-
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/files/original/4ad880f089852e54f0ebaa7d4ca6aa82.pdf
05ac666f1f2be5e24cc9a0f2efbed732
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:
14459
FoiderlD:
Folder Title:
SOTU [State of the Union] Policy Memos [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
92
4
5
2
�Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
001. draft
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RE: Council on Environmental Quality Proposed 1998 Initiatives (10
pages)
11/24/1997
RESTRICTION
P5
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
OA/Box Number:
14459
FOLDER TITLE:
SOTU [State of the Union] Policy Memos [2]
2006-0469-F
db3419
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act -144 U.S.C. 2204(a)l
Freedom of Information Act -15 U.S.C. 552(b)|
PI National Security Classified Information 1(a)(1) of the 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) of the PRA)
P4 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)(5) of the PR4|
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) of the FOIA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency 1(b)(2) of the FOIA]
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute |(b)(3) of the FOIA)
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information 1(b)(4) of the 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) of the FOIA]
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions 1(b)(8) of the 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.
�THE WHITE HOUSE
WASH INGTON
November 25, 1997
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
BRUCE REED
GENE SPERLING
ELENA KAGAN
SUBJECT:
State of the UniPE Ideas
As you requested, this memorandum provides a brief description of new ideas we are
seriously considering for the State of the Union. Most of these ideas involve increased spending,
and you will have to make choices among them.as you consider the FY 99 budget. Options
relating to social security and tax reform are not included in this memo.
Edwcatjon
1. Class size /100,000 teachers: We are working with the Vice President's office and others on
an ambitious initiative to reduce class sizes in tbe early grades by providing money to hire up to
100,000 new teachers, perhaps paid for by reducing the federal work force by another 100,000
positions. We estimate that 100,000 new reachevs in grades 1-3 would reduce average class size
from roughly 21 to roughly 18. The initiative would have three main elements: 1) grants to help
states or communities hire new teachers (as in 'he COPS program, these grants would be timelimited (3-4 years) and the federal share would be 50-75%); 2) funds for teacher training, with a
special emphasis on reading; and 3) provisions to ensure accountability, such as requiring testing
of new teachers and/or ensuring the removal of bad teachers from the classroom. A serious
proposal along these lines would cost $5-10 billion over five years, depending on the size of the
federal match and the target date for reaching 100.000. We also would need to accompany the
proposal with a school construction initiative (see below).
2. Education Opportunity Zones: As we outlined in an earlier memo on policy proposals for
the race initiative, we are working with the Education Department on a plan that would reward
10-15 poor inner city and rural school districts for agreeing to adopt a school reform agenda that
includes: ending social promotions, removing bad teachers, reconstituting failing schools, and
adopting district-wide choice and/or public school vouchers. Our goal is to give school districts
incentives to hold students, teachers, and schools accountable, in essentially the way Chicago has
done. In our working proposal, each urban grant would be worth $10-25 million and each rural
grant would be worth up to $2 million, for a total request in FY99 of $320 million.
3. National Public School Choice Law: We are exploring the possibility of proposing
�legislation to require that states and communities allow public school choice as a condition of
receiving federal education funding. Together with a strong endorsement of bipartisan charter
school legislation (bound to pass next year), this measure will show that we firmly support
choice and competition. We are also looking into the concept of a parents' right-to-know law
that would require states and communities to make key information on school performance
available, so that parents can make informed choices.
4. University-School Partnerships: As we also outlined in our earlier memo on the race
initiative, we are working on a grant program to promote strong partnerships between colleges
and high-poverty middle and high schools, with the goal of enabling more youth to go on to
college. This initiative would encourage colleges to adopt the Eugene Lang model for helping
disadvantaged youngsters. Colleges would encourage students to take demanding courses, while
providing academic enrichment and intensive mentoring, tutoring, and other support services.
The students would receive special certificates for participating in the program, somewhat along
the lines of Chaka Fatah's proposal. The Department of Education has requested $200 million for
FY 99 for this initiative.
