together (economic,
health and international triumphs) and the mountains we
have left ~o climb (too many teenagers having babies,
too many Americans who still face barriers to good
jobs, good health, good educa~ion). She will make the
point that the debate going on in Washington is not
only about our nation's character -- it's about the
graduatAS' future (Dtudcnt loans, health care,
environment, etc). She will make it clear that we're
not talking about big government, we're talking about
''shared government, '' that we can meet these challenges
together, but that the opportunities and
responsibilities lie in their h~nds.
Within this general framework, I think that Mt. Holyoke
will have more of c women's focu.~:~ to ic and that the
Medical College of Georgia will have more of a health
focus.
I can get you more specifics next week.
Thank you.
�I
u
I
I
--
--
I
1-1 I
.. -
•
_,
v..,v11
na 1..,11
""'""
1
nn
11Vo
c:.uc:.
AMBASSADOa ALBRIGHT -- COMMENCEMENT SPEECHES
Ambassador Albright is scheduled to deliver commencement
addresses at B:andeis University (~y 19) and the Johns Hopkins
School of Advanced International Studies (May 22) . Other
possibilities remain. Her remarks will incl~de a discussion of
the importance of American leaderDhip a~ound the world, with
~eference to the President's goal of seein~ "our country
continue to be the wo:r:ld's stl:'onqest fo:r:ce for peace and
freedom and prospe:r:ity and secu:ity."
1 ""u
I i.li.l l
•• uc..
�11n1
U\..1
_,.._,
'-'---....,.,
11
._,
1---
...,.,
_ _ _ ,.,._,,,,~.
UNITED S1"ATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
OFFrCE OF THE SECRETARY
May 6, 1996
MEMORANDUM TO CABINET AFFAIRS
' fl
J._,.b-.A.....-
FROM
Kathryn S. Kahler \~
Communications Director
SUBJECT
Commencement Speeches
Secretary Riley is scheduled to deliver three commencement speeches. The first speech is at
Midlands Technical College in Columbia, South Carolina on Friday the lOth. The second at
Missouri State University on the 11th in Cape Gireadeau, Missouri. The Secretary will give his
third and final conunencement speech on June 2, at Governors State University in Chicago,
Imnois
Midlands Technical College:
Both the President and the Secretary have noted the increasing importance of community and
techniaJ c:oDeges in our nation's educational sy111em. The President haaa caUecl the community
college movement one of the most important developments in American education in the last
decades. In his speech at Midlands, Secretary Riley will pick up many of these themes and draw
the link between education, economic opportunity, and community renewal in the Information
Age. He will place a strong emphasis on life-long learning and discuss Administration initiatives
to expand access to post secondary learning and higher education .
•
Missouri State U.n.iversity:
The Secretary will continue his emphasis on how education for all Americans can help to
overcome the economic insecurity that so many Amerioans feel. and place a strons emphasis on
the idea that the advance of education is essential to renewing the "optimism" that has been so
central to the American spirit. In this speech, he will make a specific reference the President's
middle class college tuition tax deduction proposal. In addition, he will suggest that the values
that the students \earn at the university are .central to rebuilding community and will calJ on the
university community to "raise its voice" and participate in the national dialogue about America's
future.
Governors State University:
This university has a much older student oopulation. the avera1.1e ue is 34. and the maioritv of
the students are women. The Secretary will continue his cmphuis on education as the economic
600 INDUE:IIIDD!Cii: 1\VJi;, $.W. W.I\SHJIIIOTON. D.C. 303Cia
Our mission 1.s
to ei'!Burl!l equral czeceSB to education and to promDte eduC4tloMI Ucellenet throughout the Nation.
�growth engine for our society and a way to renew the "optimism" that is central to the American
Dream. He will endorse the commitment that the univendty has made toward "life Jgng
learning", urge support for the President's middle class tax cut, and thank the University for
participating in the Administration's direct lending program.
For more information on the schools, see attached note.
If you nave additional questions or need more detail, please give me a call at 401-3026.
�..
-
.
.-··· ~.:."'
-
--
--•
• •
._,
•
.......... .__
.._...
..JL..'--J'~
I
M~
I
P.3/5
,(
?<
May 2, 1996
:MEMORANDUM
TO:
Kay Kahler·
Terry Peterson
Rick Miller
Frank HoJleman
FROM:
Regan Burke
CC:
Sandy Rinck
John Funderburk
RB:
Commencement Speeches
The Secretary has accepted invitations to speak at three commencements. They are all public
institutions and are all distinctly different. Perhaps the following information will help to answer
some of the questions about why the Secretary is going to these particular places of higher
learning.
Friday, May 10
Midland• Technical CoUege, Columbia, SC
Midlands is a 2-year community college, the 3rd largest college in South Carolina with 28,000
students in Continuing Education. 94% of students live and work in the area. Students average
age is 28 and 59% are women. Diploma programs include Air Conditioning/Refrigeration
Mechanics, Dental Assisting, Practical Nursing, Pharmacy Technician and Surgical Technology.
Midlands is a.n excellent example of the Administration's focus on school-to-work and lifelong
learning. It is not a direct lending institution.
Saturday, May 11
Southeast Missouri State University, Cape Girardeau, MO
A comprehensive 4-year regional university in the "Heartland''. President Bill Atchley is an old
friend ofthe Secretary's. He used to be the president of Clemson University in South Carolina.
The university is awarding its first honorary doctorate in its 123 years to the school's oldest living
alumnus and the nation's oldest living attorney (age 104). Southeast has more than 100 academic
programs, five .wollegea and two schools. Students come from all SO states and 48 foreign
countries. There are eight residence halls. It is not a direct student lending institution.
Sunday,Junel,1996
Governor's State Univenity, Park Forest~ n..
Governor's State is designed to serve an adult student population with a variety of instructional
�-•
_.·
.•
-~
~-- """"'- r r vr r .1.\... 1:.. ur
;:>t..~Kt..l HKY
P.4/5
" ,p
delivery systems. It is an upper division university serving 3rd and 4th year and graduate students.
The average student age is 32. Most .students commute to campus, work and have families.
Female.students constitute 68% of the population and 44% of all students receive financial aid.
53% are evening students and 69% are transfers from community colleges. Governor's State is
an institution dedicated to lifelong learning, one of Secretary Riley's pet issues. It is a Sth year
direct lending institution.
�..
• a public univcrah:y founded In l9tS9;
·
• pa.n: of rhe Illlnoi• Boa.rcl of Govemal'll Univenitial)'lmm which abo induds Chiaqpp Srar.c Univenll'F,
Eanern Jllinoi• \Jniversil)'. Norcheurern Illinois Univenily, 111d Wsrem JUinoia tfniYani&y;
• a university which hau.cs four callcpu dae College of Am ancl Scicnccr, dto ~ ofluainca and
l'ublicAdminisrration, rho CoJJ~c afF.duc:adon, and rho CaUc:p of Haith Profi:Uiou;
a universiry wflich ofTen bachelor 1 degrees in 17 unde~~raduare majon and
depees in 18
major~, and aJ.o offi:tt a •pecial UberaJ ans degr= coordinated duoqh che Boa.rcl. of G.nocrnon;
• a university with an annull.l budget of marc dian $25 million.
