-
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/files/original/8097d518bdc1ce78144794db62e151f3.pdf
97a5a60884936f9afecbe2d1d2bb8a75
PDF Text
Text
FOIA Number:
2006-0469-F (2)
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting
Series/Staff Member:
Michael Waldman
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
14457
FolderlD:
Folder Title:
Outside Contributors Sug [Suggestions] for SOTU [State of the Union] 1996 [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
92
4
4
3
�Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
Clinton Library
D O C U M E N T NO.
AND TYPE
DATE
SUBJECT/TITLE
RESTRICTION
001. memo
Bruce Ackerman to Don Baer; RE: State of the Union Address and
phone number (3 pages)
01/09/1996
P5, P6/b(6)
002. memo
Al From to President Clinton; RE: State of the Union Themes (4
pages)
12/26/1995
P5
003. memo
Guy Smith to Don Baer; RE: State of the Union Theme and Delivery
(I page)
12/21/1995
P5
004. memo
Guy Smith to Don Baer; RE: State of the Union Theme and Delivery
(5 pages)
12/21/1995
P5
005. memo
Martin E. Marty to Don Baer; RE: Phone number [partial] (1 page)
12/27/1995
P6/b(6)
006. memo
Bill Galston to the President; RE: State of the Union/1996 Agenda (3
pages)
01/10/1996
P5
007. memo
Bruce Ackerman to Don Baer; RE: State of the Union Address and
phone number (3 pages)
n.d.
P5, P6/b(6)
008. memo
Benjamin Barber to President Clinton; RE: 1996 Blizzard Dinner and
phone number (4 pages)
01/10/1996
P5, P6/b(6)
009a. fax
Dean Amy Gutmann to Don Baer; RE: Phone number [partial] (1
page)
01/12/1996
P6/b(6)
009b. letter
Amy Gutmann to President Clinton; RE: State of the Union (2 pages)
01/12/1996
P5
010. memo
Bill Galston to the President; RE: State ofthe Union/1996 Agenda
[duplicate of 006] (3 pages)
01/10/1996
P5
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
OA/Box Number: 14457
FOLDER TITLE:
Outside Contributors Sug [Suggestions] for SOTU [State ofthe Union] 1996 [2]
2006-0469-F
dbl929
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - |44 II.S.C. 2204(a)|
Freedom of Information Act -15 II.S.C. 552(b)|
PI
P2
P3
P4
b(l) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA|
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency |(b)(2) o f t h e FOIA)
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) o f t h e FOIA|
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information 1(b)(4) o f t h e FOIA)
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(b)(6) o f t h e FOIA|
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes |(b)(7) o f t h e FOIA)
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions 1(b)(8) o f t h e F O I A |
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells 1(b)(9) o f t h e FOIA|
National Security Classified Information 1(a)(1) of the PRA|
Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA|
Release would violate a Federal statute 1(a)(3) o f the PRA]
Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information 1(a)(4) of the PRA|
P5 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 1(a)(6) o f t h e PRA|
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 II.S.C.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
001. memo
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
Bruce Ackerman to Don Baer; RE: State of the Union Address and
phone number (3 pages)
01/09/1996
RESTRICTION
P5, P6/b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
OA/Box Number: 14457
FOLDER TITLE:
Outside Contributors Sug [Suggestions] for SOTU [State ofthe Union] 1996 [2]
2006-0469-F
dbl929
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act -144 U.S.C. 2204(a)|
Freedom of Information Act -15 U.S.C. 552(b)|
Pl National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) ofthe PRA)
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office 1(a)(2) ofthe PRA|
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute 1(a)(3) ofthe PRA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information 1(a)(4) ofthe PRA|
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors |a)(5) of the PRA|
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(a)(6) of the PRA)
b(l) National security classified information 1(b)(1) ofthe FOIA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency [(b)(2) ofthe FOIAj
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) ofthe FOIA)
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) ofthe FOIA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes 1(b)(7) ofthe FOIA)
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions 1(b)(8) ofthe FOIA]
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells 1(b)(9) ofthe 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.
�JAN 09 '96 11:13
TorDon B a e r ,
P.I
202-456-1213
Froni: Bruce Ackerman
Fax: 202-357-4439
Phone: h;|i^P6/(Bj(6)ilV o:357-1604
^
SlOONJs
Re: State of the Union Address
This Address has consistently disappointed Woodrow Wilson's
hopes. President after president has allowed federal departments
and interest groups to lobby their favorite paragraphs into The
Speech. The result has been a quasi-bureaucratic r o l l - c a l l of
mission-statements,
interspersed with a few "City on a H i l l "
paragraphs. There are few better examples of the
bureaucratisation of charisma.
But, pace Weber, there i s nothing inevitable about this.
Especially this year. You have two goals. F i r s t , and foremost,
the President's performance should suggest that he has now
mastered the challenges of his office. This means, above a l l ,
that the Speech should be short and to the point, since everybody
expects i t to be too long and diffuse. Second, i f you intend to
move beyond a purely defensive campaign i n the F a l l , you should
use the Speech to develop one or two — no more — affirmative
issues for later elaboration.
The Speech should have four parts. F i r s t , a summary of
accomplishments, domestic and foreign, second, an elaboration of
the basic values the President i s defending i n the budget
controversy. Third, moving beyond the budget, to define one or
two affirmatives. Fourth, upbeat conclusion (Buzzwords here:
1
Clinton Library Photocopy
�JHH
'yb 11:14
P.C:
reasoning together, common ground, responsible reform).
As i n d i c a t e d a t the dinner, my nominations
f o r Part Three
are the environment and campaign reform. The President'G
position
amongst h i s other major constituencies i s p r e t t y s o l i d . But he
has a very weak p r o f i l e amongst environmentalists, who are, o f
course, very numerous amongst the Northern suburban voters who
are going t o decide t h i s e l e c t i o n . I n c o n t r a s t t o other issues,
the Republicans have dug themselves i n t o a hole on t h i s one, and
cannot defend themselves e f f e c t i v e l y i f the President chooses t o
go on the o f f e n s i v e .
Environmental
law i s r i p e f o r reform. Our system o f command-
and-control r e g u l a t i o n i s obsolete and i n e f f i c i e n t . Instead o f
c o n f r o n t i n g cumbersome r e g u l a t i o n s , p o l l u t e r s should be required
to pay f o r every pound of p o l l u t i o n they generate. This w i l l not
only y i e l d
t e n (or more) b i l l i o n d o l l a r s i n e x t r a revenue each
year, making i t easier t o balance the budget or fund the
environment or cut other taxes. I t would also cut costs o f
compliance by o n e - t h i r d or more —
a sum t h a t i s also measured i n
the tens o f b i l l i o n s annually. ( I f you would l i k e support f o r the
statements made i n t h i s paragraph,
I can e a s i l y supply
them).
What i s more, there i s broad b i p a r t i s a n consensus i n support
of
t h i s reform. Indeed, Gingrich himself would favor i t , but f o r
the f a c t t h a t h i s right-wingers want t o gut environmental law
e n t i r e l y . Buzzwords f o r speech:
w
P o l l u t e r s should pay. Replace
�J m 09 '9G 11: 14
P. 3
bureaucrats w i t h the market.""We charge companies when they want
to use the airwaves, or d r i l l f o r o i l . We should charge them when
they use our waterways or the a i r we breathe." "Taxing p o l l u t i o n
i s l i k e t a x i n g c i g a r e t t e s and a l c o h o l . "
While campaign reform i s also a good issue, I do not t h i n k
t h a t e i t h e r Republicans or Democrats have much c r e d i b i l i t y here.
I have, of course, already sent you a reform proposal i n t h i s
area, but the time i s not r i p e t o go forward w i t h i t i n the
context o f t h i s speech.
The best you can do i s t o repeat the
outstanding i n v i t a t i o n t o Gingrich; and say t h a t , u n t i l we have
r e a l campaign reform, i t w i l l be much harder t o make responsible
reforms i n the environment and other areas.
�1
UJUA
btu
�THE
WHITE
HOUSE
WASHINGTON
'
^*
'
�/
•9
THE
WHITE
WASH
'
HOUSE
INGTON
: I
Pro-French legislators, who insisted that the J
�••
JIv be lieve their ears as Washington moved
.,
.,!!':;;:> without mentioning France. But even in
increduHiN ihey realized that the President had outflanked
ii:-;-::!. The discussion having been of nations that menaced Ameriear. iranquillity, the omission could be taken as a recognition of
common interest.
Turning to domestic affairs, Washington made no mention of
his ;ritics He contested the jaa£££ulj.ndjiiQSperous state of .the
LLnived StatesjKitiube_de.speration in Europ_e. "The molestations
of our trade" were overbalanced by the benefits the nation derived from her neutral position. Population was growing; internal
improvements were rushing fonvard accompanied with tax burdens so light as to be scarcely felt. "Is it too much to say that our
country exhibits a spectacle of national happiness never before
surpassed i f ever before equaled?" And should not Americans
"unite our efforts to preserve, prolong, and improve our immense
advantages?"
:
1
Vi;. .-wt !>:;ii!; ihe V.H •.•no-rate. \\ ashincton l>affi '. . - . :ec; ne: •: his forma aide and J ri uk i n g com pa nit •r T J a ri; c > N'-.i u-nr).
•T
as Secretary of War; Charles Lee. whopracticcd lave near Mount
Vernon, as Attorney General^apd'TKomas Chase of Maryland for
the Supreme Court. This^adneved, Washington fell he could appoint as Chief lustTce a Massachusetts Federalist, Oliver
Ellsworth.
"The oPflces are once more filled," John Adams noted, "but
hovv^tfferently than when Jefferson, Hamilton, Jay, etc., were
hefe!"
With anticipations often sadistic, politically minded Americans
awaited Washington's Seventh Annual Address. How would the
President defend himself? How would he defend the Jay Treaty?
Would he attack the independent mass meetings that had blasted
his policies as he had attacked the centrally organized Democratic
Societies? Would he express personal bitterness as he had in his
second inaugural? There was tenseness in the Senate chamber
when Washington walked in on December 8, 1895. It soon
changed to amazement.
"Fellow citizens of the Senate and the House of Representatives," Washington began. " I trust I do not deceive myself when I
indulge the persuasion that I have never met you at any period
when more than at the present the situation of our public affairs
has afforded just cause for mutual congratulation; and for inviting
you to join me in profound gratitude to the Author of all good for
the numerous and extraordinary blessings we enjoy."
Then Washington began enumerating blessings: Wayne's victory plus the entente with England promised peace on the northwest
frontier; an accommodation was being reached with the Barbary
pirates who had molested American shipping; Pinckney reported
progress on a treaty with Spain. Washington then mentioned the
Jay Treaty—everyone was agog—but he merely said that applying
"the best judgment I was able to form of the public interest" he
had followed the advice of the Senate. "The result on the part of
his Britannic Majesty is unknown. When received, the subject
will, without delay, be put before Congress." Washington's summary was that "prudence and moderation on every side" could
now extinguish all causes of discord "which have heretofore
menaced our tranquillity."
Pro-French legislators, who insisted that the Jay Treaty was
0
The Republicans were so devoted to controversy that their first
reaction was that Washington had raised the white flag of surrender. Some, indeed, believed that this was a prelude to his resignation. But it quickly became clear that Washington (with an assist
from Hamilton who had helped him draft the speech) had made a
master stroke. To the simplistic argument that the Jay Treaty was
anti-French, he had opposed an equally simplistic argument,
which was much closer to the experience of every citizen. He had
pit as of old Ituvvgh javers of rrmtrnversy down to the basic, unassailable truth. The nation was still free and, despite irritations_on
"the oceaiTand at the conference tables, more prosperousjhanjl
"iad ever bggp. ' l he nation Was a growing colossus whose security
;ested not on which belligerent won the European victory but on
.the continuation of conditions that would allow it to achieve unhampered its maturity. I f this were the case-and every American
who looked around him dispassionately saw that it was indeed the
case-why all this howling of faction, all these accusations that the
government was selling out the country? Why all this hysteria
.about the details of a treaty that was serving the major end of allowing the nation to grow undisturbed?
TtT5-p£n3uIum, which had sjtfung so tar against Washington,
was swinging back. But, as Washington wrote, "the restless mind
of man cannot be at p e a c ^ / A grave constitutional crisis loomed.
/
/
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
3^
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
002. memo
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
Al From to President Clinton; RE: State of the Union Themes (4
pages)
12/26/1995
RESTRICTION
P5
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
OA/Box Number:
14457
FOLDER TITLE:
Outside Contributors Sug [Suggestions] for SOTU [State ofthe Union] 1996 [2]
2006-0469-F
dbl929
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act -144 U.S.C. 2204(a)|
Freedom oflnformation Act -15 II.S.C. 552(b)|
Pl National Security Classified Information 1(a)(1) ofthe PRA)
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal ofTice 1(a)(2) ofthe PRA|
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute 1(a)(3) ofthe PRA)
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information 1(a)(4) ofthe PRA)
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
' and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(S) ofthe PRA)
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(a)(6) ofthe PRA)
b(l) National security classified information |(b)(l) ofthe FOIA)
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency 1(b)(2) ofthe FOIAJ
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute 1(b)(3) ofthe FOIA)
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information 1(b)(4) ofthe FOIA)
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(b)(6) ofthe 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) ofthe FOIA)
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells 1(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.
�Toward a New Democracy:
Introduction
It is often said that the core of America is an idea, that we are (as Abraham
Lincoln put it) a nation dedicated to a proposition. And this is true. But the idea
is dynamic, not static; not dry and abstract, but suffused with a sense of
possibility and hope. The American idea is a promise extended to all who enter
the community, and it is a dream cherished by generations of Americans.
The promise of American life~the American Dream-has shaped our history. It is
the promise of equal opportunity for all, unfettered by the status of one's ancestors
or the limits of one's current condition; of material and social progress from
generation to generation; of equal rights for all to protect against concentrations of
power and secure a zone of individual liberty; of a free society in which we may
form all manner voluntary associations to pursue shared interests and express
core values; of democratic self-government at every level of our public lives; and of
a civic unity that both embraces and transcends our differences.
The American Dream is not a condition to be described, but an ideal to be
realized. Each generation of Americans has been called upon to work toward its
fulfillment. And many have been challenged to chart dramatically new paths.
Some generations have encountered, and surmounted, a single focal crisis. For
the founders, it was the challenge of forging a unified constitutional republic. For
the Civil War generation, it was the "house divided against itself by the curse of
slavery; six decades ago, it was a Great Depression that threatened not only our
economy, but democratic institutions here and around the world.