5. Campaign on Access to Higher Education: We are preparing to conduct an intensive
publicity campaign on the affordability of higher education. The goal of the campaign would be
to make every family aware that higher education is now universally accessible, as well as to
reiterate that higher education is the key to higher earnings.
6. School Construction: We will need to re-propose a school construction initiative this year.
We are currently considering the appropriate size and duration of this initiative, as well as the
possibility of structuring this initiative as a tax credit.
7. Teacher Training for Technology: We are currently weighing several options on training
teachers to use educational technology. These include (1) expanding various innovation grants to
ensure that within four years, all new teachers will be ready to use educational technology, or (2)
using the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund to train and certify at least one "master teacher"
in every school, who can then train other teachers in the use of educational technology.
8. Hispanic Education Dropout Plan: We have developed a plan to improve educational
opportunities for Hispanic Americans (or limited English proficient students generally), with the
goal of decreasing the current disparity in dropout rates. The draft plan includes a number of
administrative actions, as well as targeted investments of roughly $100 million to programs for
migrant, adult, and bilingual education.
9. "Learning on Demand": We are developing an initiative, related to some of Governor
Romer's ideas, to encourage the use of technology (e^, the intemet, CD-ROM, interactive TV)
for lifelong learning. The initiative will begin the process of giving all Americans "anytime,
anywhere" access to affordable and high-quality learning opportunities. The initiative is still in
the developmental stage, and at this time we recommend only a small investment.
�Child Care
1. Affordability: We are developing a proposal that will help working families afford
child care by (1) increasing funding for federal child care subsidies through the Child
Care and Development Block Grant, and (2) changing the Child and Dependent Care Tax
Credit by raising the percentage of child care expenses for which taxpayers of certain
income levels may take a credit. On the subsidy side, every additional $100 million in the
block grant will pay child care costs for at least 35,000 more children with incomes below
200 percent of poverty. On the tax side, we are considering raising the maximum credit
rate to 50 percent for taxpayers with adjusted gross income (AGI) of less than $30,000
(from a current high of 30 percent for taxpayers with AGI of less than $10,000), and
adjusting the income slide accordingly.
2. Safety and Quality: We are also considering targeted investments to improve the
safety and quality of care. Our current proposal adds funding to the scholarship program
for child care providers that you announced at the child care conference (which was very
well received); provides resources for states to improve their enforcement of health and
safety standards; and funds efforts to educate parents on quality child care.
3. Early Childhood Learning and Afterschool Programs: Our current proposal also
expands early learning opportunities by increasing investment in Early Head Start and
creating a new 0-5 Early Education Fund. The new fund will provide grants for
innovative early learning programs for both working and stay-at-home parents. We are
also considering ways of expanding and streamlining afterschool programs.
4. Helping Parents Stay Home: To support parents who wish to stay at home with their
children, we are working on ways to expand the FMLA - to six months instead of 12
weeks and to smaller-sized employers. We are also looking at a variety of ways to
provide financial assistance, whether through a modified version of the Child and
Dependent Care Tax Credit or through paid family leave administered under the
unemployment insurance system. The cost of these financial proposals, however, may be
prohibitive.
Health
1. Consumer Protection Legislation: We should reiterate our support for three pieces of health
care consumer protection legislation: (1) the Quality Commission's Consumer Bill of Rights,
which has strong public and elite support and arguably is more moderate than a bill in the House
that already has attracted over 85 Republicans; (2) our genetic anti-discrimination legislation,
which has attracted bipartisan support on both sides of the Hill as a way to protect Americans
�from the misuse of new advances in genetics; and (3) privacy protection legislation, which would
establish strong federal standards to ensure the confidentiality of medical records. Although
these consumer protections would benefit the entire population, women's health advocates are
especially supportive of them, because the Consumer Bill of Rights would ensure direct access to
OB/GYNs and our genetic anti-discrimination legislation would protect women who undergo
new tests for the breast cancer gene.