Ac:acl.elllic: Calendar- ducc IS-week crimcmrm t.ll, wlnwr, and spring/summer.
Enrollmeni-COGU hc:adQDunt en&ollmenr vatl• from trimaur to trimeater. moar rcccnr caWu 8how
5.708 penansanrollcd. of whom 'l,m (48.7'MI) are underpacluatc 1tudcnrs and l.9.3J CSJ.J'MI)
are puare srudents; other 1mtisti" induder
Day Jtudetus on c:unpUI ..................................... .30.8%
E.vcningstudenrr on c::a1DpU1 ......................- ....... S4.1,. c~-OfF~pua acudeaa ......................-................... JS.J%
:Female sruciena ........- ....................- ................... ti5.159fiC.~:-----
P.S/5
nw•'•
Male •~den11 ..........................................•........... 34.4,..
Mlnaricy a~:uciencs ........................................,••.••. 2'1.4"
A~ ap of acudencs ......................................... J4..a
Non resicfcnr aliens ar undcdarecl ......................... 6.2%
Pac:uJ.cy ra •mcienr ra1ia .......................................... 1:17
T11idon-n-campw tuition race~ for Winob resident• are subjecr ro cb111p; ar the dme of publication
ofthia facr card, culrion costs per rrimaa:r am
Undergraduare Full-Time ............................. ;....... S951
Parr-Tir11e .................................,.......•.••..., S75J.2S/hr.
Gracluarc Full-nmo ........................:.................. SI.002
Pan-Time ..••..•..•.•..•.••.....•. ,...,................... SIJ.501hr.
fiC\Ill)'-dU: fawlcy inclucles 148 person~o 75 perccnr of •ham .hold che doctorare depic.
FinAAci:d Aid-kderal, acare, and inaricuriona! aid is available £or Governon Smre University snadcnn;
4~
percent ofcgngnu!na !fudencs r~:FE'i¥e aid u foUoMr
Graau ..................,..•..........................,................... 4696
~na ...................................................................... .3796
WorlclsNriy jaba ..................................................... 17%
Ccncor for llcccnded l.arnia&and Commwlicarion Sei'Yi•
" Mcclia-Butcl lnscruction, wed by mare rhan .z.400 lt&&dencs per year (roltWisian-bued and
carrupondencel cour•e~). Telcdaa fatrnar c:apruru clusroorn intencrion an Yideacapc.
• Board of Gcmsmon B.A. Dcf.i!e Prognm, a unique program clesisned to metn: tha needs of
rna\urc ad.Uu wirh job and family commicmentL l'topam uiCI&OI the adulr 1Ndenr'• prior latnlng
and slwa c:m:lit /Dr Jife apericnca.
• GS\J Lccnsion Ceamrs, locarcd d~;~wiUO\IIIn in rhe Thompson Cenrcr, in Orland Park and
Floamaor, provide couna, workshops, ancl omcr services.
• Ce,.fcrenoe•IW•rlaJaop~ and Weelrcncl CaUap. ofFer a wide wriety of credit and
noncrcdir llVenrs ar G$1.1 and orhet lacarions.
The Govemors Scam Ulliwnity Founclarion 1111d the GGYemon Scace Uniwnity A.IWIULi Auecillionatfcr a variery of&'Cftolar.rhipr ra matrlculadng and conrinu.ingsrud.enu. bom pduare and undezpduarc.
lllfarmalion Scrvicu-a University Library tlw is nace·of·dJe-art, wirh access to marc than ZD miUlon
items in IUinol.s1 a cornpu,cr lab widt more dtan I 00 arudenc scarians; and a campus-wide, disJ~
compurer nerwork. Ge.ipeci far the need. ohU c:ampus u.cen.
larDing Assiscaace Center-tho amccr ofFers coune-relarecl rutorins and rurorid a.sslmuace in
rnarhemaria, renarch anci writing techniques. nudy merhoda, and tesc-rakins.
Atzreclitarion,_c;overnorl Scare University is .a:redited u follows:
First accr=ted by the Non:h Centra! Alsog.rion of CoUcsn and Univenitle~ in J975, s=rcdication
...,.. renewed for an aacUriana1 cen ysrs in 1989·90.
GSt1 ofFers prapurn apprcwed by the Illinois Srara Soard. of Echacauan for ft&Chcr cerd.ftaadan Ln
the: arcu of clemcncary c:ducation, early childhood education, biology, chcmiacry, !nglilh, muic,
general administration, special edllCicion, school counseling, school psycbolal)', and specc:b and
fanBIJIJe impaired. The COIIftiCiing ,l'aflnull ls, iurdlcr, ar:credired by me Cauncil fur Uta Accredita•
cion af Counselor .Education and RtilAC:d Programs.
The undergraduate and graduare Nuning majors are approved by rhe Illinois Dcpamncnr of
Rsgirrrarion and Education and ac:credhocl by the NadonaJ League for Nursing.
The undc11raduatc Haith Adminl•rrarion maJor hu lUll memberallip .swus In the Aaociarion of
Y~iveralj ProArams in Hmlrh Aclministntion. The srsduate Hale& Adminiluadon prognm is
.,""edited by
t~e Accracllci"!J Cammlulan an tlucaJ~n far ~eJ~ ~e~eil AAMiKillflliBR..
The graduate Communicarion Disorders ~~j~r ls accredited in speech-l~guage ~un~IO(Y by .rhc
American Specch-Lanp.agc:·Hearlng AMoctatlOn. Ir also meets
3pttdl·lans~o~•sc p•shal"&' in the Stare of IUinDb.
me requlrcmena for licensure Ill
I
•
Tho Bs~elor of Social Work (B.S.W.) program nill been accredited by the Council on Soa~
Work Educ:~rian.
cSIII&DPI'14091UFI.,I\H4
~:
�-y-~u~
U.LU
UriU.
TO:
Anne McGuire
FR:
Bert Brandenburg
Myron Marlin
Public Affairs
Department of Justige
RB:
commencement Addresses
DA:
May 3, 1996
CUP...,.&""
..ra..--. .. -,. .. n..,
--..-.-
-·-••-.-•
••• • •·-•"'"-
The Attorney General will be delivering six commencement
addresses in the next month. CUrrently we plan to include in
each speech the message that although there are many difficult
challenges ahead, we should be filled with hope and optimism. In
addition, the speeches will likely inglude the following themes,
although this is still being decided:
p. of Sguth Carglina (5/3)
Her speech focussed on the need to confront cynicism and
extremism that exists in society. She called upon the
graduates to oppose such thinking with hope, and it will
challenge them to engage in public service.
x.c. Law
U. of Missouri at
(5/10)
In addition to citing the need to confront extremism,
cynicism and defeatism, this address will also desgribe the
majesty of the law -- the idea that one case can make such a
difference.