Other generations have confronted, not a single focal crisis, but rather profound
challenges along many fronts. Consider the situation at the end of the 19th
century: a great economic transformation from agriculture to the new industrial
order; a pervasive sense of social disorder-family breakdown, crime, and
immorality~as our population moved from rural small towns to rapidly expanding
urban centers; cultural challenges posed by unsettled issues of race and
unprecedented waves of immigration more ethnically and religiously diverse tha
ever before; a crisis of governance in which our public institutions were seen as
ineffective, corrupt, and exclusionary; and a fundamental debate on many fronts
about America's role in the world-the conditions of global economic engagement,
the strategies of military defense, the terms on which we would undertake
responsibilities beyond our borders.
In response to these challenges, a group of innovative thinkers developed a set of
bold ideas for renewing the promise of American life-ideas that provided the basis
for what we now know as the Progressive movement. These ideas included:
o a stronger national government to cope with economic and social
consequences of industrialization;
�o social legislation and regulation to deal with problems of urbanization;
o a reformed system of public education capable of transforming immigrants into
citizens;
o political reform that expanded suffrage and deployed institutions of direct
democracy against state legislatures and local governments dominated by
. special interests and corruption.
The Progressive movement was not a party, but rather a powerful new vision that
influenced both parties as well as citizens and leaders who sought to act outside
established partystructures. While it scored important early successes (both
Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson implemented portions of the Progressive
agenda), the movement's key contribution was longterm: it created the intellectual
and policy predicate for the New Deal and for the rise of a strong centralized
govemment using the tools of legislation, regulation, bureaucracy, and executive
leadership to address our national problems. It is no exaggeration to say that the
ideas launched by the Progressives shaped our politics for most of the past
century.
Today's circumstances are different from those that sparked the progressive
movement. Still, the scope of the problems our country confronts at the end of the
20th century bears a remarkable resemblance to those our predecessors faced at
the end of the 19th.
o As the industrial economy yields to the new information age, and as the selfcontained national market gives way to global competition, many Americans are
experiencing stagnant or declining wages, increased job insecurity, and heightened
anxiety about their children's future.
o Family breakdown, violent crime, and the fraying of neighborhood and
community ties have led to a widespread sense of a society coming apart at the
seams.
o High rates of immigration and new forms of ethnic, racial, and religious group
self-assertion have weakened confidence in a common civic culture, of a shared
sense of what it means to be an American.
o Our governmental institutions are excessively influenced by special interest
groups and concentrations of wealth and power, and they are responsive to a
shallow, media-driven, polarized sound-bite politics at the expense of the
considered commonsense judgments of average citizens.
o The collapse of international communism and the replacement of East/West
conflict with ethnic and economic rivalries has given rise to confusion about our
role in the world and about the strategies for reconciling our global hopes with the
means we are willing to devote to their pursuit.
But while our challenges bear a remarkable resemblance to those of a century ago,
today most Americans no longer believe that the solution is to be found in a
larger, stronger central government. And they are right. In the 20th century, the
expansion of central government power-through legislation, regulation, and
bureuacracy-dealt effectively with the challenges of growth, security, and social
�unity in the industrial age. But today, this course-still supported by traditional
liberals-serves more to defend the past than to build the future.
By contrast, many conservatives argue that the overgrown federal government is
the source of our problems and that dismantling the govemment in favor of the
free market will solve them. If only our national life were so simple! The market
is the best means ever devised for creating wealth. But the invisible hand does
not create equal opportunity, or defend equal rights, or renew our civic culture.
At the threshold of the 21st century, the challenge of this generation is to chart a
new course to the American Dream
-a course equally removed from the big govemment structures of the old
liberalism and the no-govemment dogmas of the new conservatives;
-a course that builds on the strengths of the market, that reinvents public
institutions to serve public purposes, that brings more effective self-government
closer to the people, that helps us rebuild community and a shared civic culture.
We call this course the New Democracy. It rests on three straightforward but
powerful ideas.
First: despite all their historic accomplishments, the economics, society, and
politics of the Industrial Age Eire now in irreversible decline. To pretend otherwise
is to succumb to nostalgia. For late 20th century progressives, there is no
alternative: we must reconstruct our agenda in response to the imperatives of the
rising Information Age.
Second: we must retrieve, and renew for our time, the most enduring social
ideal of our history, articulated in different ways by Thomas Jefferson, Andrew
Jackson, by Populists and Progressives alike: the ideal of a nation in which there
is equal opportunity for all and special privileges for none.
Third: to realize the ideal of equal opportunity, we must conduct both our
politics and our social life on the basis of a moral principle-mutual responsibility.
The practical meaning of that principle is clear: We cannot receive benefits unless
we give something back to our community and our country. We cannot enjoy our
individual rights without doing our fair share to maintain the overall system of
rights. And we cannot rightly exempt ourselves from obligations that bind our
fellow citizens.
Like the Progressives a century ago, we offer a new politics based on ideas in
place of an old politics beholden to interests. Like the Progressives, we hope that
the ideas we propose can transform American politics, not just one party; can
build new common ground, not new partisan divisions. And like the Progressives,
we believe that the New Democracy is the work-not of a day or a year-but of
generations to come. Still, we must do what we can. And the time to begin is
now.
�The Three Cornerstones of the New Democracy
Our country rests on one simple idea: the people have the right, and the
ability, to govern themselves. But transforming that idea into reality is anything
bu simple. Policies and institutions that promote self-government in one era may
impede it in the next. Democracy cannot be carved in stone, and the task of selfgovemment is never done. That is why the Declaration of Independence tells us
that in addition to the unalienable rights of individuals, there is a collective right
of the people, acting as a whole, to alter their institutions to better serve their
purposes.
Our current institutions and policies have served us well through the
Industrial Age, and through the long struggle against fascism and communism.
But today we face new challenges, and we must change to meet them. These
challenges have dismpted the old order, and they have brought insecurity and
anxiety to millions of average families. But they also offer unprecedented
opportunity.
We believe that our nation stands at the threshold of a new era: of growth and
prosperity in which all can share; of revitalized free associations among our
citizens; of more effective self-government, not just for the people but by the
people, closer to them and more responsive to their concerns.
We call this era the New Democracy. It is possible, but not inevitable. It will
come to pass, but only if we have the clarity to envision it and the strength to
build it.
To make the New Democracy a reality, we must change how we act. But
before we can do that, we must change how we think-about the way prosperity
and security are produced in the economy, about the way opportunity can be
enhanced through progressive self-government, and about the way we must deal
with one another as fellow citizens throughout our society.
The New Economy
A century ago, Americans faced a great transformation of their economy, from
agriculture and individual artisanship to giant industrial corporations. Appealing
to the tradition of Jefferson and Jackson, some Americans sought to resist this
shift as incompatible with equal opportunity and democratic self-government.
Others argued that the transition was inevitable. Our nation's intellectual
challenge was to decouple enduring Jeffersonian and Jacksonian values from their
dying socioeconomic base; our practical task was to craft new policies to
strengthen these values within the context of the emerging industrial order. This
was the historic mission of the Progressive movement.
The Progressives' program rested on a comprehensive analysis of the new
�economy. They understood that this shift in the basis of national wealth was
creating profound changes in our society as well. Larger units of organization;
concentration and centralization of power; more hierarchy and bureaucracy;
increased routinization and anonymity in human relations; rapid urbanization-all
these changes and more were inevitable consequences of industrialization. And
they would require, in tum, new understandings of worker organization, of
labor/management relations, and of the role of government. Fundamental issues
of individual economic security, public health and safety, and the of public power
to safeguard democracy against the dangers of economic concentration and
inequality had to be rethought.
It took generations to complete this rethinking and to create a new public
order consistent with the industrial economy-through the efforts of Woodrow
Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, and decades of national administrations of both
parties from the 1940s through the 1970s. And today, once again, we must think
and act anew. For the economic transformation now underway is every bit as
momentous as the industrialization of a century ago, and its social and political
consequences will be equally profound.
A decade ago, politicians and pundits could still puzzle over basic trends.
Now, the dimensions of the new economy are increasingly clear. Knowledge is
the core of the new wealth of nations. The pace of technological innovation is
accelerating, and product cycles are shrinking. The information revolution is
transforming the design and production of both goods and services. Global
economic competition is diminishing the power of national economic policies and is
producing an inexorable logic of productivity improvements in every sector. The
largely unregulated flow of global capital is creating new opportunities (as well as
instabilities) in parts of the world previously shut out of the international economy
and is contributing to new pressures on established industrial powers.
Today, as was the case a century ago, the new technology of mass production
in linked to new organizational forms. Then it was large, multilayered,
hierarchical, bureaucratized units structurted along military lines. Today, new
information technologies are reversing these trends. In the economy, corporate
workforces are shrinking, organization hierarchies are flattening, top-down
bureaucratic management of information is yielding to the power of personal
computers, and hierarchical authority is giving way to more consensual forms of
leadership.
While many corporations have responded effectively to the challenges of the
new economy, the prospects for workers and their families have dimmed.
Productivity and profits are up, but wages and incomes for many workers are
stagnating. Health and pension benefits are being cut back, and a seemingly
endless cycle of "downsizing" is shattering expectations of job security. By many
measures, inequality is on the rise as the educated professionals who can function
most effectively in the new knowledge economy pull away from the rest of society.
�These problems are serious, but not unprecedented. A century ago, the new
corporate/industrial order produced increased inequality of wealth and magnified
insecurity as the economy endured spasms of boom and bust. It took two
generations of public policy experimentation to reverse trends toward inequality
and create new sources of security for working families. Today, in the new
economy, our challenges are much the same. But our responses must be radically
different.
While economic agents have adjusted imperfectly to the new forces of
information, technology, and global competition, our political system has
remained mired in the past. Reform efforts to increase govemment efficiency by
shriking bureaucracy have met with entrenched resistance, exacerbating the loss
of public confidence and sparking demands for the whosesale elimination of public
agencies and functions. While modern information technology can help
decentralize political as well as economic power, these new possibilities for selfgovemment have yet to be translated into practice.
While the policy debate remains clouded, the basic point is clear: The new
economy is here to stay, and it is changing the terms on which we must act. We
need new policies-for our economic, social and political life-based on hope rather
than nostalgia, and realism rather than wishful thinking. There is simply no
substitute for bold approaches that acknowledge the irreversible reality and power
of the new economy.
Equal Opportunity for All, Special Privileges for None
As we respond to our rapidly changing economy, we must hold fast to our
enduring values. One in particular stands out as central to our vision of a good
society. It is a principle that has animated generations of American leaders and
has attracted tens of million of immigrants to our shores. It is, simply, the
promise of equal opportunity for all and special privileges for none. It is the ideal
of a society in which individuals eam their rewards through their own talents and
effort within a system of fair and open rules.
In one sense, of course, the United States has always been a society without
special privilege. The Revolutionary War uprooted our homegrown aristocracy,
and the Constitution forever prohibits the granting of titles of nobility. And
because we had no aristocracy, we were spared the class warfare that divided
European societies for generations.
Still, our history has been marked by waves of struggle against special
privilege. Consider the right to vote. It was at first the preserve of relatively
well-to-do white males. Over time, states eliminated property qualifications. A
wave of social activism at the beginning of this century led to women's suffrage. A
hard-fought constitutional amendment eliminated the poll tax. A new wave of
�social activism finally redeemed the promise of the post-Civil War amendments
and effectively ensured the right of African-Americans to participate in the
electoral process. Another constitutional amendment erased the unfairness of
requiring young Americans to fight and die for their country while preventing
them from participating in the elections that shape foreign policy decisions. And
today, conflict continues over the enforcement of "motor voter" legislation that
lowers subtle but very real barriers to voting participation by lower-income
Americans.
Similar stories could be told about the long fight, not yet concluded, against
economic and social privilege. Discrimination, for example, is a moral insult. But
it is also an injury~the assertion of unearned and unjustified privilege by some at
the expense of others. It violates the most basic terms of the covenant that unites
us. And that is why we must fight discrimination until it is only a fading
memory.
Our federal budget legislates special privileges, in the form of selective benefits
handed out to favored groups on the basis of raw political power rather than
achievement or contribution to the common good. These privileges do more than
allocate benefits to the undeserving; they divert resources from better uses and
deprive others of a fair chance to succeed on their merits. A budget that better
reflects our nation's values would do a better job of promoting the national
interest. That is why we need to attack fiscal privilege in the national
govemment-and at every level of the federal system.
At various points in our national history, we have persuaded ourselves that
the elimination of formal, legal privileges-for example, officially sanctioned
aristocracies and racial subordination backed by law-would suffice to create an
equal opportunity society. But experience has taught us that merely negative
steps, though vitally necessary, are not sufficient. There is no invisible hand that
creates equal opportunity; it is a conscious social achievement that requires
affirmative acts.
Today, we must return to first principles and ask ourselves what we must dotogether-to realize the ideal an equal opportunity society. For example: What
effective steps can we take to strengthen families, assure quality education for all,
create bridges for young people to the world of work, and give all workers tools to
retrain to meet the challenges of a constantly changing economy?
As we answer these and many other questions, we must keep in mind the first
cornerstone of the New Democracy: the irreversible economic shift that is changing
our world-and with it, the requirements of equal opportunity. For example: in
today's economy, more and more, computer literacy is a key to employment and
advancement. For opportunity to be truly equal, all our young people must have
the opportunity to acquire this literacy during the course of their elementary and
secondary education.
�Equal opportunity means a fair chance for every individual to succeed based on
talent and effort. It is a double-edged sword. On the one side, it requires the
removal of discriminatory barriers and the provision of meaningful arenas for selfdevelopment and self-improvement. But on the other, it is not a guarantee of
success, and it is not a formula for top-down distribution of social goods. The
promise of America is the promise of equal opportunity, not equal results. As we
move toward equal opportunity, therefore, we must dismantle the structures that
in the past have used mandated outcomes to compensate for disparities in
opportunity.
What We Get, What We Give Back: The Ethic of Mutual ResponsibUity
The third cornerstone of the New Democracy is a principle that should pervade
our social bonds as well as our public policies. It goes by many names, but the
core idea is simple: As a moral matter, we cannot rightly benefit from any
association to which we are not prepared to contribute our fair share or fulfill the
duties of our role. And as a practical matter, no association in which this maxim
is regularly disregarded is likely to work very well. This is the commonsense
meaning of what is sometimes called the "ethic of mutual responsibility."
This ethic is distinguished from three competing principles. First, it does not
call for an extreme of altruism-of uncompensated giving to others-but rather for
a reasonable balance between what we give and what we get.
Second, the ethic of mutual responsibility rejects libertarianism-the idea that
we have no obligations other than the ones we choose. Because we are social
beings, because we become human only through our development in society, we
live in a dense network of interdependence that we are not free to deny or reject.