2. Medicare Reform and Program Improvements: To build on the Medicare reforms in the
balanced budget agreement, we are considering two reform initiatives: additional anti-fraud
initiatives (perhaps providing $2-3 billion in savings over five years) and an income related
premium (providing another $7-8 billion in savings assuming it kicks in at an income around
$50,000). We are also considering a number of Medicare improvements to which we could
apply the above savings: (1) a Medicare (or COBRA) buy-in for pre-65 year olds (or some
targeted subset of this age group), the cost of which would depend on whether we decide to
subsidize this benefit; (2) Medicare coverage of cancer clinical trials, which could substantially
increase investment in the treatment and cure of cancer, including prostate cancer; and (3) a new
mechanism to provide Medicare beneficiaries with information about private long-term care
insurance that meets appropriate standards.
3. Doubling the NIH Research Budget with Proceeds from Tobacco Legislation: We (along
with the Republicans) are considering a proposal to double the NIH budget, which would cost
about $20 billion over five years. Such an investment could lead to breakthroughs in research
that would greatly improve our ability to prevent and treat diseases like diabetes and cancer ~
and substantially lessen the costs associated with these diseases. Because the discretionary caps
are so tight, the only realistic way to pay for such an initiative is through dedicated savings from
the tobacco agreement. This link between tobacco legislation and health research should
resonate strongly with the public.
4. Other Coverage Options - Children's Health, Workers In-Between Jobs, Voluntary
Purchasing Cooperatives: We are working on a public/private outreach effort to ensure that
every child eligible for health insurance under Medicaid or our new program actually gets
covered. The public side of this effort could include proposals to: give bonuses for enrolling
more children in Medicaid; expand the kinds of places where children can enroll; and simplify
eligibility processes. In addition, we are considering whether to propose a demonstration of our
old policy to provide coverage to workers who are in-between jobs. Finally, we are continuing to
pursue proposals relating to voluntary purchasing cooperatives, as a way to help small business
gain access to and afford health insurance coverage.
5. Racial Disparities in Health Care: We are working on a proposal to address racial
disparities in six carefully selected areas of health care: infant mortality, breast and cervical
cancer, heart disease and stroke, diabetes, AIDS, and immunization. This proposal will include
nationwide actions to reduce these disparities, as well as focused pilot projects in thirty
communities (say, a project on diabetes on an Indian reservation or a project on AIDS in an inner
�city). The stated aim of the proposal will be to eliminate racial disparities in these six areas by
2010.
Crime
1. Community Prosecutors: We are working on a proposal, costing up to $100 million, to
provide grants to prosecutors for innovative, community-based prosecution efforts. A number of
jurisdictions already have embraced such efforts; for example, community prosecution is an
essential component of Boston's juvenile crime strategy. These jurisdictions have found that a
"problem-oriented" (rather than incident-based) approach to prosecuting, using a wide variety of
enforcement methods and attending to the concerns of victims and witnesses, can pay real
dividends. A grant program could spread these innovative programs across the country.
2. Juvenile Crime Initiative: Although we got funds for much of our youth violence strategy in
last year's appropriations bills, we should continue to press for the passage of juvenile crime
legislation ~ especially for a juvenile Brady provision, which will stop violent juveniles from
owning guns as adults. We also should challenge the four cities leading the nation in juvenile
crime (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Detroit) to replicate Boston's successful strategy
and target resources to these cities to help them meet this challenge.
Wdfarg/Hpusing
1. Welfare-to-Work Housing Vouchers: We are working with OMB and HUD on a proposal
for 50,000 new housing vouchers to help welfare recipients in public housing who need to move
in order to find employment. We would distribute these vouchers on a competitive basis to
public housing authorities working with local TANF agencies and/or grantees of the new $3
billion welfare-to-work program. We are working on a number of proposals to increase housing
mobility (see below), and linking this issue to welfare reform may increase the chance of
attracting congressional support. At the same time, we should reiterate our support for welfareto-work transportation funds as part of NEXTEA.