Qhio State University Law (5/12)
In addition to citing the need to confront extremism,
cynicism, and defeatism, this address will focus on the
victims of crime, and a call to turn adversity to hope.
U. California at Dayis Law (5/18)
In addition to talking about the themes of hope and
optimism, this address will discuss the benefits of
diversity in a society with so ~uch to offer.
Hilbert College
(5/19)
In addition to citing the need for hope and calling upon
others to get involved in public service, this address will
discuss the need to balance one's career with their family.
New Englapd (5/20)
�002
Pending.
BYtqers university (S/23)
This speech will discuss the int•rnational scope of law
enforcement in the 21st Century -- and the new challenges it
~rings •
.................._______________________
�~··C't..
~
SOCIAL SECURITY
.
DA'l'E:
May 3, 1996
'1'0:
Ms. Kitty Higgins
Assistant to the President and
Secretary to the Cabinet
FROM:
SOBJEC'l':
SSff
Joan Wainwright~~
Deputy Commissi
r
for Communica 'ons
Commencement Speeches
As requested,
I am providing a paragraph that describes how
Commissioner Chater will incorporate the themes discussed at
yesterday's meeting into her commencement addresses.
During her remarks, the Commissioner will explain the principles
and underlying philosophy of the Social Security program. She
will tie in the concept of family values by outlining the ways in
which Social Security helps to strengthen families and keep them
together. Social Security provides financial support to families
when a working parent becomes disabled or dies. In addition,
Social Security allows older Americans to live independently and
with dignity, while relieving their families of the financial
burden of caring for them.
If you would like additional information, please call me at (410)
965-1720. Thank you.
�uu.a.
A
V\ v1
,11/1 c._ b
w:,. 't'
"'"'m.M&'"'',..,"'"" ...... - .. ,
o....-
/2.. 6! f'-. "'" 7 0
'S I, f".,_,
4-S C:,-C7cJ'f
!Uo
7/1-C-fA(,-J(:;,
Pouv7J
Ycr FcNe.
Q6..-J&
S6c . gf,~fSt71 ro~M0-UCcMEA"
tN JuJJf.
sPE-E-CH c:.. rk.E-t:. ,... ' C--)' LL (f ~- If /Iff Fl.) c)~
t47714cf~0
I
I '6 ro
TI"'"IE-
�---
--- --"""
.......... ""
UU1
Ia! 002
~UMMUNl~ATlON
Page 1
REMARKS OF INTERIOR SECRETARY BRUCE BABBITT
Press Club Address, Dec. 13, 1995, 3 p.m.
''The GOP's environmental onslaught Is being defeated, giving rise to a new
movement called American Restoration. We shall empower communities to
restore every single watershed in America."
•
•
*
On Earth Day, 1995, I set out on a journey, a series of eleven Natural Heritage
Tours all across the country. I ceme here today to report what I learned about the
commitment of Americans to their surrounding landscape, and the importance of our
laws which heal and protect it.
Eight months ago today, I left Washington because the newly elected
Republican Congress had just assumed that the 1994 elections gave them a mandate
~
to dismantle that framework.
I lett because the House leadership told the Wall Street Journal that DDT was
"not harmful," that "it should not have been banned" because the ban "drove up the
cost of doing business."
I left because a new Congresswoman opposed our reintroduction of wolves into
Yellowstone National Park and asked me "Why don't you just open it up to hunting
instead?"
·
I left because the House attached 17 riders -legislative Post-Its-- to the EPA's
budget that would, among other things, restrict regulation. of lead in the air, weaken
standards that keep radon and arsenic out of tap water, and exempt industrial plants
from water-pollution controls.
I left because the Alaska delegation had introduced a bill to drill the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge.
I stayed on the road because I read in the Penver Post, that the Chairman of the
House Subcommittee on Public Lands "estimated that his committee may have to close
more than 100 of the Park Service's 369 units."
I read that another Congressman sponsored legislation to abolish the newly
created Mojave National Preserve in. California.
I stayed out there because the Senate passed a moratorium on listing
�1(&1 UUiJ
:
r
:
:
:
endangered species.
I stayed out there because the House passed a "Clean Water'' bill that repeals
stormwater treatment, repeals nonpoint pollution controls, and defines 70 percent of all
wetlands as nonexistent.
I left because all these changes were about to happen, with no discussion, no
debate, and working Americans were not informed of the sweeping changes that would
alter their communities and diminish the futures of their children.
Natural Heritage Tours
The Natural Heritage Tours brought me through 67 cities, over some 100 days,
talking one-on-one with literally hundreds of Americans, some of whom have gathered
with me here today.
With these Americans, I rafted down the James River that runs through
Richmond, Virginia. I rowed with them down the Little Miami River through Cincinnati,
Ohio; across the estuaries of San Francisco Bay. Together we boated the Blackstone
River through New England; the St. Johns River through Jacksonville, Florida, the
Grand River of Michigan, and Casco Bay, Maine.
We set free a bald eagle at Cape Canaveral, released a peregrine falcon over
Wall Street, and unleashed wolves into Yellowstone for the first time in 70 years.
I put my questions to teachers, fishermen, property owners, businesses leaders,
preachers, doctors, biologists, mayors, and 4th graders.
Not one of them told me that our conservation laws should be weakened. And
none of them ever told me that we have too many National Parks.
Instead, from waterfront to waterfront, this is what they told me, and this is what I
saw:
Helen Fenske of the Great Swamp watershed told me it was not enough to stop
airports and developers from degrading their neighborhoods around their watershed;
conservation laws should be expanded to protect their entire swamp, their wetlands,
nourishing and revitalizing the place they live.
In a Philadelphia Children's Hospital I met Jaclyn Buckley, once a victim of
childhood leukemia, a disease which killed one of my best friends back in Arizona. But
since then, a once rare plant like those protected by the Endangered Species Act
yielded a cure that will keep her smiling into old age.
Off New Jersey's shore town of Belmar, New York industry routinely dumped its
�-
---
----
I .
Page3
sludge, waste, and infected syringes in the sea. A father living a block from the beach
said he was forced to build a swimming pool for his children, because they came home
sick every time they swam in the Atlantic. But through our conservation laws they
stopped the dumping until striped bass, whales, and even parrot fish returned to the
Atlantic coastline.