And third, the ethic of mutual responsibility is at odds with the philosophy of
entitlement-the belief that we can make demands on others, or on the
community, without reciprocating. The reason is simple: Just about everything of
value, whether material resources or social capital, is produced and sustained
through human action, usually in cooperation with others. To demand something
of value without contributing anything in return is to assert as a matter of right
that others should work for me without compensation. That is wrong as a matter
of morality. And in a free society, contributers will soon respond to free riders by
withdrawing their support from common enterprises.
Mutual responsibility rests on a foundation of personal responsibility. We are
not helpless victims of external forces. We are capable of understanding what is
required of us, and of acting on that understanding. That is the faith of a free
society, and of democracy itself.
We are born with the capacity for personal responsibility. But as every
parent knows, we are not bom responsible. The capacity must be developed over
�an extended period, starting with the family. While our society must hold all
normal adults responsible for their acts, we must recognize the existence of
unequal opportunities for developing responsibility. And we must work to ensure,
so far as possible, that every child has an adequate chance to do so.
As adults, personal responsibility begins at home. We have an obligation to
take care of ourselves and our families-and to avoid unnecessary dependence on
others. Regardless of economic or social status, we have an obligation to obey the
law-and to convey to our children the importance of law-abidingness.
Mutual responsibility means doing our part to sustain the institutions from
which we benefit. For example: because we value the equal protection of the law,
we have a responsibility to serve on juries when asked-not to evade jury duty
based on weak claims of personal inconvenience.
The norm of mutual responsibility should guide public policy as well as
personal conduct. Whenever possible, policies should be structured so that
citizens who contribute to the community are rewarded, and those who benefit
from the community give something back.
Policies conceived in this spirit of reciprocity are far more likely to work and to
enjoy sustained public support. For example, the GI Bill was one of the most
effective measures in our history because it expressed the nation's gratitude for
our veterans' extraordinary service. And John F. Kennedy's Peace Corps was
electrifying because it challenged the most fortunate Americans to give something
back through service to their country.
If we take mutual responsibility seriously, we must eliminate public programs
that confer one-way benefits on selected individuals or groups. We must reform
programs where benefits exceed contributions over time. And we must
acknowledge that responsibility links to us future generations as well as to one
another. We have received a legacy from our parents and grandparents that we
can never repay. But acting as stewards of this inheritance, we can pass it onintact and enhanced-to our children and grandchildren. That is why practical
policy issues such as fiscal discipline and environmental protection also present
profound moral challenges to our capacity for responsibility.
Governance in the New Democracy
Taken together, the three cornerstones of the New Democracy-economic
transformation, opportunity without privilege, mutual responsibility-define a
vision of revitalized enduring values in a context of rapid social change. And they
point toward a new conception of self-government.
Recall the basics:
�o Changing structures of production and information are breaking down
bureaucratic organizations, bringing new decision-making power to frontline
workers, entrepreneurs, and individual citizens.
o Implementing the principle of opportunity means dismantling centralized
mechanisms that exist only to distribute and defend privilege.
o Taking mutual responsibility seriously means reforming programs and
institutions that confer one-way benefits and turn citizens into beneficiaries.
All this means a return to democratic self-government based on confidence in
the capacity of average citizens, once furnished with information, to choose
responsibly for themselves. In many cases, govemment, so understood, will yield
ground to markets and voluntary associations. When govemment is still needed,
there should be a presumption in favor of decisions made close to the people and
implemented in a manner that respects their liberty and common sense.
This does not mean that the federal govemment is somehow the enemy of the
New Democracy. Yes, the philosophy of entitlement is incompatible with the New
Democracy. But so is the philosophy of abandonment. What we need instead is
govemment guided by the imperative of empowerment, govemment that fortifies
the self-directing powers of ordinary citizens.
For by itself, the invisible hand will not enable all Americans to participate in
the new economy. The commitment to equal opportunity requires affirmative
steps taken by the entire nation. The scope of our responsibilities to one another
crosses state and local boundaries. We need not always act together as a national
community. But even today, national action as circumstances require can still
help realize the promise of American life.
�21Dec95
MEMORANDUM
TO: Don Baer
FROM: Guy L Smith
SUBJ: SlLate of the Union Theme and Delivery Scenario
"There is no substitute
for American leadership
anywhere in the world."
"When you are a leader
you can never not lead."
THEME
It is my recommendation that the theme for this year's State of the
Union address be leadership.
Leadershin is a commoditv the American neonle exnect in their
�S M I I H W U H L L m i U C IINiL-.-lliew l O f l t
M t i t - l l?-£.OI3
UHJI^J^^/^O
21 Dec95
MEMORANDUM
TO: Don Baer
FROM: Guy L. Smith
SUBJ: State, of the Union Thome and Delivery Scenario
"There Is no substitute
for American leadership
anywhere in the world."
"When you are a leader
you can never not lead."
THEME
It is my recommendation that the theme for this year's State of the
Union address be leadership.
Leadership is a commodity the American people expect in their
President. The budget battle, as unwieldy and unpleasant as it has
been, has very strongly positioned the President as standing up
firmly for what he believes in. Now, he must tell the American
people where is going to lead them. And in telling them, he must
remind them what American leadership has meant to progress for
each American and what it has meant for the security of the world.
Leadership as a theme is not trite in an era when there is so much
division in our society, so much discord, so much negative. A strong
expression of leadership is needed, wanted by most Americans, most
particularly the core Bill Clinton supporter...the truck driver from
Lubbock, the nurse from New York City, the senior from St.
Petersburg, the cop from Boise.
The address should, of course, set the stage of American leadership
and develop a clear road map of American leadership during the
coming year. Where, and how, is Bill Clinton going to lead us?
�S M I I H W U H L U W I U f c I N C . - N e w YOfKL
M ' d . I <L- I I a-<iD I D
<411 I
30
In the speech the President should articulate his vision of American
leadership, both for foreign policy and domestic policy.
Each Administration success and proposal (only the broadest
outlines) should be framed as a leadership action; each action worthy
of mentioning, be it foreign or domestic, past, current, or prospective,
should be framed within the leadership idea.
Examples:
Haiti...it was American leadership
The Mideast...it was American leadership
Bosnia...it is American leadership
The environment (a specific)...it is American leadership
Crime...and human services...and just a few others
This should not be a litany, but the communication of an idea...
• and that idea is that this President is a leader...
•
and he is leading this nation into the next century in such a
way that makes Americans believe him, s u p p o r t him, and
t r u s t him.
This President makes leadership decisions based on what is
the right t h i n g to do!
PURPOSE
The American people respond to strong leadership. They respond
to a leader standing f i r m f o r his core beliefs, his core
values. As the election year begins, positioning the President as a
strong leader with a clear idea of where he is leading the country
communicates powerful and real emotions that will resonate with
Americans.
Using a leadership theme permits almost all major policy ideas to be
neatly wrapped into a consistent and coherent package (as
contrasted to last year's address).
�S M I I M W U H L U W I U f c I N C - N e w TCXK.
" M I <L-1 I l - ^ O I b
«4D I / i / * ^
O'U.OI
The leadership theme positions the President in the strongest
possible manner at what is essentially the kickoff of the reelection
campaign.
Also, it will greatly aid in dispelling the lingering commentary about
the President's indecisiveness (e.g. the Securities legislation veto the
other day).
DELIVERY SCENARIO
The President enters the House chamber as usual, makes his way to
the rostrum as usual, enjoys the usual applause...but then, as he
begins, he lirst begins with a preamble, delivered as a
preamble..."Before I begin my formal report to the Congress"-type of
comments. In this preamble he then advises the audience (which will
be at least half filled with GOP partisans) and the television audience,
that he has some very serious, very important, he believes, ideas to
share and that he w o u l d r e s p e c t f u l l y ask that the members
hold t h e i r applause u n t i l he Is t h r o u g h (the language here
should be solemn, formal, solicitous, and not humorous).
No one has ever done this before.
•
It will set a very serious, very Presidential tone.
•
It will eliminate the cameras panning during the applause of the
President's partisans and the TV shots of the Republicans sitting
on their hands looking sour (which is a reminder of division, not
leadership).
It will eliminate the TV commentators' ability to count the
number of times the President was interrupted by applause.
It will eliminate the distractions to the TV audience.
And, it will permit the messages to come through to the TV
audience, and to the journalists covering the speech.
With this high level of solemnity and dignity, the TV
pictures will communicate a very powerful message about
this President.
•
That this President is serious.
U'WD
�•
That this President is leading this countr}'- where I (the citizen
who is watching) want it to go and 1 Peel good about what and
how he is doing it.
•
That this President is, indeed, a leader, my leader.
After this preamble, the President begins, first with some meaningful
and brief historical references about American leadership, both
foreign and domestic.
Then he begins the foreign policy section. At this p o i n t the
President holds up an actual launcher mechanism f o r a
Soviet SS-2 2. He makes the point that because of American
leadership no Soviet soldier is sitting in a silo with missiles aimed at
our country. Using the actual launcher key will create a powerful
picture and will vividly remind the audience (not the one in the
House chamber) about exactly what kind of leadership this President
is providing. This will also put the Bosnia mission into a clear
perspective.
Then on to Bosnia, Haiti, the Mideast...but briefly...but with colorful
and emotional oratory.
Then to domestic, again with the leadership theme for each area
covered...and the areas covered should be very few.
•
The speech should not exceed 20 or 25 minutes...25 minutes
max!
•
The speech should be heavy w i t h e m o t i o n , p a t r i o t i s m , and
reminders to Americans that they are, as a people, indeed leaders.
The conclusion o f t h e speech should combine the leadership theme
with an articulation o f t h e President's core beliefs that American
government is an instrument of good...for every American...and
for people around the world.
PRE-SPFTiCH BUILDUP
•
Several days prior to the speech the President should visit the
troops in Bosnia...as Commander-in-Chief.
�•
but
•
The day before the speech, in the evening, the President should
hold a Clinton-style town meeting in Charlottesville on the
campus of the University o f V i r g i n i a ,
before the town meeting...
The President should make a visit to Monticello...ALONE.
No aides, no gaggling press corps, no family...nobody!
I want the entire mansion to be devoid of anybody except the
President, the White House photographer, and one news
photographer.
The President goes in, sits at Thomas Jefferson's desk or chair
in his library, makes some finishing touches on his State of the
Union address, stands at the window and looks out,
thoughtfully regards the painting of Jefferson.
Essentially, he visits Jefferson's house and draws on, and from,
Jefferson...
the imagery and comparisons will be powerful.
The photograph that the White House releases, for the morning
papers the day o f t h e State o f t h e Union, will he very, very powerful.
They w i l l create a connection between the leader Thomas
Jefferson and the leader William Jefferson C l i n t o n .
This visit, almost literally with Thomas Jefferson, and the town
meeting with the American people, will set the stage for leadership
for the next evening for the formal delivery of the State of the Union.
Respectfully submitted,
Guy L. Smith
�r
-a
Z
4
rrnac. KJI
D
To: b.
ou
SVa^re
3
of
1
^
�TOi
AtfN LEWIS
DON BAER
FROM: LISA LINDEN
DATE: 1/11/96
i believe that there may be an important and emerging
campaign i ^ u e / ^ i u e that i J W t h exploring furth.r. Th. v-luo
i l E S J t i i t y — t h . ^onea of a strong, steady and
^ the t i l l i r . Obviously, that value i» embedded in many
o"h« - uch as leadership, puking the < « « 5 « « ™ *
^
standing up for Araerioo—but i t also haa a l i f e of i t * own.
S
6
Recent electiona emphaaiwd th* ^ " f ^ w * ? * ^ K L + J S ^ S fhe
was dramatically avidancad in 1994, and LB being raflactod in the
S J i t S S S of thJ fre^h^n Ropublicana in thai budget dGbateo now.
However, I sutipect that the ulactorate i s unaomfortable with the
kind of baeic, fundamental, sweeping govftrnroent«i ch«ng»« whinh
are b^ing pushed so fervently. The country may smpport the
general direction, but no one actually voted for the Contract or
ite detailed implementation. Very few probably want to actually
shred the oaf sty n=t (or admit they do) . The ardor of th»
<»
contract'e most vigorous proponents—and their unoompromising
zeal—maKes voters nervous. They ore seeking assurance—not
necessarily about who i s right and wrong in the debate—but that
there i s a steady hand in charge they can depend on for guidance
in thie philosophical storm.
Even those attracted by the meeaaga are probably wary of the
shoaie of extramlem. I t may be why the Speaker's peevish behavior
about hie wanner of debarking from Air Foroe one provoKed the
reaction i t did. Even i f you want a revolution, i s that the kind
of person you would want in charge?
Bob Dole, on the other hand, i s seeking to project some of
the qualities seen as important under these circumatancss—
maturity, experience, a down home aort of authority, a deal maker.
in asking voters to decide between unreconcilable
philosophies and paasiona, voters may instinctively duox and
rather choose the person most capable of holding the middle ground.
i t may be that Dola's supposed blip in the polls reflects, not
what h* hae aohieved, but that he may be seen by some ae the most
reliable person to control the fundamentalists who would drive the ehip
of state on the rocks rather than alter a degroa of their course.
The President has a great sense of presence and leadership.
He i s clear about his purposes, projects confidence and strength
and has the ability to bring peopl* together, w© ahould expior* wayg
to snowcaee theoa improoolvo qualitiea. I t may be appropriate
for example, to open up the governmental process at tines, where
appropriate, so that Americana can get a glimpse or the President
as shirtsleeves leader. He should be central and comfortable and
in command—whether with administration or opposition
roproBentatives. There are many other opportunities to pursue.
�MEMORANDUM
TOi Don Baer
FROM: L i s a Linden
RE: S t a t e o f t h e Union
DATE: December 20, 1995
The
S t a t e o f t h e Union speech p r o v i d e s a superb o p p o r t u n i t y
f o r t h e P r e s i d e n t t o g i v e a human face t o t h e v a l u e s a t t h e core o f
the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ' s philosophy.
The
p r e s i d e n t , i n r e c o g n i z i n g o u t s t a n d i n g Americans, can a l s o
l e a d t h e n a t i o n and t h e Congress i n paying t r i b u t e t o people whose
achievements
underscore
Americans w i l l
h i s themes.
a l s o be a p p l a u d i n g
Those
applauding
these
the President's
l e a d e r s h i p and
Americans may be well-known
and p r e v i o u s l y
policies.
Some o f these
honored; o t h e r s c o u l d be r e c o g n i z e d f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e . The f a c t l a
t h a t t h e s p e c i a l c o n t e x t p r o v i d e s a new meaning and added resonance
f o r each honoree.