Housing
1. Housing Portability/Choice: In addition to the new welfare-to-work housing vouchers
discussed above, a package on housing portability and choice could include: increasing the
number of Regional Opportunity Counseling (ROC) sites; encouraging the use of exception rents
(rents up to 120 percent of the "fair market rent") as a tool for opening up more expensive
suburban housing markets; and eliminating obstacles to portability of Section 8 vouchers.
2. Fair Lending/Fair Housing: This proposal could include: an examination of the impact of
credit scoring andrisk-basedpricing on the availability of credit/capital to lower-income and
minority individuals; issuance of guidance by banking regulators on certain key credit scoring
issues and, possibly, onrisk-basedpricing; a Presidential call to the FDIC and the Federal
�Reserve to obtain more data on reasons for home mortgage loan denials (OCC and OTS already
collect such information); and collection of race and income data as part of the Equal Credit
Opportunity Act/CRA small business and small farm lending reporting requirement.
3. Downpayment Reduction: We are working on a proposal to increase homeownership by
reducing the barriers to buying a new home. Many low- and moderate-income families find a
downpayment the largest hurdle to buying a new home; this initiative would lower this cost and
help more families become homeowners. In 1992, Congress authorized the National
Homeownership Trust, but never appropriated any money. We are investigating whether we
should request money for this program or whether it is better policy to expand the existing
HOME program (which serves a similar purpose).
Labor/Workforce
1. Child Labor: We are working on a comprehensive Child Labor Action Plan, anchored by a
$100 million commitment to the International Program on the Elimination of Child Labor (IPEC)
~ a voluntary program of the International Labour Organization which is dedicated to the
elimination of child labor. The fiinds, which would be managed by the Department of Labor in
accordance with criteria we would develop, would go to programs attacking the most intolerable
forms of child labor. The initiative also might include a stepped up Customs program to enforce
U.S. law banning the import of goods made with forced or bonded child labor; increased support
for the Migrant Education Program to support elementary and secondary education to the
hardest-to-serve migrant children; and a call for prominent organizations, such as the Boy Scouts
and Girls Scouts, to adopt a "No Sweat" code for uniforms and an accompanying label.
2. Pensions: We have developed an expanded pension coverage initiative that focuses on a
simplified defined benefit plan for small businesses, based on the SAFE plan proposed by the
American Society of Pension Actuaries (ASPA). We are also looking at a payroll deduction IRA
proposal, a three-year vesting requirement for employer matching contributions in 401(k) plans,
a women's pension initiative, and a pension right-to-know proposal.
3. Community Adjustment: As part of the Fast Track debate, we proposed the creation of the
Office of Community and Economic Adjustment (OCEA). As you know, this office will be
modeled after the Defense Department's Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA) - the
Administration's first point of contact with communities experiencing a military base closure or
defense plant closing. The OCEA would coordinate the Administration's response to regions
impacted by a major plant closing or trade, by working with Labor, Commerce, SBA, HUD,
Treasury, and other government entities. This group would provide planning grants and
expertise to help communities develop comprehensive economic adjustment strategies. Since
this program will be part of the Economic Development Administration (EDA), we are
investigating whether we could initiate this proposal by executive memorandum, while awaiting
Congressional appropriations.
�Climate Change
1. Tax Incentive and R&D Package: You already have committed to a $5 billion package over
five years for tax incentives and R&D to promote low-carbon technologies. The Treasury
Department is working on a possible package of tax incentives to be included in the FY 1999 budget,
and DOE has a proposal on the expenditure side. We are working to develop final options.