Outside Pittsburgh, I joined the Chartiers Valley High biology class, hard at work
on Scrubgrass Run. Scrubgrass Run cascades through the school grounds before
flowing into the Ohio, and when they began it was orange, toxic, and lifeless from acid
mine drainage. Under the practical science and guidance of federal surface mine
reclamation laws, however, the students are resurrecting that creek, breathing new life
into it with the hope that fish will once again swim in its waters.
In the Colorado Rockies, near the Continental Divide, the waters once teemed
with a native fish called the greenback cutthroat trout. Decades of mine waste, dams,
exotic trout and overfishing left it nearly extlnd. But a group of anglers, foresters,
biologists and businessmen all united through our conservation laws to clean up
streams, until the greenback retumed with a vengeance; splashing off the endangered
list near recovery, the new state fish, a symbol of national pride.
In the suburbs outside Seattle I went to Piper Creek, where families joined their
neighbors to restore the suburban stream that runs past their houses and schools.
They came together to revegetate the river banks, to create the conditions in which
they could bring back anadromous fish, hatching and planting fry each fall until native
salmon returned to their local landscape.
In Cleveland, 26 years after the Cuyahoga River caught fire, fireboat captain
Wayne Bratton gave me a tour up to the point of ignition. On that route, I saw blue
herons, sportfishing boats tied to new marinas, upscale riverwalk cafes sprouting up by
abandoned steel mills, all within sight of I.M. Pei's new Rock 'n Roll Hall of Fame. What
was once our symbol of national shame is now our symbol of hope and pride.
Everywhere I looked I saw children and old people on the river banks; people
who had come back to the waterfronts to eat, work, and play. Rivers and bays that had
been healed, people Who had been reconnected to the distinctive features of the
places they lived, communities that are restored.
I saw people celebrating how the Clean Water Act has been the most successful
urban renewal law in American history.
A Sleeping Giant Awoke
But when Americans teamed that their hard won gains might be taken away, at
that very moment, by politicians in Washington, they awoke like a sleeping giant.
�Ill 005
:
Mh
They awoke, and got on the phone, and wrote letters to the editor, to their
Congressmen, and soon the pressure began to build. Soon there were stories In the
press about a public backlash against the Republican agenda. Suddenly reporters
were writing about the rise of a cadre of "green" and "moderate'' Republicans. And by
last month there were stories about how Americans have handed the Republican
agenda an embarrassing string of defeats:
After we spoke out with people in Fort Meyers, Miami, Pensacola, and Fort
Lauderdale about laws protecting the beautiful white sand beaches of Florida,
Congress heard us, and dropped its bill to allow offshore oil drilling there.
After Americans paddled through the 6th District of Georgia, down Atlanta's
Chatahoochie River NRA, Congress heard us, and withdrew a bill to form a parks
closure commission.
That bill was then resurrected as a budget rider, but days later, after we
gathered history students and Civil War buffs in front of the Appomattox Courthouse,
Congress surrendered to us on that rider as well.
After we met with hundreds of BASS anglers to discuss a bill to give away public
land and lock out access for hunters and fishermen, that bill's co-sponsor changed his
mind to say even ~wouldn't vote for it.
And after we gathered at Sagamore Hill with the descendants of Teddy
Roosevelt to hear them talk about how the root of conservative Is "to conserve,"
moderate Republicans broke ranks to erase those 17 EPA riders.
Americans have defeated so called ''takings" referenda in Arizona and
Washington state, Americans have spoken out two-to-one against drilling in the Arctic,
against mining giveaways, and In favor of wolf reintroduction. Several weeks ago, their
agenda a shambles, the Republican House leadership admitted: "We mishandled the
environment all spring and summer."
The Environment is Back
That's quite a confession. Thanks to the people in this room and people like
them all across the country, Americans are now winning against the lobbyists.
The conservation laws are working because the American people are making
them work. They will stay strong and stay in place because people are insisting on it.
Congress will no longer be able to gut the Clean Water Ad because it would be
political suicide for those who would do so.
Congressmen will not vote to close our National Parks unless they are casting
Page4
�l
::
-
---
---
Ia) 006
---
-
Db
the last vote of their final term.
Congress will no longer gut the Endangered Species Act because no politician
wants to run on a platform that says the wisdom of elected officials outweighs the
wisdom of our Creator.
And while in the 1994 election campaigns the environment was not an issue, I
can assure you, by November 1996, in each county, state, Congressional, and in the
Presidential election, the environment will be right at the core of every single debate.
In my travels I have teamed a good many things. I have heard the message
people are sending to Congress: Our framework of environmental laws is working and
is making our country greater and more beautiful for us and for our children in the next
century.
*
*
...
We Can Do Better
But In the course of my·travels I saw something else that was entirely new.
I discovered the stirring of a third generation of environmental activism, not
political activism directed at Washington, but hands-on work directed at their own
communities, an activism focused at reclaiming their known heritage, their local
landscapes, their sense of place which reminds them where they are and, therefore,
:tmg they are.
Running through this activism, rising above their collective anger over the threat
to their hard won gains, I heard a voice, a quiet voice, but one that carried a message
that was vigorous, and insistent, and backed up by the work of its hands; it was the
voice of Americans rooted to their land.
It quietly announced: 'We can do better.''
It asserted: "We can use these laws. We can do more than just stop our waters
and our soils from declining. We can apply these laws to make America's landscapes
cleaner, healthier, richer, more independent."
As America's communities used our laws to restore their waters, those waters. In
turn, have begun to restore America's communities.
And I saw that the current generation of Americans was not just approaching, but
was already crossing the threshold into an entirely new era, literally a third great
environmental movement.
The Restoration Movement
�..
r
:
The first era was the Conservation movement of Teddy Roosevelt, which created
America's great parks, wildlife refuges, and national forests. It lay the .legal foundation.
It saw America as a patchwork of places and resources either to be protected or to be
exploited.
The second generation, of Rachel Carson, saw our air and waters and soils
being polluted by modern industrial society and helped pass legislation that brought us
clear water and clean air.
Out of that, the current generation is awakening to a new and larger vision - to
the possibilities that we can use our laws not just to stop decline, but to reverse it; not
just to preserve the isolated parts, but to protect and reconnect whole landscapes and
entire watersheds; not just to fsnce off the local greenway or trickling neighborhood
stream, but to unite them with the great National Parks and the wide oceanbound
rivers.
What we have begun in this generation across the landscape opens a new
chapter. An entirely new era of conservation called American Restoration.
What do I mean by American Restoration?
Let me put it this way. How many of you have restored one of your grandparent's
rocking chairs? An antique table? How many of your sons and daughters have restored
an old Ford pickup?
The restoration work involves scraping, and varnishing, reinforcing, and tuning.
It's not just cosmetic, involving paint or stain, but goes past the surface, involving
something deeper - bringing out something's essence, structure, and inner nature.