The
a c t e o f r e c o g n i t i o n (the b r i e f b i o g r a p h y
and t h e honoree
s t a n d i n g t o applause) c o u l d be b u i l t i n the speech - p u n c t u a t i n g i t
r a t h e r than i n t r u d i n g ,
adding r a t h e r than i n t e r r u p t i n g - p r o v i d i n g
i n d i v i d u a l human touches.
with
honorees,
process
adds
I t w i l l add t o the panorama f o r viewers
f o r example,
variety
seated
and dimension
i n different
areas
and i s n o t a
eo t h e
s t a t i c or
r e p e t i t i v e exercise.
The k i n d s o f people the P r e s i d e n t might choose t o honor c o u l d
include:
-A D e t r o i t engineer, auto worker o r q u a l i t y c o n t r o l
specialist
�2./
in
r e c o g n i t i o n of
emergence
of
the
quality
contribution
American
of
that
person
manufacturing
t o the
products
re~
and
the
resurgence o f q u a l i t y American automobiles- as r e f l e c t e d by v a r i o u s
data i n c l u d i n g t h e r e c e n t J.D.
Power survey;
-Oseola Mccarty, the A f r i c a n - A m e r i c a n M i s s i s s i p p i washerwoman
who
saved f r o m a l i f e t i m e o f l a b o r $150,000 which she
contributed
t o a s c h o l a r s h i p f u n d , u n d e r s c o r i n g her s h i n i n g b e l i e f i n e d u c a t i o n
as t h e key t o a b e t t e r tomorrow;
-A community policeman from an i n n e r c i t y i n C a l i f o r n i a o r
New
York o r Ohio, a s t r e e t worker h e l p i n g k i d s s t a y i n s c h o o l and out
of
trouble;
-A p h y s i c i a n d e d i c a t e d t o s e r v i n g the poor, the l a s t d o c t o r i n
a s m a l l town who
d i d n ' t leave;
-A handicapped person who has overcome i m p o s s i b l e odds t o l e a d
a full
and p r o d u c t i v e l i f e -
conducts
such as t h e b l i n d and deaf woman who
forums on the i n t e r n e t ;
-A young mother b a l a n c i n g f a m i l y and economic p r e s s u r e s ,
has worked her way
and
is
setting
who
t h r o u g h school t o r e c e i v e a degree w i t h honors
out
on
a
career
becoming
a
role
model
and
i n d i v i d u a l s should be c a r e f u l l y s e l e c t e d t o r e f l e c t
and
taxpayer/entrepreneur.
The
enhance t h e
message. As
themes of the speech and
highlight
the
President's
s u c h , t h e y can be memorable images t h a t endow t h e
w i t h the eloquence o f t h e i r s i l e n t
testimony.
text
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
005. memo
SUBJECTYriTLE
DATE
Martin E. Marty to Don Baer; RE: Phone number [partial] (I page)
12/27/1995
RESTRICTION
P6/b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
OA/Box Number: 14457
FOLDER TITLE:
Outside Contributors Sug [Suggestions] for SOTU [State of the Union] 1996 [2]
2006-0469-F
dbl929
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)|
Freedom of Information Act -15 II.S.C. 552(b)|
Pl National Security Classified Information 1(a)(1) ofthe PRA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office 1(a)(2) of the PRA)
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute 1(a)(3) ofthe PRA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information 1(a)(4) ofthe PRA)
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors |a)(5) ofthe PRA)
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(a)(6) of the PRA)
b(l) National security classified information |(b)(l) ofthe FOIA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency 1(b)(2) ofthe FOIA]
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute 1(b)(3) ofthe FOIA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information 1(b)(4) ofthe FOIA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(b)(6) of the FOIA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes 1(b)(7) ofthe FOIA)
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions 1(b)(8) ofthe FOIA]
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells 1(b)(9) ofthe FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 II.S.C.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
�86/15/1995
22:04
7084479506
MARTIN E. MARTY
PAGE
01
Dec 27, 1995
FAX to Office of Speechwriting, The White House
Don Baer
202 456 5709
From Martin E. Marty, The University of Chicago, Chicago 60637
Dear Mr. Baer:
Last year your office asked for suggestions for a State of the Union address. At the
end of my own ideas I sent a paragraph by Rdnhold Niebuhr and an FDR selection by a
High School senior. I came across them again this week as I cleaned out my 1995files.They
strike me as relevant now as they did then; maybe they'll inspire.
No need to acknowledge. I wish you-all and the President well in the New Year.
Warm regards,
a—
Martin E. Marty
1^1 f
I sent tlfeir&flja Nietaftr quote m tM* subject *ome tune ago
and w&iepcttlt justtorfun; it* notfflfdyto help you put a
speech together but it reflects a philosophy that might sustain
you through the llth cup of coffee •backstage." The final note
of forghrcnesa strikes me as being in place in these times of
cruelty of citiam against citizen, also in poUtical rhetoric and
action. "Nothing that is worth doing can be achieved in our
lifetime; therefiwe we must be saved by hope. Nothing which is
true or beautiful or good makes complete sense in any
immediate context of histoiy; therefore we must be saved by
faith.Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished
alone; therefore we are saved by love. No virtuous act is quite
as virtuousftomthe standpoint of our friend or foe as it is
from our standpoint. Therefore we must be saved by the final
form of iwe, which is forgiveness."
We wish the Pre»dent and you and your team all the best.
Martin E. Maty,
Loo 5 }
/
Clinton Library Photocopy
�06/15/1995 22:04
7084479508
MARTIN E. MARTY
PAGE
1/8/95
Dear Professor Martin Marty,
1'AX 708 447-9508
My Dad asked me to send you this as possible material for President Clinton's
State ofthe Union Address. 1foundthis while searchingforquotes to place in my high
school yearbook Each senior had to choose three quotations to place udder their
graduation picture. I chose the foUowing because I have always admired Franklin D.
Roosevelt When 1 was in sixth grade I did myfirstmajor term paper on this remarkable
President and in just a few days I will begin my essay for The George Washington
University in which I need to create a monument commemorating Franklin and Eleanor
As an inner-city public school student, I am very much aware of the inequality
between those who have and those who have not 1 wish 1 could believe that the road we
are headed down is the one Presideot Roosevelt intended for us. However, it seems just
the opposite, and 1 would encourage President Clinton to work for compromise but never
forget his mission as a Democrat: to help others in need
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to
the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we
provide enough for those who have too little."
•Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Second Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, 1937
Sincerely,
Jessicah Krey
02
�- portability of health care, pensions, training
* Opportunity.
- we have made real progress — rapid rise of technology, internet
- but we have more to do - national mission of technological literacy
* Community.
- we have made real progress ~ crime is down
- but we have more to do - a, b, c, d
* Family.
- we have made real progress
- but we have more to do
- tobacco
- fatherhood
* Freedom
- we have made real progress
- but we have more to do
- bipartisan campaignfinancereform
* A strong America.
- We have made real progress. America strongest force for peace in the world.
- We have more to do -- finish the job in Bosnia, etc.
Conclusion
* Over the past year, we have come to a new national consensus about the proper role of
govemment. Not big bureaucracy ... not atomized individualism ... but govemment as
catalyst. For in the 21st Century, we want less govemment but more leadership.
* America has alway
�NEED
- e.gs of challenges met by Americans before
- imagery of challenge
�RESEARCH
Economy
- up to date economic statistics
- concrete examples of how American businesses are now most competitive in the world
Technology
- growth of the internet / computerization
�JRN-10-1996
13:34
fil/PGSI
2027752622
The Pew Global Stewardship Initiative
The Aspen Institute
Suite 1070
1333 New Hampshire Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C 20036
Fax Cover Sheet
PGSI Fax Number: (202) 775-2622
To::
S<1<^
Company: C e ^ ^ o ^ c J h c ^ S / b l k l t t-WotFax Number:
From:
QaJ^^
D3te: W .
l^, l^tC
Number of pages including cover sheet: 'f
If the total number of pages is not received, please call
_ 5*^3 o
Message:
I
M ^ i -Ucjr -TK
^1
oj. toy*. C<y/lcc
P.01
�01/11/96
16:41 FAX 2029941606
001
CommunltarlanNet
Ihe
rge
igton
nveiSity
UNIVRRSFTY PROFESSOR
TELEFAX COVER PAGE
OUR FAX NO.:
DATE:
01-11-96
PAGE
1
TO:
FROM:
of
6
Michael Waldman
Ryan J . Hsgeaanr. f o r Dr. Amitai E t z i o n i
Ths CoTrmunitsrinn Network
D r a f t Me-x>
RE:
PERSONAL
geowashu\faxcover
202/99J4-S190
(202) 994-1606
�01/11/96
16:41 FAX 2029941606
CommunltarlanNet
©002
mvemty
WASH I N G T O N
DC
UNIVERSITY PROFFSSOR
MUTUALITY FOR 1996: s a f e t y n e t s aa a middle c l a s s l33ue (and a l l
o t h e r s ) . Common around: p u b l i c s a f e t y n e t s h o u l d be a b i p a r t i s a n
commitments
(A d r a f t memo. Revised 1/10/96).
The
key "values"
i s s u e f o r 1996 i s what t h e members o f a
community owe one another. Reference i s t o a l l members, n o t j u s t t o
those who a r e v u l n e r a b l e .
An i m p o r t a n t p a r t o f t h e answer i s s t r o n g , sound s a f e t y n e t s .
These n e t s may be s e t low, so as t o encourage i n d i v i d u a l s t o
l i v e up t o t h e i r p e r s o n a l and s o c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , b u t t h e n e t s
must be i n v i o l a t e . Every American must be a b l e t o f e e l secure
that
i f she o r he l o s e t h e i r j o b because o f f o r c e s beyond t h e i r c o n t r o l
and a r e n o t a b l e t o f i n d another/ even i f t h e y s e a r c h f o r one h i g h
and
low, t h a t
service)
they w i l l
o r helped
be e i t h e r o f f e r e d
t o survive u n t i l
a j o b ( i n community
such a j o b i s f o u n d .
Every
American must be a b l e t o f e e l t h a t i f t h e y have worked a l l t h e i r
lives,
and t h e y have reached r e t i r e m e n t age, t h a t
a modicum o f
secure income and h e a l t h care w i l l be a v a i l a b l e . F a m i l i e s must f e e l
secure
that
they
will
be a b l e
t o provide
education
for their
c o l l e g e - a g e c h i l d r e n and p u t t h e i r p a r e n t s i n n u r s i n g homes i f t h e y
no l o n g e r can be t a k e n care o f o t h e r w i s e .
While s a f e t y n e t s may be a d j u s t e d as t o d e t a i l s o f b e n e f i t s ,
premiums, s t a r t i n g dates, and i n f l a t i o n measures - - p r i v a t i z a t i o n o r
�01/11/96
16:41
FAX 2029941606
CommunltarlanNet
12)003
2
m e a n s - t e s t i n g w i l l cause t h e i r d e s t r u c t i o n . To be sound, t h e n e t s
must encompass a l l t h e members o f t h e community and be p r o v i d e d by
t h e community a t l a r g e .
True, Americans have grown u n c o m f o r t a b l e w i t h b i g government.
However, these s a f e t y n e t s i n many ways are n o t t y p i c a l government
services.
They
are
insurance
schemes,
community
or
on
based
i n part
on premiums
loans
that
(and i n c r e a s i n g l y
s o ) , on
p r o v i d e d by a l l members o f t h e
must
be
repaid.
These
nets
are
m a i n t a i n e d w i t h a minimum o f paperwork, v e r y s m a l l s t a f f , and v e r y
low a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o s t s . And t h e y are (and s h o u l d be made more)
i n s u l a t e d f r o m p o l i t i c s , by t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f independent
public
authorities.
Data show t h a t Americans are r a p i d l y becoming more
concerned
about these s a f e t y n e t s . For example, compared t o March 1994, t h e
number o f Americans i n November 1995 t h a t w o r r i e d t h e y c o u l d n o t :
afford
h e a l t h care
rose
from 50% t o 66%; save enough money t o
r e t i r e rose f r o m 42% t o 48%; pay o f f c o l l e g e t u i t i o n r o s e f r o m 37%
t o 44%; a f f o r d t o keep a home i n c r e a s e d from 3 1 % t o 38%; and those
w o r r i e d t h e y would l o s e a j o b o r take a pay c u t was up t o 34% f r o m
28%.
These
concern
f e a r s are n o t those o f one c l a s s o r s o c i a l
group;
a
o f o n l y t h e more v u l n e r a b l e members o f s o c i e t y , o r those
l a s t h i r e d and so on. They a f f e c t a l l Americans, i n c l u d i n g numerous
i n t h e m i d d l e c l a s s , e x e c u t i v e s who cannot f i n d j o b s , g r a d u a t e s o f
p r o f e s s i o n a l schools t h a t cannot f i n d employment t h a t a l l o w them t o
repay t h e i r l o a n s and many o t h e r s . The i s s u e , hence, i s n o t one o f
�01/11/96
16:41 FAX 2029941606
CommunltarlanNet
121004
3
compassion, w h i c h s a d l y i s i n s h o r t s u p p l y i n a t h r e a t e n e d
but
one o f m u t u a l
society,
o b l i g a t i o n o f t h e members o f t h e American
community.
The
g r o w i n g American a n x i e t y about t h e b a s i c
commitments we
have made t o one another as members o f one n a t i o n a l
reflects
both
economic
recent
trend.
political
Regarding
trends
community
and an u n d e r l y i n g
the p o l i t i c a l
trends.
socio-
the public
i n c r e a s i n g l y understands t h a t w h i l e some moderate R e p u b l i c a n s seek
only
t o adjust
campaign
the level
t o remove
them
of the safety
and i n s t e a d
nets,
urge
others
reliance
actively
on e i t h e r
c h a r i t a b l e i n s t i t u t i o n s (which are overwhelmed a l r e a d y ) o r a l l o w i n g
p e o p l e t o f a c e t h e s t r e e t i f t h e y cannot hack i t on t h e i r own.
I t m i g h t be s a i d t h a t t h e Democratic White House j o i n e d t h e s e
drives
by s i g n i n g
provisions
this
or that b i l l ,
b u t these do n o t i n c l u d e
t h a t would remove t h e s a f e t y n e t s by p r i v a t i z i n g o r
m e a n s - t e s t i n g . I n 1996.
one must s t r i v e f o r a b i p a r t i s a n agreement
t o p u t t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f p u b l i c l y p r o v i d e d s a f e t y n e t s as a shared
value
f o r f u t u r e y e a r s (the way i t i s i n Europe) and f o c u s f u t u r e
discussions
but
on t h e l e v e l and s p e c i f i c n a t u r e o f t h e s e p u b l i c n e t s ,
n o t on t h e v e r y
commitment t o such p r o v i s i o n s o f e l e m e n t a r y
safety.