Ra££
A number of the above proposals — e^, education opportunity zones, university-school partnerships,
housing vouchers ~ can be presented as part of the race initiative, because they target predominantly
minority areas or provide disproportionate benefits to members of minority groups. Other proposals
described above ~ the Hispanic dropout plan and the race and health initiative ~ have obvious and
explicit race connections. In addition:
1. Civil Rights Enforcement Initiative: We are working on a coordinated package of reforms for
the EEOC and the civil rights offices at DOJ, HUD, HHS, Education, and DOL. Among other
things, this proposal would expand dramatically the EEOC's mediation program, substantially
increasing the average speed of resolving complaints and reducing the EEOC's current backlog.
Similarly, the proposal would promote the increased use of non-adversarial techniques by the
agencies' civil rights offices. The proposal also would provide a mechanism for better coordination
among the various civil rights offices.
�Executive Office of the President
Council on Environmental Quality
Date: UWWV
To: ^\\Ck}^l
^-k'.VvtvfX
From: SV^llW
V vlbW C
Prepare reply for my signature.
O
Please handle.
O
Discuss with me.
D
Reply directly; please send me a copy.
For your comments.
D
For your information.
Remarks:
�COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
PROPOSED 1998 INITIATIVES
l
DRAFT - 11/24 )7
Not Administration Policy
Following are summaries of several environmental initiatives that could form the basis of one
or more major policy announcements by the President. We have been developing these
proposals with an eye to the State of the Union and the FY "99 budget but could be ready to
launch them sooner.
The initiatives fall into three of our five major policy areas -- Resource Stewardship.
Protecting Communities from Toxics and Sustainable Communities -- and are organized
accordingly. For each, we have identified proposed actions, budget implications. Hill
implications and potential negatives.
RESOURCE STEWARDSHIP
A THOUSAND RIVERS RESTORED
Action: The President would confront a major environmental and public health threat by
launching America's next generation of clean water protections. As a goal, he would commit
to fully restoring 1000 watersheds (the 40 percent of the nation's river systems that remain
seriously polluted). The strategy would be two-fold: the President would challenge Congress
to join him in strengthening the Clean Water Act; simultaneously, whether or not Congress is
prepared to act, he would take executive action to push the limits existing law. These steps
could be coupled with other water-related initiatives - including the International Year of the
Ocean and designation of American Heritage Rivers ~ as part of a broader year-long water
strategy.
Background: We recently celebrated the 25th anniversary of the Clean Water Act and its
remarkable successes. Yet a recent EPA study found that 40 percent of the nation's waterways
are still too polluted for fishing or swimming. Despite dramatic reductions in pollution from
factories and sewage plants, dirty runoff from farms and city streets continues to create
unacceptable environmental and public health threats. The dangers posed by such ''nonpoint
source" pollution were recently underscored by the Pfiesteria outbreaks in Maryland and
Virginia that killed fish, made people sick and harmed local economies. Similar incidents are
bound to recur.
In the long term, the answer is a stronger Clean Water Act. The 104th Congress, in the guise
of reauthorizing the act, instead tried to weaken it. The President derided the proposed
amendments as the "Dirty Water Act" and successfully defeated them. He could now
challenge Congress to reverse course and ensure clean water for the next generation.
At the same time, the President could demonstrate that he is prepared to act even if Congress
�is not, by initiating administrative actions in three areas:
- curbing uncontrolled runoff from cities and rural areas through regulatory and
incentive-based strategies.
-reducing toxic discharges, such as dioxin and PCBs, so people would no longer have
to be warned not to eat the fish they catch.
-promoting community-based planning that protects watersheds by coordinating local,
state and federal actions, as we are now doing in California's Bay-Delta.
Budget Implications: A credible initiative would require between $500 million and $1 billion
a year depending on the division between tax incentives and appropriations (currently under
discussion with OMB).
Hill Implications: Clean water is an issue - more than any other - on which the public
overwhelmingly trusts Democrats over Republicans. Seventy-one percent of Americans want
tougher water standards, and while 75 percent trust Democrats on the issue, only 10 percent
trust Republicans. A Presidential clean water initiative would unify Democrats in both the
House and Senate, as well as environmental and community groups. It would also force
moderate Republicans who opposed the "Dirty Water Bill" to choose once again between
their party and their constituents.