It's hard work. Back breaking work. But we're willing to do it because the process
feels good to our hands and our spirits; it feels good to sit in, to eat on, to drive. It also
looks good, and gives us an aesthetic pleasure when we see it in our living rooms or
driveways. Most of all, it is something we can do with our spouse, our sons and
daughters, and become a stronger and prouder family as a result of our work.
But when we restore that dilapidated, rotting, and leaning picket fence in our
back yard, we can no longer do the work by ourselves. We must choose a time with our
neighbor, bringing out hammers and nails, buying fresh wood from the lumberyard,
splitting the costs, the labor, and the time. We may have been strangers before this
process began. But after the mending and repair is complete, we share a sense of
pride each time we go to the fence, and realize that we have become stronger friends,
better neighbors, for the partnership we have forged.
Now, what I have seen goes beyond our immediate home or neighbors to involve
Page6
�lf&)U
[
Page7f
the entire community.
For years the elders of that community -- like Helen Fenske, Florence LaRivere,
Marjory Stoneman Douglas, or the father near the ocean in Belmar, New Jersey - all
watched as their open spaces filled up, as their local stream dried up or was polluted,
as fewer birds and fish and mammals lived in their watershed.
This is a democracy, however, and through the laws that they voted for, these
Americans and their children stopped the loss. They set aside park and public open
spaces; they protected the local lakes and streams nearby; they worked for the survival
of the native creatures they grew up with. They used federal laws to backstop the
process and give power to their efforts.
As I went out there I saw-Americans crossing the threshold from Prevention into
watershed Restoration. They are building upon the current framework of laws, giving
form and content to abstract, clumsily worded codes, getting results beyond the
expectations of the legislators who wrote our laws back in the 1970s.
Our federal laws do not require that communities restore their local waters, but
in order to restore their local waters those communities require our laws.
When I gather with them, Americans say to me: We have done this, and we are
proud of what we have done. But we can do more. We have stopped the decline of our
river, the erosion o~ our soil, the disappearance of our open land, but we can go further.
We can, and will, bring life out of death, we can roll up our sleeves and continue the
task of cleaning it up, bringing back native fish, reconnecting the entire landscape,
reclaiming our heritage.
Every Watershed in America
When they say this to me, I answer that this Administration will back them every
single step of the way;
We will back their efforts to restore every single watershed in America.
We will become full partners In this process, using laws creatively, listening to
local needs, empowering local communities, and sharing the costs of Restoration.
We will help them reclaim their heritage.
But more than that, this Administration is taking the lead by example, working on
a larger scale to demonstrate these principles in places like:
The Pacific Northwest, where the President's Forest Plan was created in
pattnership with the states of Washington, Oregon and California and with local
�~g)
::::·
communities in the Cascades, to provide a sustainable timber harvest, to protect the
ancient forests, and to restore the historic salmon runs.
•
South Florida, where citizens have joined with state and local agencies in a long
term project to reconnect the severed, hydrologic arteries that once flowed down
through the River of Grass, healing the tropical marshes and swamps of the
Everglades, restoring natural life all the way down through the Florida Bay fisheries to
the Keys.
•
San Francisco Bay Delta, where diverse groups - the Pacific Federation of
Fishermen, Trout Unlimited, fruit and vegetable growers, and cities and communities
from San Diego to San Francisco - have all formed a partnership to ensure thriving
farmlands, growing cities, and restoration of fish and waterfowl up the Sacramento and
the San Joaquin River watersheds.
•
The Blackstone River Valley, where small towns and cities that grew up along
the first industrial river in America have all come together under an interstate
commission that restores the historic mills, tums the old brick buildings into theaters
and restaurants, and offers fishing and boat excursions to tourists from around
America.
Chesapeake Bay, where we are working with the Amish of Pennsylvania, the
Maryland Oystermen, and the Naval fleet in Norfolk, Virginia to restore the crabs, the
shellfish, the striped bass fisheries, until the waters are clear enough to wade in up to
your chest, look down, and see your feet.
Whether they cross state borders or cross county lines, all these restoration
efforts all have the same, common, working principles, principles that parallel the work
of students at Scrubgrass Run: They are united by watersheds, they are built through
partnerships, they are reinforced by federal laws, and they reach decisions through the
consensus of everyone invohted.
They may involve tens of thousands of people, but the essential nature is all
those people are coming together, working in harmony, listening to one another,
looking inward towards their community in search of a common solution, and getting to
yes.
When it all comes together, as these students and teachers at Scrubgrass Run,
Pennsylvania, can tell you, it is an extraordinary moment, more beautiful by the
knowledge that we have all played a part in making it happen, and the knowledge that
its renewal ripples downstream to other waterfront communities, giving each one a
stronger sense of place.
What we realize in that moment Is that the Environment is not. just a fixed point in
time. or some place outdoors, or even an "issue'' to be "handled" by one party or
009
.Page 8
�It) 010
c
:::·:·=:
::::::
tee
another.
It is a tradition that endures only through our labor, an opportunity that lasts as
long as we fight for it; part of our colledive heritage, passed on like a torch; a job that
brings all of us together under a common purpose.
Now let's get to work.
•. Page 9t
�THE: WHITE: HOUSE:
WASHINGTON
June 3, 1996
COMMENCEMENT ADDRESS TO PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
DATE:
LOCATION:
TIME:
FROM:
I.
June 4, 1996
Princeton University
!O:OOam
Don Baer
PURPOSE
To deliver the commencement address to Princeton University.
II.
BACKGROUND
Commencement
This is Princeton's 250th anniversary, and the 1OOth year it has been known as
Princeton University, formerly the College of New Jersey. Prior to the commencement
you will meet with a number of Trustees and other University dignitaries, and have
photographs taken with a number of ceremony participants.
There are roughly 1,100 seniors graduating.
A band called Concerto Soloists will play during the processional and recessional.
Senator Bill Bradley '65 spoke at the Baccalaureate service on Sunday.
III.
PARTICIPANTS
President Harold T. Shapiro will be with you for the entire day.
IV.
PRESS PLAN
On the record.
�V.
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
Greet trustee and robing
The President will be greeted by President Shapiro
President Shapiro will escort you to the President's office in Nassau Hall.
The President will be given a copy of the book, Princeton, the First 250
Years, by David Oberdorfer.·
There you will meet the people listed below, and will be invested with your
robe.
Attendees:
President Shapiro. He is formerly the president of the University of Michigan.
Vivian Shapiro, the President's wife. Her Ph.D. in social work is from Smith.
Robert H. Rawson, Jr. '66, Trustee: Mr. Rawson was a Rhodes Scholar, and
now runs the Cleveland office of Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue.