Steps l e a d i n g
harmful
economic
t o the destruction of p u b l i c safety nets are
a t t h i s t i m e because t h e y come d u r i n g a p e r i o d o f g r o w i n g
insecurity
as
the private
and
public
sectors
are
d o w n s i z i n g t h e i r l a b o r f o r c e ; c o r p o r a t e l o y a l t i e s t o employees a r e
o p e n l y c u r t a i l e d ; and b e n e f i t s - - f r o m h e a l t h i n s u r a n c e t o r e t i r e m e n t
�01/11/96
16:41 FAX 2029941606
CommunltarlanNet
121005
4
r i g h t s - - a r e b e i n g c u t back. Americans i n c r e a s i n g l y r e a l i z e
these
economic p r e s s u r e s
a r e no l o n g e r l i m i t e d
that
to transitional
p e r i o d s o f r e c e s s i o n s , b u t a r e p a r t o f a much deeper change i n t h e
economy, as we seek t o compete i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y w i t h l o w wage and
low b e n e f i t c o u n t r i e s and as new t e c h n o l o g i e s r e p l a c e workers more
r e a d i l y t h a n t h e y absorb them.
Second, one must r e c o g n i z e t h a t some s e l e c t r e g u l a t i o n s a r e an
i n d i s p e n s a b l e p a r t o f t h e p u b l i c s a f e t y n e t s . These r e g u l a t i o n s
i n c l u d e measures t h a t ensure t h a t meat and p o u l t r y a r e n o t i n f e s t e d
w i t h d i s e a s e ; n u r s i n g homes do n o t abuse t h e i r p a t i e n t s ; t h a a i r
and w a t e r a r e n o t l a c e d w i t h carcinogens; t h a t m e d i c a t i o n s w i l l n o t
cause severe b i r t h d e f e c t s ; c o r p o r a t i o n s n o t r a i d t h e i r r e t i r e m e n t
funds
among o t h e r s . These
regulations f a l l
into
a category of
community m u t u a l i t y , because here we say t o one a n o t h e r t h a t each
of
us w i l l n o t have t o conduct
goods,
t h e environment,
p r o v i d e d by independent
be s h a r e d
h i s o r h e r own t e s t s o f consumer
and m e d i c a t i o n s ;
and
deregulatory
zealotry
these
will
i m p a r t i a l e x p e r t s and t h e i r f i n d i n g s
by one and a l l . True,
regulations
that
these
must
t h e r e have been some
further
be
be
will
excessive
eliminated;
however
s h o u l d n o t be a l l o w e d t o c u t i n t o
vital
s a f e t y n e t s as we u n l o a d excessive baggage.
Which s p e c i f i c p o l i c i e s h i g h l i g h t t h e suggested theme? Many o f
these a r e a l r e a d y i n p l a c e , i n c l u d i n g r e s t o r i n g c o l l e g e e d u c a t i o n
loans
Others
and p r o t e c t i n g
need
t o be
Medicare,
fleshed
Medicaid,
and S o c i a l S e c u r i t y .
oub, e s p e c i a l l y
those
concerning
community j o b s , such as t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f an E x e c u t i v e Corps f o r
�01/11/96
16:41 FAX 2029941606
CommunltarlanNet
5
those who are downsized but can b r i n g s k i l l s t o the educational and
independent sector.
A c i t i z e n review board t o separate e s s e n t i a l
from onerous regulations i s another.
Amitai E t z i o n i
University.
i s a University
Professor a t George Washington
El006
�CHARLES B RANGEL
fl
1STH CoNOBtr.slONAL DI8THICT
23S4 fi,>T8URM M o u s e O p u c r B U I L P I N Q
W A S H I N O T O M . OC 20S16-321S
TELEPMONC: (202) 225^1385
Otfv-rr WHIP
OISTHICT OFFICES:
WAYS AND MEANS
Congress ot tije Hmteti States
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN
RESOURCES
ftousc of aaeprcfientatibes
COMMITTSt:
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRADE
MaSbington, m t 20515-3215
JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION
MS. VIVIAN E. JONES
OISTHIC AbMlNISTRATOR
fl
163 VVtST 125TH STREET
NE** Y O R K , NV 10027
TELEPHONE: 1212)683-3900
L"!
December 28, 1995
• 2 1 1 0 RRST A v S N y c
N e w Y O R K , N Y 10028
TELEPNONt: i 2 l ; i 3 4 8 - 8 6 3 0
RESPONb TO
Hon. William Clinton
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear President
Clinton:
3=»
CO
F3
As wc approach the end of an historic year, 1 wish to
commend your outstanding leadership on the world stage.
Your wise diplomacy and stalwart action have brought peace
and real hope for freedom and democracy to the peoples of
Haiti, Bosnia, Northern Ireland and the Middle East. In (he
continuing debate over the budget, you have demonstrated
your steadfast commitment to the defense of the aged, the
poor, the sick and our children.
f am eagerly awaiting your State of the Union message and,
in anticipation, would like to share a few urgent thoughts
regarding the narcotics abuse and urban crises, which I
hope you will address in your speech.
As indicated in my November 17th letter (see enclosed). I was
encouruged by your unprecedented crackdown on Colombian
drug smugglers, announced at the United Nations last
October, and your plans for a White House conference on
youth, drugs and crime, early next year. 1 remain greatly
concerned, however, that despite your personal commitmem
to these issues. I have seen no evidence that your domestic
team has moved forward with the same enthusiasm.
There was no
professional and
Control Policy,
departure. I do
effective without
question thai Dr. Lcc Brown, a dedicated
his staff al the Office of National Drug
shared your commitment. But with his
not believe that another Drug Czar can be
the lull support of your cabinet.
As you know, the problem of narcotics abuse and the
deterioration of our inner cities arc intertwined, and must be
approached in a coordinated fashion, by a variety of
Departments. Failed education, poor health, inadequate
housing and unemployment combine to breed a cycle of
hopelessness, desperation
and
family
breakdown that
ultimately result in crime and violence.
6aLS9:01
:WOyj
b£::8X 96 91-Nbf
�Hon. William Climon
December 28, 1995
Page 2
For God's sake, Mr. President, our children are being chewed
up by drugs, by violence, by guns, by a blind hopelessness
that is tearing our cities to shreds. And even as we fail to save
those living in our urban centers, their problems are
spreading into the suburbs and rural communities.
The preparation of your State of the Union address would be
the ideal opportunity for every cabinet secretary to assist you
in addressing these issues. 1 would suggest that each
Department provide you with information on what they have
done and what new programs are planned for the coming
year to contribute to your drug policy, urban agenda and
Empowerment Zones program. In discussing these issues. I
wish to express my great appreciation of Secretary Henry
Cisneros, whose work with the Empowerment Zones has
proven his commitment to solving our urban crises.
Mr. President, again, your leadership has made me proud to
serve in governmeni. at this time in history, despite the
difficulties we are facing. I remain convinced that under
your guidance wc have a chance to surmount ihcm all, and I
remain at your service on these or any other issues in which
I might be helpful. Please let me know how I can be of
assistance.
My deepest regards (o you and your family in the new year.
UlnaJL
CHARLES B. R A N G E L C ^Member of Congress
»
CBR/em
enclosure
CC: Hon. Al Gore
Hon. Ronald Brown
Hon. Henry Cisneros
Hon. Robert Reich
Hon. Janet Reno
Hon. Richard Riley
Hon. Robert Rubin
Hon. Donna Shalala
Hon. Andrew Cuomo
Hon. Patrick Griffin
Hon. Alexis Herman
Hon. Harold Ickes
Hon. Leon Panetta
Hon. Carol Rasco
Hon. Alice Rivlin
£:0:3Sbd
60ZS9:ai
TSa99Sl7S0S
:UIOyj
b£:8T 96 91-Nbf
�Ol
— ^ - i '
Congress ot tlieftnitefaStates
WAVS AfcO MEAMS
MS
I JOMJ
V . l — . ? i i , » t j
sot
jaiastiington. SC 20515-3215
.O.NTCOMM.TTHOs'AXAT.cs
N.HCIIlhcr
17.
NV5
v - ' ^ ' s V W
•i ••-•,«•
Hon. William Clinton
The While House
Washington. DC 20500
Dear Prcsidem Clinton:
Your leadership in making certain (hat your goals on behalf
nf the people of the United States are not jeopardized by the
blatant political inieresi.s of Republicans in Congress has
made me particularly proud of my service in governmeni.
Your stalwart position in holding your ground
has
strengthened the American people and won support across
the nalion. By all indications, every Democratic member of
Congress has also benefitted from improved ratings among
their constituents.
^
As proud as I have been of your leadership during the
currem debate over the budget. 1 was deeply hurt by your
decision not to veto HR 2259. the bill rejecting the U.S.
Sentencing Commission's recommendation to equalize federal
mandatory sentences for crack and powder cocaine offenses.
As a former U.S. Attorney. 1 hold no brief for narcotics
offenders, whom 1 used to prosecute. But it serves no
worthwhile
purpose
lo
maintain
the
egregiously
discriminatory mandatory sentencing structure thai the
Sentencing Commission proposal would have changed.
Every law enforcement and narcotics abuse
enpert-including Secretary
Lee Brown-has admitted that the
existing sentencing law has had no impact on reducing
consumption, distribution, or international trafficking in
illegal narcotics. If anything, the law seems to target poor,
hopeless, unemployed, drug-dependent young Black men who
sell drugs to support their addictions.
Mr. President, I have started several letters to express my
disappointment over your response to this issue, but tore
them up. relucum to add io your problems with ihe
Republican majority. By waiting. I hoped to contribute in a
positive way to your formulation of an urban and drug
strategy, instead of joining the chorus of critics who agree
that building more jails and deploying more police are not
the only answer to drug dependency and unemployment.
J t ; >ta « y .
�Hon. William Clinton
Nnvemhcr 17. 1 W
< 5
Page 2.
In lhe fall of 19^1. I asked Dick Dannun. President Bush s
Dircdor of Manajjcmcni jud Budyci. io vhjrc »ith mc IIJC
economic
impact of druy addiction
He included (he
measurahle financial costs ol crime and violence, law
enforcement and prisons, health care, homelessness. AIDS,
and all the other liabilities growing out of drug abuse. A
relatively minor example nf the figures contributing to his
calculations was the $60,000 a year it costs to hold a prisoner
at Rikcrs Island jail in New York City, where the level of
economic distress is today measured by the battle over
spending $6,000 a year to educate a child in public school.
Darman then factored in the waste in lost productivity and
revenues attributable to drug addiction and arrived at a total
estimate of more than $250 billion. Most economists today
would double thai estimate.
When one considers our huge investments to discourage the
cultivation and process^ig of narcotics in foreign countries,
and to impede internltional trafficking, (hen include the
costs associated with crime, health, homelessness and the
rest, it seems to me that it makes far more sense to avoid
addiciion in lhe first place than to suffer ils horrendous
consequences.
The U.S. leads the world with one million people incarcerated
and millions more under criminal justice supervision. In
some jurisdiclioos. 90^- of the inmates are jailed on drug
related offenses. Prisons are a leading growth industry, and
in some states such as California, prison guards are among
the most powerfu) political forces. State legislators are
waging political battles over the locations of an evergrowing number of prisons, in the same way cities used ty
compeie for military bases.
On every level of government, less money is available for
education and training. But for some reason, the private
sector continues in its. failure to join as panners with the
school system to help prepare qualified workers to compete
in the high-tech global economy. We will fail as a nation if
we fail to train our people.
Your adoption of Empowerment Zones and support of its
passage was a giant first step in dealing with an urgent
national problem. It sent a signal of your awareness of the
growing problems io our urban centers.
�Hon. WjUurn Clinton
Novemher 17. 1995
Page >
You won'i believe ihis. hut ^incc wc nrjani/cJ the Upper
Manhallan Empnvkerment Zone inonih> a^o with the Messing:
ol' Mayor Giuliani, it was only lasi week thai ihe Slate
government finally granted iis approval. So we're gelling a
late start. But working closely with Secretary Cisneros and
Assistant Secretary Andrew Cuomo at HUD. the city and state. I
am certain wc will make you proud.
Mr. President. I greatly appreciate your support of the
Empowerment Zone, just as I commend your strong recent
initiative announced at the United Nations io sanction
Colombia's Caii drug cartel. Like the Empowerment Zones,
however, that crackdown should serve as a beginning, not a
substitute for a sound drug and urban policy.
There never has been a
out ttainst this crisis
cities and dividing our
most able team to carry
beticr time than now for you to strike
that is sapping the strength of our
nation. You have already assembled a
it out.
Armed by a comprehensive coordinated slrategy with lhe
power of your office behind them, your cabinet secretaries
will be fortified for the effort. Auorney General Reno and
Secretary Lee Brown will find it less difficult and costly to
prevent addiction and crime than io contain it. Education
Secretary Riley will be empowered to prepare all of our
graduates to compete globally Secretary Shalala will be
equipped to stop ihe spread of tuberculosis. AIDS, diabetes and
oiher debilitating diseases. Secretary Cisneros will find
housing for the homeless. Secretary Reich will apply his
creative genius to putting our young people to work. And
Secretary Ron Brown will help business to better understand
thai their investmeni in people is an inveslmeni in their own
future.
As you know, Mr. President, all of the problems facing our
cities are intertwined, making each one even more difficult
to solve. Therefore a full array of resources must be
assembled to get the job done. Some of the tools are already at
hand: wage credits, capital gains relief, market-driven
education and training programs, national service, student
stipends, scholarships, and many more. Other ideas will
emerge from tbe creativity of your cabinet and other
members of tbe government, and from those of us who are
already involved in our cities. One thing is certain, however,
no solutions will be viable without the full participation and
cooperation of the private sector.
9
0
:
3
9
y
d
60ZS9:O1
iaS99£b202
:N0aj
9£:Ql 96 9I-Ndf
�Hon. William Clinion
Novemhcr 17. I W
Page 4
Thc-c arc ideas (hal I kiin\* arc noi new io you 1 hjvc xpoken
aboul (hem wilh Sc(.rclar\ Rubin and oilier> in your
Administration. But it scem> to mc thai the time i* now right
for a major Presidential initiative and statement on the
growing crisis in our urban communities The people are
beginning to recognize that the hopelessness of poor urban
youth not only dooms the ghettos, but robs the Treasury,
cripples our international competitiveness,
threatens our
personal security and dangerously divides the nation. They
also know that young people who are educated, trained and
armed with hope for the future, don't use drugs, bear
children before their time or commit acts of violence.