Status: Pursuant to a directive from Vice President Gore, EPA and USDA are now developing
an "Action Plan" defining our second-generation clean water strategy. The plan, which will
launch a series of aggressive Administrative actions, will be ready before the State of the
Union. On the legislative front, the Administration has long had a set of principles that
already are reflected in a number of Democratic bills.
Potential Negatives: House Republicans may deride the initiative as politically motivated.
Controls on agricultural runoff may draw rural opposition.
A NEW CENTURY FOR AMERICA'S FORESTS
Action: The President would inaugurate the second century of America's national forest
system with a sweeping strategy to end abuses and assure healthy forests for generations to
come. The strategy would include administrative action and possible legislative proposals to
permanently protect the nation's last untouched forests, eliminate timber road subsidies and
put forest management on a sound scientific footing.
Background: Federal forest reserves, the precursors to today's 155 national forests, were
established by the Organic Administration Act in 1897. Next year, then, marks the start of the
second century of federal forest management. Early emphasis on protecting forests to
safeguard watersheds gave way, during the post-World War II boom, to rising demands for
timber production. In recent years, however, Americans have come to expect more from their
�national forests -- recreation, wilderness and wildlife protections. Continued timber harvest in
old-growth stands and roadless areas inflicts serious environmental harm. Damage also results
from an extensive road network many times the size of the federal highway system. National
forests generate only about five percent of the nation's timber supply. Yet efforts to reduce
timber harvesting in favor of other forest values have resulted in some of the most polarized
env ironmental conflicts of the past decade.
The President's Pacific Northwest Forest Plan addressed these issues head on and established
a model that can now guide the second century of federal forest management. In his statement
upon signing the Interior Appropriations bill, the President referred to system-wide measures
being developed on roads and forest planning. These eould be combined with other initiatives
in a broad strategy to fulfill the national forests' multiple-use mandate: Jobs can be preserved
through sensible logging while recreation, wildlife and other values are given higher priority.
Specific elements could include:
-Immediate suspension of road-building in roadless areas as an interim step toward
permanent protection of millions of acres of pristine land. A scientific panel would
recommend criteria for determining lands to be protected.
-Elimination of timber road subsidies through administrative action, coupled with
legislation to hold counties harmless against revenue losses.
-New regulations, based on the recommendations of an expert panel, to incorporate
new science and ecosystem management in forest planning.
-Changing incentives, which now favor timber cutting, by delinking timber receipts
and payments to counties, and by revising agency budget processes that make other
programs dependent on high harvest levels.
Budget Implications: Eliminating road subsidies would result in considerable savings.
However, guaranteeing continued payments to counties would require new resources; OMB's
early out-year projections for FY '99 are $20 million to $40 million.
Hill Implications: Although forest issues have been extremely divisive in the last two
Congresses, with key committee chairs opposing Administration proposals, there is rising
interest in greater protection for national forests. Senators Warner, Robb, Thurmond, Cleland
and Hollings support deferring new roads and timber harvests in roadless areas in the
Southeast. One bill with bipartisan support would stop all commercial logging on national
forests.
A Presidential initiative would draw strong support from Democrats and some Republicans in
the East, Southeast and Midwest; strong opposition in Alaska and some Rocky Mountain
states; and mixed reaction in the Pacific Northwest.
�Status: Initiatives to end road subsidies, protect roadless areas and revise forest planning
regulations are being developed. A proposal to delink timber receipts from county payments is
being considered for the FY '99 budget.
Potential Negatives: Opposition from the timber industry, and possibly labor and some
Democrats.
A NEW ALASKA WILDERNESS
Action: The President would propose legislation to prevent oil drilling in the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge by declaring it wilderness.