Alan and Madeleine Blinder
George Whitesides, Class of 1996 co-president
Susan Suh (pronounced "Sue"), Class of 1996 co-president
Photographs with Honorarv Degree Recipients. Winners of the Secondary Teaching
Awards. and Distinguished Faculty Teaching Awards
The President will proceed to the Faculty Hall in Nassau Hall for photographs.
Honorary Degree Recipients:
The President, Doctor of Laws.
Sir Robert McCredie May, Doctor of Science. Sir May was a member of the
Princeton faculty from 1973 to 1988, starting as a professor of biology. In
1995, he was appointed to Britain's senior science policy post, chief scientific
advisor and head of the Office of Science and Technology. {Sydney
University (B. Sc., 1956); City University, London (Ph.D., 1959)}.
George A. Miller, Doctor of Science. Professor Miller taught at Princeton from
1979 to 1990. He is a psycholinguist. {University of Alabama (B.A., 1940;
M.A., 1941); Harvard University (A.M:, 1944; Ph. D., 1946)}.
Ruth J. Simmons. Doctor of Laws. Ruth Simmons was installed as the ninth
President of Smith College in 1995. From 1983 to 1990 she was Associate
Dean of the Faculty at Princeton, and was the Vice Provost there from 1992:1995. {Dillard University (B.A., 1967); Harvard University (A.M., 1970; Ph.
D., 1973)}.
Toshiko Takaezu, Doctor of Fine Arts. Ms. Toshiko was born in Hawaii to
Japanese parents from Okinawa. She is a ceramist, weaver and painter. She
taught at Princeton for 25 years, retiring in 1992. {University of Hawaii (194851); Cranbrook Academy of Art (1951-54)}.
LeRoy T. Walker, Doctor of Laws. Dr. Walker is the President of the U.S.
Olympic Committee. {Benedict College (B.A., 1940); Columbia University
(M.S., 1941); New York University (Ph. D., 1957)}.
�Secondary Teacher Awards, given each year to four outstanding teachers from
secondary schools in New Jersey:
These will be presented by Jeremiah Ostriker, the Provost of Princeton
University.
Franklin Garrett, Clearview High School, Mulica Hill. Art teacher.
John Penna, Governor Livingston Regional High School, Berkeley Heights.
Chemistry teacher.
Richard Lawrence Peterson, Bloomfield Middle School. Special needs teacher.
John Sauerman, Lawrenceville School. History teacher.
Distinguished Faculty Teaching Awards:
The Teaching Awardswill be presented by Amy Gutmann, the Dean of the
Faculty.
David Billington, Professor of Civil Engineering and Operations.
James Rankin, Senior Lecturer in German Languages and Literatures.
Shirley Tilghman, Howard A. Prior Professor in the Life Sciences and
Professor of Molecular Biology.
David Wilkinson, Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics.
Procession and Commencement Ceremony
The President will be at the end of the processional which begins the
commencement ceremony.
The President will be escorted by Robert P. Hauptfuhrer '53, trustee. He is
the retired Chairman and C.O.O. of Oryx Energy Co. {Princeton, 1953.
Harvard M.B.A., 1957}.
The invocation is given by Dean Williamson.
President Shapiro makes welcoming remarks.
A Latin Salutatory is given by Charles Parker Stowell (pronounced "Stole"), a
senior and classics major from Maryland.
The Secondary Teaching Prizes are awarded.
The undergraduate degrees are awarded.
The Valedictorian, Brian Patrick Duff, a psychology major from Florida, gives
remarks.
The advanced degrees are awarded.
The President's Distinguished Teaching Awards are given.
The Honorary Degrees are awarded.
President Shapiro introduces the President.
The President delivers the commencement addfess.
The benediction is given by Dean Williamson.
The President departs from the back of the stage, to the motorcade, with
President Shapiro.
The commencement ceremony concludes with the recessional.
I
VI.
REMARKS
To be provided by speechwriting.
�THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 3, 1996
RECEPTION WITH HONORARY DEGREE RECIPIENTS
AND UNIVERSITY TRUSTEES AT PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
DATE:
LOCATION:
TIME:
FROM:
I.
June 4, 1996
Tent outside Prospect Hall,
Princeton University
1:30pm
Don Baer
PURPOSE
To give brief remarks and shake hands with approximately 200 dignitaries from the
Princeton commencement.
II.
BACKGROUND
This reception will give some of Princeton's elite, along with a number of White
House staffers and/or their relatives, a chance to see you in a more intimate setting.
Gold Commencement Coin
The commemorative medal is from the 150th anniversary. It says in Latin: "That
which was formerly the College of New Jersey having completed 150 years, now as
Princeton University looks upon a new century." Woodrow Wilson was President
then.
Princeton T -shirt
The t-shirt was designed to commemorate the 249th commencement, on June 4, 1996,
showing campus buildings named for U.S. Presidents.
III.
PARTICIPANTS
The President
President Shapiro
Trustees
Other Princeton dignitaries
White House staff/friends
Jon Orszag works at the White House for the National Economic Council, and
is receiving his undergraduate degree from Princeton today.
�IV.
PRESS PLAN
Closed to the press.
V.
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
The President will be escorted from the hold to the tent outside by President
Shapiro.
Off-stage announcement of the President, accompanied by President Shapiro.
The President is presented with a gold commencement coin and a Princeton tshirt from the commencement.
The President gives brief remarks.
The President works a ropeline and departs.
VI.
REMARKS
To be provided by speechwriting.
�6/3/96 9:00pm
PRESIDENT W][LLIAM J. CLINTON
COMMENCEMENT ADDRESS
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY .
PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY
JUNE 4, 1996
President Shapiro; members of the faculty; alumni; p~ents and friends; and especially
the graduates of the Class of 1996: It is my great pleasure to join you in celebrating
Princeton's first 250 years. President Shapiro, I want to thank you for your distinguished
service to higher education in America. And I especially want to thank Princeton for its long
and noble service to our nation. I have the pleasure to work with some of the sons and ·
daughters of Princeton who serve Am~rica today. Mike McCurry, my press secretary, sat in
those seats in 1976. I'm sure Princeton helped Mike to hone his ability to think quick ...
and talk fast. Laura Tyson, the Chair of the National Economic Council, is a former
Princeton professor ... and Mike's thesis advisor. Tony Lake, Bruce Reed, and John Hilley
are all senior members of .my staff who graduated from Princeton. And I know you have
rigorous standards at Princeton, but ifany of the facts in this speech are wrong, they were
checked by your classmate, Jon Orszag.
'
I am especially pleased to be here at Princeton today. ,For at every pivotal moment in
American history, Princeton, its leadership, and its students have played a crucial role.
Many of America's founding fathers can be counted among Princeton's first sons. The very
hall behind me was occupied btY the British in 1776, liberated by the army of George
Washington in 1777, and sanctified to American history forever by the deliberations of the
Continental Congress in 1783.