I know the love you have for this country, and your
sensitivity to the problems of our people. 1 can only hope that
you feel the urgency of the situation. 1 am anxious to work
with you and am prepared to pull together Jack Kemp and my
colleagues Speaker Cingrich and Chairman Kasich. all of
whom share our concern and agree that the private sector
must be involved.
Mr. President. once again. congratulations, on your
leadership, and I respectfully look forward to hearing from
you on these critical issues.
Cl
(ember of Congress
CBR/em
OC: Hon. Al Gore
Hon. Lee Brown
Hon. Ron Brown
Hon. Henry Cisneros
Hon. Robert Reich
Hon. Janet Reno
Hon. Richard Riley
Hon. Robert Rubin
Hon. Donna Shalala
Hon. Andrew Cuomo
Hon. Alexis Herman
Hon. Harold Ickes
Hon. Leon Panetta
Hon. Carol Rasco
Hon.
�THE WHITE H O U S E
WASHINGTON
January 11, 1996
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
DONALD A. BAER
SUBJECT:
STATE OF THE UNION IDEAS
Attached are suggestions on the State of the Union which came in as a result of Sunday
night's dinner. I hope you find these useful.
Also attached is something I received this morning which I thought you would want to see.
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
006. memo
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
Bill Galston to the President; RE: State of the Union/1996 Agenda (3
pages)
01/10/1996
RESTRICTION
P5
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
OA/Box Number:
14457
FOLDER TITLE:
Outside Contributors Sug [Suggestions] for SOTU [State ofthe Union] 1996 [2]
2006-0469-F
dbl929
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - |44 U.S.C. 2204(a)|
Freedom of Information Act - |5 U.S.C. 552(b)|
Pt National Security Classified Information 1(a)(1) ofthe PRA|
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office 1(a)(2) ofthe PRA|
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute 1(a)(3) ofthe PRA)
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information |(a)(4) ofthe PRA)
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors (a)(5) ofthe PRA|
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(a)(6) ofthe PRA)
b(l) National security classified information [(b)(1) ofthe FOIA)
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency 1(b)(2) ofthe FOIA1
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute 1(b)(3) ofthe FOIA)
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information 1(b)(4) ofthe FOIA)
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(b)(6) ofthe 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 1(b)(8) ofthe FOIA)
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells [(b)(9) ofthe FOlA|
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.
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
007. memo
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
Bruce Ackerman to Don Baer; RE: State of the Union Address and
phone number (3 pages)
RESTRICTION
n.d.
P5, P6/b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
OA/Box Number: 14457
FOLDER TITLE:
Outside Contributors Sug [Suggestions] for SOTU [State ofthe Union] 1996 [2]
2006-0469-F
dbl929
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act -144 II.S.C. 2204(a)|
Freedom of Information Act -15 U.S.C. 552(b)|
Pl
P2
P3
P4
b(l) National security classified information 1(b)(1) of the FOIA)
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency 1(b)(2) ofthe FOIA)
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute 1(b)(3) ofthe FOIA)
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information 1(b)(4) ofthe FOIA)
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(b)(6) ofthe FOIA)
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes 1(b)(7) ofthe FOIA|
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions 1(b)(8) ofthe FOIA)
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells 1(b)(9) ofthe FOIA]
National Security Classified Information 1(a)(1) ofthe PRA)
Relating to the appointment to Federal office 1(a)(2) ofthe PRA|
Release would violate a Federal statute 1(a)(3) ofthe PRA]
Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information 1(a)(4) ofthe PRA)
P5 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 1(a)(6) ofthe PRA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
�TorDon Baer, 202-456-1213
From: Bruce Ackerman
Fax: 202-357-4439
Phone: h:|fVp6/(SK6f71; o:357-1604 Y l O O ^ ]
^
Re: State of the Union Address
This Address has consistently disappointed Woodrow Wilson's
hopes. President after president has allowed federal departments
and interest groups to lobby their favorite paragraphs into The
Speech, The result has been a quasi-bureaucratic r o l l - c a l l of
mission-statements,
interspersed with a few *City on a H i l l "
paragraphs. There are few better examples of the
bureaucratization of charisma.
But, pace Weber, there i s nothing inevitable about this.
Especially this year. You have two goals. First, and foremost,
the President's performance should suggest that he has now
mastered the challenges of his office. This means, above a l l ,
that the Speech should be short and to the point, since everybody
expects i t to be too long and diffuse. Second, i f you intend to
move beyond a purely defensive campaign in the F a l l , you should
use the Speech to develop one or two —
no more — affirmative
issues for later elaboration.
The Speech should have four parts. First, a summary of
accomplishments, domestic and foreign, second, an elaboration of
the basic values the President i s defending in the budget
controversy. Third, moving beyond the budget, to define one or
two affirmatives. Fourth, upbeat conclusion (Buzzwords here:
1
Clinton Library Photocopy
�reasoning together, coinmon ground, responsible reform) .
As i n d i c a t e d at the dinner, my nominations
f o r Part Three
are the environment and campaign reform. The President's p o s i t i o n
amongst h i s other major constituencies i s p r e t t y s o l i d . But he
has a very weak p r o f i l e amongst environmentalists, who are, of
course, very numerous amongst the Northern suburban voters who
are going t o decide t h i s e l e c t i o n . I n c o n t r a s t t o other issues,
the Republicans have dug themselves i n t o a hole on t h i s one, and
cannot defend themselves e f f e c t i v e l y i f the President chooses t o
go on the o f f e n s i v e .
Environmental
law i s r i p e f o r reform. Our system of command-
and-control r e g u l a t i o n i s obsolete and i n e f f i c i e n t . ^ I n s t e a d o f
c o n f r o n t i n g cumbersome regulations, p o l l u t e r s should be required
to pay f o r every pound o f p o l l u t i o n they generate^ This w i l l not
only y i e l d
t e n (or more) b i l l i o n d o l l a r s i n extra revenue each
year, making i t easier t o balance the budget or fund the
environment or cut other taxes. I t would also c u t costs o f
compliance by o n e - t h i r d or more —
a sum t h a t i s also measured i n
the tens o f b i l l i o n s annually. ( I f you would l i k e support f o r the
statements made i n t h i s paragraph,
I can e a s i l y supply
them).
What i s more, there i s broad b i p a r t i s a n consensus i n support
of
t h i s reform. Indeed, Gingrich himself would favor i t , but f o r
the f a c t t h a t h i s right-wingers want t o gut environmental law
e n t i r e l y . Buzzwords f o r speech: " P o l l u t e r s should pay. Replace
�JPIN 09 '96 11: 14
P. 3
S
bureaucrats w i t h the market.""We charge companies when they want
to use the airwaves, or d r i l l f o r o i l . We should charge them when
they use our waterways or the a i r we breathe." "Taxing p o l l u t i o n
i s l i k e t a x i n g c i g a r e t t e s and a l c o h o l . "
While campaign reform i s also a good issue, I do not t h i n k
t h a t e i t h e r Republicans or Democrats have much c r e d i b i l i t y here.
I have, o f course, already sent you a reform proposal i n t h i s
area, but the time i s not r i p e t o go forward w i t h i t i n the
context o f t h i s speech.
The best you can do i s t o repeat the
outstanding i n v i t a t i o n to Gingrich; and say t h a t , u n t i l we have
r e a l campaign reform, i t w i l l be much harder t o make responsible
reforms i n the environment and other areas.
�The Great Opportunity of Democracy :
Scholars' Dinner at the White House
January 7,1996
Amy Gutmann
Laurance S. Rockefeller University Professor
and Dean of the Faculty,
Princeton University
An image permeates American history. Our country is large; we contain multitudes. At
the sametimeas this image provokes some anxiety, it creates great opportunities. How
can such a large, diverse citizenry resolve the moral and political disagreements among
ourselves? In response to this anxiety-producing question, James Madison celebrated a
conception of democracy that is even more relevant today—with our vastly expanded
means of communication—than ever before. We call this conception deliberative
democracy. The core idea Is simple: when citizens and public offldals disagree with each
other, we should not resort to violence, power politics, or interest-group bargaining, but
we should reason together to reach mutually acceptable decisions. Because political
decisions are mutually binding, we should aspire to public reasoning that is mutually
justifiable.
The aim of such reasoning is reciprocity, or fairness. The means is mutual respect.
What does it take for deliberative democracy to work? There are at least three challenges
that the deliberative ideal poses for American politics today.
r
tf'
P I 7 I QC<r7n7-0Q I 70C7
'
I I Q I • fl I
AW
1
OA-fH-l
'
n 7 rw
J 0 T d 0 3 0 I 0 I XOJOV-ia
I Mac
�-2-
First and perliaps furemost Is Uie chaUenge of educating our children to dvic virtue. A
successful dvic educadon teaches the difference between acting in ways that take
advantage of others, and acting fairly. In a way that we can Justify to each other. Civic
education therefore cannot ba morally neutral Robert Frost quipped that a liberal is
someone who cannot take his own side In an argument Democrats must take our own
side in the argument over dvic education. Our democracy canflourishonly if we educate
our children to the common values of dtteenship: toleration, non-violence, honesty, hard
work, and the distinctively democratic virtues of dvic partidpatlon and mutual respect
among all people who are part of the ongoing democratic quest for fair terms of sodal
cooperation.
The second challenge is that of assodating cooperatively as adults. "Each has his or her
place In the procession," Walt Whitman wrote about democracy in America. The
democratic procession depends on our mutually cooperative efforts in many
associations, families and friends, neighborhoods and clubs, companies and unions,
professions and political parties. Not all assodations serve democracy well. The Michigan
"dtizens' militia," which teaches violence, distrust of difference, and disrespect of
legitimate authority, is detrimental to democracy. But the vast majority of assodations in
this country serve as schools of deliberative democracy. We need to foster them, both by
private and public efforts. In dvic assodations, we leam essential skills of democratic
dtizenshlp, to accommodate differences that are worthy of respect, and to economize on
our moral disagreements. There is a role for everyone in fostering more and better dvic
assodations. Citizens and public offidals alike who demonstrate mutual respect and who
practice an economy of moral disagreement help dispel the cynidsm that too many
people have developed toward the democratic ideal of helping each other help ourselves.
Although disagreement Is Inevitable in a free sodety, a robust assodational life coupled
6 #:
eiSl99frS0Z*-89lS8SS
:
WVQUOL:
96-Ql-L : OZOi JOidoooioi
XOJOX:A9
1N3S
�-3with an open democrattc govemment enables us to resolve our disagreements In
mutually respectful, cooperadve ways.
To foster deliberative ways of resolving our disagreements, a third challenge must be
met. We must work to counteract soundbite democracy, the antithesis of deliberative
democracy. Soundbite democracy rewards the simplistic and the sensational; it punishce
dvillty and denigrate fair compromises, which reciprocity often requires. For many years
now, dtizens have beseeched Journalists as well as public offidals to bring out the best
rather than the worst in each other. The point is deddedly not to limit freedom of speech
or the press, but to recognize the responsibility that accompanies these great rights of
American democracy. The rights presuppose our responsibility to pursue the best rather
than pander to the worst in our politics.
Educate for dvic virtue. Associate cooperatively. Speak responsibly and respectfully.
When we put these deliberative ideals Into practice, they have conspicuously positive
effects on our politics.
Consider the mutually-agreed upon aim of balancing the budget. Redprodty calls on us
not only to balance the budget but also to balance the burden of balancing the budget.
Only If the burden is balanced can the decision be considered mutually acceptable.
Or consider another mutually-agreed upon aim, of ending "welfare as we know it." A
commitment to assodating cooperatively asks us aU to look for ways In which we can
find jobs and make work pay for all Americans who are willing and able to work. Only If
men and women can find work that pays can we expect assodational life to flourish in
this country. Assodating together takes time, which dtizens who are willing and able to
work but who cannot make ends meet do not have.
fr
#;
eiZ19SVZ0SH}9LZBSZ
'. WV6L;Qi: 96-QL-L : OZU JOidoooioi X0J0X:Ag j.N3R
�-4-
Consldcr, finaUy, campaign finance. Unlike soundbite democracy, deliberative
democracy depends on public officials having the time and being given the opportuiUty
by the media to explain their positions thoroughly and thoughtfully with all Americans,
rather than spending inordinate amounts of time raising money to run an effective
campaign.
Working together, citizens and public officials can meet each of these three challenges of
deliberative democracy if we use its means of mutual respect in education, dvic
assodation, and poUtical deliberation. We have the capadty to seek fair terms of sodal
cooperation, and it is this capadty that deliberative democracy encourages.
It is an honor for me to be here tonight as part of the American procession. I thank you,
Mr. President and Mrs. Clinton, for the opportunity to partidpate in this deliberative
forum, an opportunity so great as to overwhelm (almost) all the anxiety.
c a:
p.ui&w.Mi-MlZM?.
: WV6L:0L: 96-OL-L : QZQL JOidoooioi xojox;Aa 1N3S
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
008. memo
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
Benjamin Barber to President Clinton; RE: 1996 Blizzard Dinner and
phone number (4 pages)
01/10/1996
RESTRICTION
P5, P6/b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
OA/Box Number:
14457
FOLDER TITLE:
Outside Contributors Sug [Suggestions] for SOTU [State ofthe Union] 1996 [2]
2006-0469-F
dbl929
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - |44 II.S.C. 2204(a)|
Freedom of Information Act -15 II.S.C. 5S2(b)|
PI National Security Classified Information 1(a)(1) ofthe PRA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office 1(a)(2) ofthe PRA|
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute |(a)(3) ofthe PRA|
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information [(a)(4) ofthe PRA]
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors |a)(S) ofthe PRA]
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(l) National security classified information | (b)(1) ofthe FOIA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency 1(b)(2) ofthe FOIA]
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute 1(b)(3) ofthe FOIA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information 1(b)(4) ofthe FOIA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(b)(6) of the FOIA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes 1(b)(7) ofthe FOIA)
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions 1(b)(8) ofthe FOIA)
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells 1(b)(9) ofthe 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.
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
008. memo
DATE
SUBJECT/TITLE
Benjamin Barber to President Clinton; RE: 1996 Blizzard Dinner and
phone number (4 pages)
01/10/1996
RESTRICTION
P5, P6/b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
OA/Box Number:
14457
FOLDER TITLE:
Outside Contributors Sug [Suggestions] for SOTU [State ofthe Union] 1996 [2]
2006-0469-F
dbl929
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)l
Freedom oflnformation Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)|
Pl National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) ofthe PRA|
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office 1(a)(2) ofthe PRA)
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute 1(a)(3) ofthe PRA)
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information 1(a)(4) ofthe PRA]
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors |a)(5) ofthe PRA]
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(a)(6) ofthe PRA]
b(l) National security classified information 1(b)(1) ofthe FOIA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency 1(b)(2) ofthe FOIA]
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute 1(b)(3) ofthe FOIA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information |(b)(4) ofthe FOIA)
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(b)(6) ofthe 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 1(b)(8) ofthe FOIA]
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells 1(b)(9) ofthe 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.