Background: A new poll shows growing opposition to oil drilling in the refuge. Sixty-two
percent of those polled oppose drilling: 47 percent strongly oppose.
Details to come.
SAVING GREAT PLACES
Action: The President would permanently protect irreplaceable natural areas, and possibly
create a new National Park, through a series of significant land acquisitions from willing
sellers. These acquisitions would continue the Administration's strenuous efforts to save
America's great places before it is too late.
Background: The President has demonstrated a strong commitment to protecting vital lands
for future generations through creation of the California desert parks, designation of the Grand
Staircase-Escalante National Monument and agreements to acquire Headwaters Forest and the
proposed New World Mine outside Yellowstone. The Interior Appropriations bill includes
$699 million for priority acquisitions through the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
Although much of that total is earmarked for Headwaters and Yellowstone, more than $300
million remains uncommitted.
An interagency process to identify candidate areas for LWCF acquisition is under way. The
final list will depend on priority, cost, availability and other factors. Sites and regional priority
areas under consideration include the following:
Purchase of Caldera Basin, home of the world's largest elk herd -- A private
inholding surrounded by the Santa Fe National Forest in northern New Mexico, the
Caldera property is an ancient volcano now supporting lush forest, grasslands and
clean water surrounded by a spectacular rim reminiscent of its origins. In addition to
the elk herd, it supports a rich diversity of plants and animals.
�Winter Range for Yellowstone WiU/li/e - Acquisition of 7800 acres of the Royal Teton
Ranch would be a rare opportunity to protect key winter range and migration corridors
for bison, elk, grizzly bear and other wildlife that cross the Yellowstone National Park
boundary. The land would be managed by the Forest Service and the state of Montana.
Full buy-in from Montana would be necessary.
Completion of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail -The trail extends 2.1 19 miles
from Georgia to Maine. Remaining gaps in the trail would be closed by acquisitions in
Virginia. Maryland, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York. Connecticut,
Massachusetts, Vermont. New Hampshire and Maine.
Oregon Coastal Refuge Complex — Expansion of this complex would protect
wintering waterfowl and diverse habitats and wetlands associated with coast estuarine
ecosystems.
Expansion of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area — Acquisition of 15
riverfront tracts would preserve additional scenic, scientific and historic features of
this park 50 miles west of Manhattan.
Expansion of Acadia National Park -- The last privately owned oceanfront property
adjacent to the park, if offered to the public, would quickly be subdivided, and
developed. The owners are willing sellers and are patiently awaiting for acquisition
funding.
Budget Implications: FY '98 Land and Water Conservation funds would be the primary
source of funding but new resources would be required for some projects.
Hill Implications: A Presidential initiative on lands acquisition which had regional diversity
would enjoy broad Democratic support but could provoke jockeying for rival properties.
Potential negatives: Some Republicans and other detractors would say the existing park
system is in disrepair and should be fixed before new lands are added.
PROTECTING COMMUNITIES FROM TOXICS
EXPANDING EVERY COMMUNITY'S RIGHT -TO-KNOW
Action: The President would commit to an expansion of every community's right to know
about toxic materials moving through their neighborhoods and potentially threatening their
children. Specifically, he would endorse/propose legislative and administrative action to
require "materials accounting" or "use data" disclosure so communities know about toxics in
their midst, whether or not they are released directly to the environment.
�Background: The Administration already has taken steps to expand disclosure of toxic
releases, doubling the number of chemicals subject to "toxic release inventory'* (TRI)
reporting in 1993. and last year increasing in the number of facilities subject to TRI by 30
percent. The President could take the next step by requiring disclosure of toxic materials used
or stored in facilities. Often, communities are unaware of the risks these materials pose until
an explosion or other extraordinary event causes a catastrophic release. Massachusetts and
New Jersey, which already requires such disclosures, claim dramatic reductions in toxic
material use as a result.