The last time there was a Class of '96, Princeton celebrated its !50th anniversary. In
a speech that year, Professor Woodrow Wilson gave this university its motto: "Princeton in
the Nation's Service." He said, "Today we must stand as those who would count their force
for the future. Those who made Princeton are dead; those who shall keep it and better it S\ill.
live-- they are even ourselves." What he said about Princeton 100 years ago applied then to
America, and it applies to America even more today.
At the time of that speech, America was living through a period of enormous change.
The Industrial Age brought incredible new opportunities and great new challenges.
Princeton, through Wilson and his contemporaries, was at the center of efforts to master
these powerful forces of change to benefit all Americans and to protect our time-honored values. And less than three years after he left this campus, Woodrow Wilson became the
President of the United States; he followed Theodore Roosevelt as the leader of America's
response to that time of change -- which we now know as the Progressive Era.
Today, on the edge of a new century, all of you, our Class of '96, are living through
another time of great change. Powerful forces are changing forever the jobs to which we go,
the neighborhoods in which we live, and the institutions upon which we depend. For many
Americans this is a time of enormous opportunity. For others, it is a time of insecurity as
··- ....· ..•.,. ,
..
�they wonder whether their old skills and
century.
~nduring
values are up to the challenges of the new
My fellow Americans: In 1996, like 1896, we stand at the dawn of a new age-- an
age of possibility. A revolution in information and technology is sweeping a world no longer
divided by the Cold War, increasingly drawn together by global markets.
Consider this: There is more computer power in the Ford Taurus you drive to the
supermarket than there was in Apollo 11 when Neil Armstrong took it to the moon. Nobody
who wasn't a high-energy physicist had even heard of the World Wide Web when I became
President, and now even my cat Socks has his own page. By the time a child born today is
old enough to read, over 100 million people will be on the Internet. The entire structure of
the world economy is changing. Distance collapses and differences dissolve. In Tokyo
today a consumer can drive to work in a Chrysler Jeep, talk with a friend on a Motorola
phone, snack on an apple from Washington state, and have American rice for dinner. Of
course, a Japanese speaker could say the same thing about an American using all Japanese
products, but at least we can both tell the same story now.
The age of possibility means that more Americans than ever before will be able to
breathe life into their dreams, and build the lives of which they dream. For all of you, this
age of possibility will actually be an age of probability ... in large measure because of the
excellent education you celebrate today. But America's mission must be to ensure that all
our people have the opportunity to live out their dreams in a nation that remains the world's
strongest force for peace, freeqom and prosperity and remains committed to national unity
based on personal responsibility and respect for diversity.
For 220 years, opportunity for all and the freedom to seize it have been defining
ideals for America. Of course, they have not always been perfectly realized. But our
history is a steady march of a nation striving to live up to these ideals.
When I took office, Washington led us toward the future with uncertain steps. The ~
deficit had skyrocketed; unemployment was high; job growth was weak. I was determined to
chart a new course. We put in place a comprehensive strategy for economic growth. First,
to put our economic house in order so that private business could prosper. Second, to tap the
full potential of a new global economy through open and fair trade. And third, to invest in
our people so they have the capacity to meet the demands of the new economy.
Our strategy is in place, and working. We cut the deficit in half, and reduced the size
of the federal government by over 230,000 workers -- the smallest in 30 years. We·have
signed over 200 trade agreements -- exports are at an all time high. We gave a tax cut to 15
Million of the hardest-pressed working families. The American people have created 8.5
million new jobs. The combined rate of inflation, unemployment, and mortgages is the
lowest in 3 decades. Americans have bought 3. 7 Million new homes, and started a record
number of new small businesses in each of the last three years.
We ar·e doing well, but we must do better. If America grows faster, incomes will
2
··...
-~~
~~-~·
. ,
"••
....
..... ,. ,
�grow faster, businesses will grow faster, and more of our people will have more chances
·
·· .. .. .. ... ~-.- -~--.
to live out the American Dream •.-..... -- ..
Some people ask, "How much faster can America grow?" The answer is ours to
decide. If we look to the long-term, if we believe in our people, if we give them
opportunity and demand they take responsibility, then I say: the sky is the limit.
But we must look with the greatest skepticism at simple solutions that promise
the easy way. We know the course that leads to long-term high growth- we are on
that course; we must expand it; and we must not veer from it.
How will we go forward? First, a real growth strategy must finish the job we started
in 1993 and balance the budget. It is wrong to leave our children a legacy of debt.. But
balancing the budget also keeps interest rates down now, and helps increase savings now.
Large corporations can expand, and small businesses can start. Families can buy homes, and
parents can send their children to college. We must not tum away from the responsible
course towards a balanced budget.
Second, a real growth strategy must continue the fight for open and fair trade. We
know the fastest growing economies are the most open economies. And we know that when
American workers and American companies have the chance to compete, we do not take
second place. But we also know that if America's markets are open to the world, then
America has a right to demand that the world's markets are open to our products.
'
'
Third, a real growth strategy
must do more to help all Americans deal with economic
change in.a positive way: by investing in the future, and by targeted tax cuts to help
Americans invest in their own lives. We will never sustain high growth for the long-term
unless all Americans have a chance to share in the benefits of the new economy. We need to
reward work and boost incomes, by protecting the Earned Income Tax Credit and raising the
minimum wage. We need to give middle-class families tax cuts to help buy a first home,
cope with health emergencies, and pay for education. And we have to make sure that a
change in jobs is a chance to move up, not a threat to basic security. People should have
health care, pensions and training they can take with them when they move from job to
better job.
Fourth, and in many ways most important, is education. It is the key to faster
growth, increased productivity, and greater equality. Education has always been important.
But today education is the fault line, the great continental divide, that separates those who
will prosper and those who cannot. If all Americans have access to it, education will be the
sturdy bridge that leads from the old economy to the new.
In our first two centuries, America led the world because we made the most of first,
the natural resources we were blessed with, and then, our unmatched capacity for mass
production in the Industrial Age. The mind is the great natural resource of the next
American century.
- 3
�•
That is why we have worked hard to help schools set high standards and have high
expectations ... We_ have..worked to keep.. schools safe and drug:-free~ .. I have .challenged the.. ___-._: ___ __.
states to dismantle the barriers that discourage the most talented people froin becoming
teachers, to find ways to reward the best teachers, and to find a fair process to make it easier
to remove those who do not measure up.
We are working to give every child access to a computer, good software, trained
teachers, and the Internet. This spring, the Vice President and I helped kick off NetDay in
California where school, business, and civic leaders have already wired [20] percent of the
schools. I'm pleased to announce today that a partnership of high-tech companies, parents,
teachers and students, are launching NetDay New Jersey to connect over 1000 schools by
this time next year.