�.The
>g
re
/Tastiington
University
A SHINGTON
DC'
;
UNIVERSITY PROI USSOR
MUTUALITY FOR 1996: s a f e t y n e t s as a middle c l a s s i s s u e (and a l l
o t h e r s ) . Common ground: p u b l i c s a f e t y n e t s h o u l d be a b i p a r t i s a n
commitment.
(A d r a f t memo).
The
key "values"
issue
f o r 1996 i s what t h e members o f a
community owe one another. Reference i s t o a l l members, n o t j u s t t o
those who a r e v u l n e r a b l e .
The answer i s s t r o n g , sound s a f e t y n e t s .
These n e t s may be s e t low, so as t o encourage i n d i v i d u a l s t o
l i v e up t o t h e i r p e r s o n a l and s o c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , b u t t h e n e t s
must be i n v i o l a t e . Every American must be a b l e t o f e e l secure
that
i f she o r he l o s e t h e i r j o b because o f f o r c e s beyond t h e i r c o n t r o l
and a r e n o t a b l e t o f i n d another, even i f t h e y search f o r one h i g h
and
low, t h a t
service)
they w i l l
o r helped
be e i t h e r
t o survive u n t i l
offered
a j o b ( i n community
such a j o b i s found.
Every
American must be a b l e t o f e e l t h a t i f t h e y have worked a l l t h e i r
lives,
and t h e y have reached r e t i r e m e n t age, t h a t
a modicum o f
secure income and h e a l t h care w i l l be a v a i l a b l e . F a m i l i e s must f e e l
secure
that
they
will
be a b l e
t o provide
education
for their
c o l l e g e - a g e c h i l d r e n and p u t t h e i r p a r e n t s i n n u r s i n g homes i f t h e y
no l o n g e r can be taken care o f o t h e r w i s e .
While
s a f e t y nets may be a d j u s t e d as t o d e t a i l s o f payout,
premiums, s t a r t i n g dates, and i n f l a t i o n m e a s u r e s - - p r i v a t i z a t i o n o r
Tin- GKI.MAN I.IDRARY • ROOM 71-1J
• 2I.M> H STRI:I:T. N.W.
• WASHINGTON. DC JOOSJ
�2
m e a n s - t e s t i n g w i l l cause t h e i r d e s t r u c t i o n . To be sound, t h e n e t s
must encompass a l l t h e members o f t h e community and be p r o v i d e d by
t h e community a t l a r g e .
True, Americans have grown u n c o m f o r t a b l e w i t h b i g government.
However, these s a f e t y n e t s i n many ways are n o t t y p i c a l government
services.
They
are
insurance
schemes,
community
or
on
based
i n part
on premiums
loans
that
(and
increasingly
s o ) , on
p r o v i d e d by a l l members o f t h e
must
be
repaid.
These
nets
are
m a i n t a i n e d w i t h a minimum o f paperwork, v e r y s m a l l s t a f f , and v e r y
low a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o s t s . And t h e y are (and s h o u l d be made more)
i n s u l a t e d from p o l i t i c s , by t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f independent
public
authorities.
Data show t h a t Americans are r a p i d l y becoming more
concerned
about these s a f e t y n e t s . For example, compared t o March 1994, t h e
number o f Americans i n November 1995 t h a t w o r r i e d t h e y c o u l d n o t :
afford
h e a l t h care
rose
from
50% t o 66%; save enough money t o
r e t i r e rose from 42% t o 48%; pay o f f c o l l e g e t u i t i o n rose from 37%
t o 44%; a f f o r d t o keep a home i n c r e a s e d from 3 1 % t o 38%; and those
w o r r i e d t h e y would l o s e a j o b o r take a pay c u t was up t o 34% from
28%.
These
f e a r s are not those o f one c l a s s o r s o c i a l group;
a
concern o f o n l y t h e more v u l n e r a b l e members o f s o c i e t y , o r those
l a s t h i r e d and so on. They a f f e c t a l l Americans, i n c l u d i n g numerous
i n t h e middle c l a s s , e x e c u t i v e s who cannot f i n d j o b s , graduates o f
p r o f e s s i o n a l schools t h a t cannot f i n d employment t h a t a l l o w them t o
repay t h e i r loans and many o t h e r s . The i s s u e , hence, i s n o t one o f
�3
compassion,
society,
which
anyhow
i s i n short
b u t one o f mutual
supply
in a
threatened
o b l i g a t i o n o f t h e members o f t h e
American community.
The
g r o w i n g American a n x i e t y about t h e b a s i c
commitments we
have made t o one another as members o f one n a t i o n a l
reflects
both
economic
recent
trend.
political
Regarding
trends
community
and an u n d e r l y i n g
the p o l i t i c a l
trends,
socio-
the public
i n c r e a s i n g l y understands t h a t w h i l e some moderate Republicans seek
only
t o adjust
campaign
the level
t o remove
them
of the safety
and i n s t e a d
nets,
urge
others
reliance
actively
on e i t h e r
c h a r i t a b l e i n s t i t u t i o n s (which are overwhelmed a l r e a d y ) o r a l l o w i n g
people t o face t h e s t r e e t i f they cannot hack i t on t h e i r own.
I t m i g h t be s a i d t h a t t h e Democratic White House j o i n e d these
d r i v e s by s i g n i n g t h i s
provisions
or that b i l l ,
b u t these d i d n o t i n c l u d e
t h a t would remove t h e s a f e t y n e t s by p r i v a t i z i n g o r
m e a n s - t e s t i n g . I n 1996,
one must s t r i v e f o r a b i p a r t i s a n agreement
t o p u t t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f p u b l i c l y p r o v i d e d s a f e t y n e t s as a shared
value
f o r f u t u r e y e a r s (the way i t i s i n Europe) and f o c u s f u t u r e
discussions
but
on t h e l e v e l and s p e c i f i c n a t u r e o f these p u b l i c n e t s ,
n o t on t h e v e r y
commitment t o such p r o v i s i o n s o f e l e m e n t a r y
safety.
These n o t i o n s are p a r t i c u l a r l y t h r e a t e n i n g because t h e y come
d u r i n g a p e r i o d o f growing economic i n s e c u r i t y as a l l t h r e e
--private,
public,
force; corporate
and independent--are
downsizing
their
sectors
labor
l o y a l t i e s t o employees a r e o p e n l y c u r t a i l e d ; and
b e n e f i t s - - f r o m h e a l t h insurance t o r e t i r e m e n t r i g h t s - - a r e b e i n g c u t
�4
back. Americans i n c r e a s i n g l y r e a l i z e t h a t these economic p r e s s u r e s
are no l o n g e r l i m i t e d t o t r a n s i t i o n a l p e r i o d s o f r e c e s s i o n s , b u t
are p a r t o f a much deeper change i n t h e economy,
as we seek t o
compete i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y w i t h low wage and low b e n e f i t c o u n t r i e s and
as new t e c h n o l o g i e s r e p l a c e workers more r e a d i l y t h a n t h e y
absorb
them.
Second, one must recognize t h a t some s e l e c t r e g u l a t i o n s a r e an
indispensable
part
of
the p u b l i c
safety
nets.
These
concern
measures t h a t ensure t h a t meat and p o u l t r y a r e n o t i n f e s t e d
d i s e a s e ; n u r s i n g homes do n o t abuse t h e i r p a t i e n t s ;
water
are not laced w i t h carcinogens;
cause
severe
birth
defects;
with
t h e a i r and
t h a t medications w i l l not
corporations
do
not
raid
their
r e t i r e m e n t funds, and a few o t h e r s . These r e g u l a t i o n s f a l l
into a
c a t e g o r y o f community m u t u a l i t y , because here we say t o one a n o t h e r
t h a t each o f us w i l l n o t have t o conduct
consumer goods, t h e environment,
be p r o v i d e d by independent
will
be shared
regulations
and m e d i c a t i o n s ; t h a t these
impartial
by one and a l l . True,
i n the past
and
h i s o r her own t e s t s o f
these
e x p e r t s and t h e i r
will
findings
t h e r e were some e x c e s s i v e
are
and
must
further
be
e l i m i n a t e d ; however d e r e g u l a t o r y z e a l o t r y s h o u l d n o t be a l l o w e d t o
literally
throw
away v i t a l
safety
nets
as we
unload
excessive
baggage.
Which s p e c i f i c p o l i c i e s h i g h l i g h t t h e suggested theme? Many o f
these a r e a l r e a d y i n p l a c e , i n c l u d i n g r e s t o r i n g c o l l e g e e d u c a t i o n
loans
Others
and
protecting
need
to
be
Medicare,
fleshed
Medicaid,
and
out, especially
Social Security.
those
concerning
�5
community j o b s , such as t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f an E x e c u t i v e Corps f o r
those who are downsized b u t can b r i n g s k i l l s t o t h e e d u c a t i o n a l and
independent s e c t o r .
A c i t i z e n r e v i e w board t o s e p a r a t e
from onerous r e g u l a t i o n s
essential
i s another.
Amitai Etzioni i s a University
University.
(January 4, 1996).
Professor
a t George
Washington
�Ihe
prge
mvefSity
WASHINGTON
DC
UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR
MUTUALITY FOR 1996: s a f e t y n e t s as a m i d d l e c l a s s i s s u e (and a l l
o t h e r s ) . Common ground: p u b l i c s a f e t y n e t s h o u l d be a b i p a r t i s a n
commitment.
(A d r a f t memo).
The
key "values"
issue
f o r 1996 i s what
t h e members c f a
community owe one another. Reference i s t o a l l members, n o t j u s t t o
those who a r e v u l n e r a b l e .
The answer i s s t r o n g , sound s a f e t y n e t s .
These n e t s may be s e t low, so as t o encourage i n d i v i d u a l s t o
l i v e up t o t h e i r p e r s o n a l and s o c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , b u t t h e n e t s
must be i n v i o l a t e . Every American must be a b l e t o f e e l secure
that
i f she o r he l o s e t h e i r j o b because o f f o r c e s beyond t h e i r c o n t r o l
and a r e n o t a b l e t o f i n d another, even i f t h e y search f o r one h i g h
and
low, t h a t
they w i l l
s e r v i c e ) o r helped
be e i t h e r
t o survive u n t i l
offered
a j o b ( i n community
such a j o b i s found.
Every
American must be able t o f e e l t h a t i f t h e y have worked a l l t h e i r
lives,
and t h e y have reached r e t i r e m e n t age, t h a t
a modicum o f
secure income and h e a l t h care w i l l be a v a i l a b l e . F a m i l i e s must f e e l
secure
that
they
will
be a b l e
t o provide
education
fortheir
c o l l e g e - a g e c h i l d r e n and p u t t h e i r p a r e n t s i n n u r s i n g homes i f t h e y
no l o n g e r can be taken care o f o t h e r w i s e .
While
s a f e t y nets may be a d j u s t e d as t o d e t a i l s o f payout,
premiums, s t a r t i n g dates, and i n f l a t i o n m e a s u r e s - - p r i v a t i z a t i o n o r
THE
GHI.MAN I.IHRARY • ROOM 71,-, | . J I U I II STKKHT. N.W. • WASH INC ION. DC JDOSJ
�2
m e a n s - t e s t i n g w i l l cause t h e i r d e s t r u c t i o n . To be sound, t h e n e t s
must encompass a l l t h e members o f t h e community and be p r o v i d e d bv
t h e community a t l a r g e .
True, Americans have grown u n c o m f o r t a b l e w i t h b i g government.
However, these s a f e t y n e t s i n many ways are n o t t y p i c a l government
services.
They
are
insurance
schemes,
community
or
on
based
i n part
on premiums
loans
that
(and
increasingly
s o ) , on
p r o v i d e d by a l l members o f t h e
must
be
repaid.
These
nets
are
m a i n t a i n e d w i t h a minimum o f paperwork, v e r y s m a l l s t a f f , and v e r y
low a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o s t s . And t h e y are (and s h o u l d be made more)
i n s u l a t e d from p o l i t i c s , by t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f independent
public
authorities.
Data show t h a t Americans are r a p i d l y becoming more
concerned
about these s a f e t y n e t s . For example, compared t o March 1994, t h e
number o f Americans i n November 1995 t h a t w o r r i e d t h e y c o u l d n o t :
afford
h e a l t h care
rose
from
50% t o 66%; save enough money t o
r e t i r e rose from 42% t o 48%; pay o f f c o l l e g e t u i t i o n rose from 37%
t o 44%; a f f o r d t o keep a home i n c r e a s e d from 3 1 % t o 38%; and those
w o r r i e d t h e y would l o s e a j o b o r t a k e a pay c u t was up t o 34% from
28% .
These
f e a r s are not those o f one c l a s s o r s o c i a l
group;
a
concern o f o n l y t h e more v u l n e r a b l e members o f s o c i e t y , o r those
l a s t h i r e d and so on. They a f f e c t a l l Americans, i n c l u d i n g numerous
i n t h e middle c l a s s , e x e c u t i v e s who cannot f i n d j o b s , g r a d u a t e s o f
p r o f e s s i o n a l schools t h a t cannot f i n d employment t h a t a l l o w them t o
repay t h e i r loans and many o t h e r s . The i s s u e , hence, i s not one o f
�3
compassion,
society,
which
anyhow
i s i n short
b u t one o f mutual
supply
in a
threatened
o b l i g a t i o n o f t h e members o f t h e
American community.
The
g r o w i n g American a n x i e t y about t h e b a s i c
commitments we
have made t o one another as members o f one n a t i o n a l
reflects
both
economic
recent
trend.
political
Regarding
trends
community
and an u n d e r l y i n g
the p o l i t i c a l
trends,
socio-
the public
i n c r e a s i n g l y understands t h a t w h i l e some moderate Republicans seek
only
t o adjust
campaign
the level
t o remove
them
of the safety
and i n s t e a d
nets,
urge
others
reliance
actively
on e i t h e r
c h a r i t a b l e i n s t i t u t i o n s (which are overwhelmed a l r e a d y ) o r a l l o w i n g
people t o face t h e s t r e e t i f they cannot hack i t on t h e i r own.