But we must do more, as America always has when we have realized our people
needed more education to get ahead. Atthe turn of the century, the Progressives made it the
law of the land for every child to be in school. After World War II, with a new world of
opportunity beckoning, we said 10 years was not enough --that public schools should extend
for 12 years. The G.l. Bill and college loans threw open the doors of college to the sons
and daughters of farmers and factory workers -- and they have powered our economy ever
since. Colin Powell, Bob Dole [business leaders to come] and I all have one thing in
common: America helped us go to college.
America knows that higher education is the key to the growth we need to lift our·
country. Today, that is more true than ever. Of the 8.5 million jobs created in the last three
years, half of them have been managerial and professional. Fifteen years ago, the typical
worker with a college degree made 38 percent more than a worker with a high school
diploma. Today, that typical college-educated worker makes 73 percent more than the high
school worker. But we know that finishing two years of college means a 20 percent increase
in earnings. Higher education is the key to a successful future in the 21st century. America
has the best higher education in the world. We don't need to change it-- we need to make it
available (or all Americans.
Our goal must be nothing less than to make the 13th and 14th years of education as
universal as the first 12. To meet this challenge, my Administration has put in place an
unprecedented college opportunity strategy: Student loans directly to the people who need
them. AmeriCorps, which by next year will have given 75,000 young people the chance to
earn their way through college by serving their country. Scholarships for deserving students
-- more every year in my budget. We have proposed to go even further: Expanding workstudy so one million students can work their way through college by the year 2000. Letting
people use money from their IRA to help pay for college. A $1,000 merit scholarship for
the top 5 percent of every high school. I have called on colleges to. keep costs down.
We must always raise our sights. As we enter a new century, we must make 14
years of education the standard for every American. I want Congress to pass a $10,000 tax
deduction to help families pay for education after high school. But we must do more,
because we know our country needs every American to have at least two years of education
4
.-._ ......
··.
�after high school.
Today, I am announcing a new plan to complete our college strategy, and make two
years of college as universal as four years of high school. The right way to do it is to give
families a tax cut, targeted to achieve our national goal. And as we create this opportunity,
we must make it clear that there is a responsibility to make the most of it. We must say to
anyone in America who wants to go to college: We will give you a tax cut to pay the cost
of tuition at the average community college for your first year. We will give you the same
tax cut for the second year, but only if you earn it, by getting a B average the first year.
A tax deduction for families to help them pay for education after high school. A tax
cut for individuals to guarantee the first year 'of college, and the second year if you earn it.
This tax cut isn't just for individuals though; it's for our whole country. America is stronger
when more Americans go to college.
If you're in high school, we will say: Stay in school, work hard, and go to college.
If you're in your twenties and already working, but can't move ahead on a high school
diploma: Go to college. If you're a mother planning to go back to work but you're afraid
you don't have the skills to get a good job: Go to college. If you're 40 and worried that you
need more education to support your family, we will say: Go part-time, go at night, but by
all means, go to college.
I know this works. When I was Governor of Arkansas, we created Academic
Challenge Scholarships-- givep only to students who make a good average, stay in school,
and stay off drugs. And today's proposal builds on the enormously successful HOPE
Scholarships in Georgia, which guarantee any student in the state free college so long as they
earn a B average. This year, HOPE scholarships are helping 80,000 Georgia students-including 70% of the freshman class at the University of Georgia. In recognition of
Georgia's leadership, I want to call my proposal "America's Hope Scholarships." I am
pleased that Georgia Governor Zell Miller .is here with us today. I challenge all states in
America to follow his leadership --Georgia's leadership --and make four years of college•_
possible for all Americans.
Money doesn't grow on trees in Washington. That is why I have put forward enough
spending cuts in my balanced budget plan to pay for this. We must not go back to the days
of something for nothing. The era of big government is over, and so is the era of big
deficits. This plan is targeted and it is paid for -- and no tax cut will do more to raise
incomes and spur economic growth over the long haul than one designed to help people go to
college.
This proposal will do three things: First, it will open the doors of college opportunity
to every American, regardless of their ability to pay. With this plan as the capstone to our
college strategy, education at a typical community college will be free. Second, it will offer
free education and training to every adult willing to work for it. No one in America need be
stuck in a deadend job or in a rut of unemployment. Finally, this plan will work because the
people who get this help are going to have to work for it. It is rooted in America's most
5
.,_ · .····
�basic bargain: We as a nation will create more opportunity, but if and only if our people take
responsibjlity to- make the most··of their· own lives.
We must never forget it is that basic bargain which has always brought us together as
a community, as a country. No generation of Americans understood that better than the
generation represented by a special group here today-- the Class of 1946, celebrating its
50th reunion. When you laid down your studies to take up arms, you took the ultimate
responsibility for the future of your nation and your world. And when you returned, a
grateful nation did everything it could to create opportunity for all of you. And we can all
attest to the fact that you made the most of it.
The ultimate lesson the Class of 1946 teaches the Class of 1996 is this: You will do
well, because America d<>es well. You must never be satisfied with an age of probability
only for the sons and daughters of Princeton. You could go your own way, in a society that
so often seems like it's coming apart. You have the ability to succeed in this economy; and
you could secede from the America trapped in the old economy. But you must not secede
from our common purpose. You must engage on our common ground. You must follow the
example of the Class of 1946, who sacrificed for America like no other generation in history,
and built the future you live in. Your blessing is an obligation -- to help ensure that the
promise of this age is made real for all the sons and daughters of America.
In 1914, President Wilson wrote: 11 The future is clear and bright with promise of the
best things. We are all in the same boat, and we now know the port for which we are
bound. We have a common discipline of patriotic purpose. We shall advance, and advance
together, with a new spirit, a new enthusiasm, a new cordiality of spirited cooperation.••
The Class of 1946 stands halfway between the day Woodrow Wilson called Princeton
to the nation's service and this day on which you graduate. They built a future that lived up
to the promise of his words. We can do no less. That is the spirit that must guide America
as we march together, across the bridge that will lead through the age of possibility to a
future of greatness. Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America.
6
. ··- _,-.· .. ~ ·•·. t••
.. __ ..... ···l•·
�
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
Don Baer
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Office of Communications
Don Baer
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1994-1997
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
<a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/36008" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7431981" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0458-F
Description
An account of the resource
Donald Baer was Assistant to the President and Director of Communications in the White House Communications Office. The records in this collection contain copies of speeches, speech drafts, talking points, letters, notes, memoranda, background material, correspondence, reports, excerpts from manuscripts and books, news articles, presidential schedules, telephone message forms, and telephone call lists.
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.
537 folders in 34 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
Commencement 1996
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Office of Communications
Don Baer
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0458-F
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Box 18
<a href="http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/assets/Documents/Finding-Aids/2006/2006-0458-F.pdf" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7431981" 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.
1/12/2015
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
42-t-7431981-20060458F-018-003-2014
7431981