I t might be s a i d t h a t t h e Democratic White House j o i n e d these
d r i v e s by s i g n i n g t h i s
provisions
or that b i l l ,
b u t these d i d n o t i n c l u d e
t h a t would remove t h e s a f e t y n e t s by p r i v a t i z i n g o r
m e a n s - t e s t i n g . I n 1996,
one must s t r i v e f o r a b i p a r t i s a n agreement
t o p u t t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f p u b l i c l y p r o v i d e d s a f e t y n e t s as a shared
value
f o r f u t u r e years (the way i t i s i n Europe) and f o c u s f u t u r e
discussions
but
on t h e l e v e l and s p e c i f i c n a t u r e o f these p u b l i c n e t s ,
n o t on t h e v e r y
commitment t o such p r o v i s i o n s o f e l e m e n t a r y
safety.
These n o t i o n s a r e p a r t i c u l a r l y t h r e a t e n i n g because t h e y come
d u r i n g a p e r i o d o f growing economic i n s e c u r i t y as a l l t h r e e
--private,
public,
force; corporate
and independent--are
downsizing
their
sectors
labor
l o y a l t i e s t o employees a r e o p e n l y c u r t a i l e d ; and
b e n e f i t s - - f r o m h e a l t h insurance t o r e t i r e m e n t r i g h t s - - a r e b e i n g cut
�4
back. Americans i n c r e a s i n g l y r e a l i z e t h a t these economic p r e s s u r e s
are no l o n g e r l i m i t e d t o t r a n s i t i o n a l p e r i o d s o f r e c e s s i o n s , b u t
are p a r t o f a much deeper change i n t h e economy,
as we seek t o
compete i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y w i t h low wage and low b e n e f i t c o u n t r i e s and
as new t e c h n o l o g i e s r e p l a c e workers more r e a d i l y t h a n t h e y
absorb
them.
Second, one must r e c o g n i z e t h a t some s e l e c t r e g u l a t i o n s a r e an
indispensable
part
of
the p u b l i c
safety
nets.
These
concern
measures t h a t ensure t h a t meat and p o u l t r y a r e n o t i n f e s t e d
d i s e a s e ; n u r s i n g homes do n o t abuse t h e i r p a t i e n t s ;
water
are n o t l a c e d w i t h c a r c i n o g e n s ;
cause
severe
birth
defects;
with
t h e a i r and
that medications w i l l
corporations
do
not
not
raid
their
r e t i r e m e n t funds, and a few o t h e r s . These r e g u l a t i o n s f a l l
into a
c a t e g o r y o f community m u t u a l i t y , because here we say t o one a n o t h e r
t h a t each o f us w i l l n o t have t o conduct
consumer goods, t h e environment,
be p r o v i d e d by independent
will
be shared
regulations
and m e d i c a t i o n s ; t h a t these
impartial
by one and a l l . True,
i n t h e past
and
h i s o r h e r own t e s t s o f
these
will
e x p e r t s and t h e i r
findings
t h e r e were some
excessive
are
and
must
further
be
e l i m i n a t e d ; however d e r e g u l a t o r y z e a l o t r y s h o u l d n o t be a l l o w e d t o
literally
throw
away v i t a l
safety
nets
as we
unload
excessive
baggage.
Which s p e c i f i c p o l i c i e s h i g h l i g h t t h e suggested theme? Many o f
these are a l r e a d y i n p l a c e , i n c l u d i n g r e s t o r i n g c o l l e g e e d u c a t i o n
loans
Others
and p r o t e c t i n g
need
to
be
Medicare,
fleshed
Medicaid,
and
out, especially
Social Security.
those
concerning
�5
community j o b s , such as t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f an E x e c u t i v e Corps f o r
those who are downsized b u t can b r i n g s k i l l s t o t h e e d u c a t i o n a l and
independent s e c t o r .
A c i t i z e n r e v i e w board t o s e p a r a t e
from onerous r e g u l a t i o n s
essential
i s another.
Amitai Etzioni i s a University
University.
(January 4, 1996).
Professor
a t George
Washington
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
009a. fax
DATE
SUBJECT/TITLE
Dean Amy Gutmann to Don Baer; RE: Phone number [partial] (1
page)
01/12/1996
RESTRICTION
P6/b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
OA/Box Number:
14457
FOLDER TITLE:
Outside Contributors Sug [Suggestions] for SOTU [State ofthe Union] 1996 [2]
2006-0469-F
dbl929
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act -144 U.S.C. 2204(a)|
Freedom of Information Act -15 U.S.C. 552(b)]
Pl National Security Classified Information 1(a)(1) ofthe PRA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal ofTice 1(a)(2) ofthe PRA)
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute 1(a)(3) ofthe PRA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information 1(a)(4) ofthe PRA]
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors |a)(5) ofthe PRA]
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(a)(6) ofthe PRA]
b(l) National security classified information 1(b)(1) of the FOIA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency 1(b)(2) ofthe FOIA)
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute 1(b)(3) ofthe FOIA)
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information 1(b)(4) ofthe FOIA|
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(b)(6)ofthe FOIA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes 1(b)(7) ofthe FOIA|
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions 1(b)(8) ofthe FOIA]
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells 1(b)(9) ofthe FOIA|
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile denned in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
�S N BYJXorox Telecopier 7020 ; 1-13-86 : 1t21PH ;
ET
Pnncciuu Umvchiiv
2bS2168-2024561213
; 1
#
Dean of the Faculty
9 N'HMU Hall
Princeton, New leney 08544-5264
Tel: (609) 2S8-3030 Fm: (609) 258-2168
FAX
TO I
PQVKR
SHEET
POM
ADDRESS: T ^ i g
FAX NUMBER:
viJ lo 14t^
^.o^
Lrb^t^rf
i>_n
FROM
DATE:
I —' 1 " . *
2
^
Wa aro transmitting -—^ pages including t h i s page. I f
thar© a r s any problems or qusstions regarding t h i s transmission,
please contact us a t 609-258-3021,
Clinton Library Photocopy
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
3^
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
009b. letter
DATE
SUBJECT/TITLE
Amy Gutmann to President Clinton; RE: State of the Union (2 pages)
01/12/1996
RESTRICTION
P5
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
OA/Box Number:
14457
FOLDER TITLE:
Outside Contributors Sug [Suggestions] for SOTU [State of the Union] 1996 [2]
2006-0469-F
dbl929
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)|
Freedom of Information Act -15 U.S.C. 552(b)|
Pl National Security Classified Information 1(a)(1) ofthe PRA|
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office 1(a)(2) of the PRA]
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute 1(a)(3) ofthe PRA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information 1(a)(4) ofthe PRA|
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors |a)(5) ofthe PRA|
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(a)(6) ofthe PRA|
b(l) National security classified information 1(b)(1) ofthe FOIA|
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency 1(b)(2) ofthe F01A|
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute 1(b)(3) ofthe FOIA)
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information 1(b)(4) ofthe FOIA)
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(b)(6) ofthe FOIA|
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes 1(b)(7) ofthe FOIA)
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions 1(b)(8) ofthe FOIA)
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells |(b)(9) ofthe 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.
�But w*' have an obligation lo work togtrlher whon wc can. And then? is une area where we
can and must oooperale - ewn in an plPv tion year. That area is thf need lorcvenerftizethe local
institutions lhal on< e lied logother individuals, families, blocks and neighborhoods. I'm talking
about the PTAs and the Boy Scouts, churches, synagogues and mosques, block associations, the
Comn-mnily Chest, and charities like lhe Red Cross or Habilal for Humanity. When 1 was
growing up, these were the types of organizations lhal citizens worked through to solve Iheir
own problems.
For years conservatives have criticized Democrats for relying on government to solve every
problem. And you know what? The conservatives were righl. Democrats have relied loo much
on government. Sometimes, of course, government is the answer - as when it brings massive
financial firepower againsi a problem. The best examples of that are Social Security and
Medicare, whit h have dramatically reduced poverty among seniors in jusl one generation. Bui
when the problems are rooted in personal behavior — family breakdown, crime, educational
decline « government falls far short. Bureaucracies are inflexible, expensive and (annol
distinguish beiwcen lhe needy who are trying lo help themselves and those who aren't. That's
why we have lo rely much more on nonbureauc ratic, local, non-profils - often failh-based - to
solve problems.
I once heard Speaker Gingrich say thai we could gel by with a much smaller governmeni if
everyone in America volunteered two hours a week. And the Speaker is absolutely right aboul
lhal loo. St) to those Americans who are worried about the cost of government but don't wani
the schools to deteriorale, the drinking water to gel dirty, or crime to worsen - you have an
obligation lo actually do something about these problems yourself. And I'm not talking about
wriling a letter to your congressman. I'm talking aboul leaving your house and working hands on — lo solve a problem in your community, [examples tk]
T0
<*
KVHSMINMllD V
9 ©
�®
6
A CUNNINGHAM
P02
Al lhe same time, for years Democrats i ritu i/cd Republicans for wanting to just dismantle
government without putting something in ils place. I've got lo say I think that has been a fair
criticism in the past - bul there are signs thai that's changing too. In recent months, some
Republicans have been offering very irealive ideas for non-bureaucratir ways for the
governmeni lo help community institutions. Sen. Dan Coats of Indiana, someone wilh whom I
disagree quite often, has proposed legislation lhal would use lax credits and government grants
lo, in his words,
lake the side of people and inslitulions who are rebuilding their own
commuiiities - and who often feel isolated and poorly equipped." Thai might mean t reating
rigorous residenlial academies lo bring some structure to the lives of teenagers from broken
families. Or it might mean linking up high schools to Big Brothers or Big Sisters programs lhat
provide effective mentoring.
I'm proud lo say lhat AmeriCorps, the national service program that Democrats and
Republicans set up a couple of years ago, has already helped out in remarkable ways. So far
25,1)1X1 [ck] young people have been working in their communities raising reading st ores in
schools, pulling garbage out of rivers, helping polite shut down crackhouses.
Sometimes
AmeriCorps members have helped government do its job better. Chief tk Bralton of New York
City has said lhat AmeriCorps members have really helped them in tbe efforts - successful
efforts - lo reduce t rime in New York City. And sometimes AmeriCorps members have helped
privale charities do Iheir joh better. The tk members have helped Habilal for Humanity to lure
Ik more unpaid volunteers to build Ik housing.
I'm not saying this is going to be easy work, We've got a program going in San Diego,
Charleston, Denver and Maryland modelled after lhe old CCC of the New Deal. It's t ailed thr
Nalional Civilian Conservation Corps or lhe NCCC, and it was signed inlo law by President
Bush and supported by Senator Dole. The young people live on military bases, rise al b a.m.
[ckl, i-ome to formation and then do some buckbreaking work like tk tk tk. Perhaps most
exciting of all, these servue corps members come from every conceivable background - and yet
�©
6
A CUNNINGHAM
they're workinj} together side hy side lo solve our nation's problems. They t ome to know and
understand and trust each other (ust as intensely as do soldiers in the same platoon. That's why
ultimately national service is a better solution lo our racial problems than most traditional
liberal or conservative solutions.
Bul as much as 1 love what AmeriCorps is doing, it is noi lhe only way. We cannot solve our
nation's problems wilh jusl this full-time service or, for that matter, just middle-age people like
us volunteering on weekends. Everyone has to contribute. Now I've .spent a great deal of lime
defending our country's senior i iti/,ens, trying lo preserve Iheir access to quality health cun;.
Bul 1 have to say, at the same time, thai no group has more lime - and wisdom - to contribute
to solving problems Ihan seniors. Tk tk tk example from RSVP or whatever. And while I ihink
the governmeni has an imporlanl role in aiding, children Ihrough programs like Head Start, even
young kids can give something back. Service learning example tk tk tk
While I've got your ullcnlion I'm going lo do something thai may seem a bil lacky for such an
occasion, but I'll lake my chances. I'm going to give you two phono numbers that may change
your lives and, more importantly, the lives of others. The first is for a group called U.S. Cares,
which is a volunteer clearinghouse that will get you hooked up with an organization in your
area that can help vou lo help your communities. 1-8(X)-xxx-xxxx. The second is for the
Corporation for Nalional Service, which overset's AmeriCorps, the Senior Corps, the NCCC and
the service programs for kids. l-SOd-^-ACORPS.
I'm sure lhal AmeriCorps and ihese other programs can be further improved and I'm eager to
work with Republicans to do so. Let's put the idea of nalional service outside the realm of
politics. You know when former President George Bush a few years buck called for a 1000 points
of lighl, some DemiHTats mocked him. But he was on lo a very important idea. There is no
single hig solution lo our problems - not from govemment or the free markel. There are
thousands of solutions in our communities jf we're willing to work logether.
P03
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
010. memo
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
Bill Galston to the President; RE: State ofthe Union/1996 Agenda
[duplicate of 006] (3 pages)
01/10/1996
RESTRICTION
P5
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
OA/Box Number:
14457
FOLDER TITLE:
Outside Contributors Sug [Suggestions] for SOTU [State ofthe Union] 1996 [2]
2006-0469-F
dbl929
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)|
Freedom of Information Act - (5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
Pl National Security Classified Information 1(a)(1) ofthe PRA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office {(a)(2) ofthe PRA)
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute |(a)(3) ofthe PRA)
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information |(a)(4) ofthe PRA)
PS Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors |a)(5) 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 1(b)(1) ofthe FOIA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency 1(b)(2) ofthe FOIA)
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute 1(b)(3) ofthe F01A|
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information 1(b)(4) ofthe FOIA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy 1(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 1(b)(8) ofthe FOIA]
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells 1(b)(9) ofthe FOIAJ
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.
�
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
Michael Waldman
Description
An account of the resource
<p>Michael Waldman was Assistant to the President and Director of Speechwriting from 1995-1999. His responsibilities were writing and editing nearly 2,000 speeches, which included four State of the Union speeches and two Inaugural Addresses. From 1993 -1995 he served as Special Assistant to the President for Policy Coordination.</p>
<p>The collection generally consists of copies of speeches and speech drafts, talking points, memoranda, background material, correspondence, reports, handwritten notes, articles, clippings, and presidential schedules. A large volume of this collection was for the State of the Union speeches. Many of the speech drafts are heavily annotated with additions or deletions. There are a lot of articles and clippings in this collection.</p>
<p>Due to the size of this collection it has been divided into two segments. Use links below for access to the individual segments:<br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=43&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=2006-0469-F+Segment+1">Segment One</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=43&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=2006-0469-F+Segment+2">Segment Two</a></p>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Michael Waldman
Office of Speechwriting
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1993-1999
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0469-F
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
Segment One contains 1071 folders in 72 boxes.
Segment Two contains 868 folders in 66 boxes.
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
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
Outside Contributors Sug [Suggestions] for SOTU [State of the Union] 1996 [2]
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Office of Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Box 36
<a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/36404"> Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7763296">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0469-F Segment 2
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.
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.
Preservation-Reproduction-Reference
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
6/3/2015
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
7763296
42-t-7763296-20060469F-Seg2-036-003-2015