The President first endorsed the concept of "use date" disclosure in Putting People First and
in 1995 directed EPA to accelerate its review of the merits. OMB and the economic agencies
have expressed reservations about potential costs and proprietary concerns (why should Fuji
be able to learn what materials Kodak uses?).
Budget Implications: A credible initiative would require few new resources (less than $ 10
million).
Hill Implications: This issue has strong support in the left wing of the Democratic caucus but
could divide Democrats. Several senior Democrats (e.g. John Dingell) have been opponents
of "materials accounting," even though a number of moderate Republicans are supportive.
Status: EPA is in a position to accelerate its administrative process, although there is doubt
about its legal authority to expand disclosure requirements by regulation. Congressmen
Waxman (D-CA) and Saxton (R-NJ) already have introduced legislation that would reinforce
EPA's authority and enhance disclosure of environmental threats to children. The President
could set enactment of these bills as a priority.
Potential Negatives: Strong opposition by industry and some Democrats.
SAFE PLACES FOR KIDS
Action: President Clinton would launch an aggressive program to protect children from
environmental health and safety threats where they live, play, and go to school through direct
federal action and support for state and local governments.
Background: On April 21, President Clinton signed an Executive Order directing Federal
agencies to enhance the protection of children from environmental health and safety threats.
The order and its implementation respond to an emerging scientific consensus that children's
physiology and activity patterns put them at a disproportionate risk from exposure to toxics
and other environmental hazards. EPA and HHS have a broad interagency effort under way to
develop a series of on-the-ground initiatives.
This week, a major anti-lead initiative announced by Mrs. Gore and Carol Browner drew
�favorable press response. If additional funds are committed, they could be used to more
aggressively expand lead abatement, preventive health measures, school improvements and
removal of other hazards. Possibilities include health monitoring in at-risk areas, accelerated
cleanup of toxic dumps, assistance to homeowners for the removal of lead-soldered pipes, and
creation of federal-state teams in targeted communities. Wherever possible, federal funds
would be used to leverage state matches and public-private partnerships.
Budget Implications: Undetermined. A credible initiative focused on 100 targeted cities and
rural areas would require new resources at a level of $ 100 million or more annually.
Hill Implications: Children's health issues tend to unify Democrats and generate bipartisan
support. A draft bill codifying the President's Executive order already has been developed
(though not introduced) and eould be used to foster Hill "buy-in" and ownership of the
children's health agenda.
Status: Pursuant to the Executive Order, EPA and HHS have been convening agencies to
develop the elements of an effective initiative.
Potential Negatives: House Republicans may deride the initiative as politically motivated,
although moderate Republicans are likely to be receptive.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE FOR ALL AMERICANS
Action: The President would advance his initiative on race relations by committing to an
aggressive, targeted pollution abatement strategy in 100 communities and rural areas where
low-income and minority communities have suffered adverse and disproportionate impacts
from toxic exposures.
Background: Early in the first term, the President issued Executive Order 12898 directing
Federal agencies to consider disproportionate and adverse impacts on low-income and
minority communities when implementing federal programs and activities. Many AfricanAmerican community leaders, however, feel that our commitment is faltering. This
frustration stems in part from the fact that many significant environmental "injustices" result
not from federal actions but from historic patterns of development and decades-old
contamination.
Additional resources could be used to target cleanup, pollution reduction and health responses
in communities receiving little or no help from their state and local governments. Possibilities
include relocation of people living next to toxic sites, medical monitoring in at-risk areas,
incentives for businesses to reduce emissions and creation of zones for state-federal action
plans.
Budget Implications: Undetermined. A credible initiative focused on 100 targeted cities and
�rural areas would require new resources of at least $100-$200 million annually.
Hill Implications: This initiative would receive strong support from the Black Caucus and
the Hispanic Caucus, as well as the left wing of the Democratic caucus. Significant
opposition is unlikely.
Status: Pursuant to the Executive Order, there exist an interagency workgroup and a Federal
advisory committee that could rapidly identify target areas and needs. Most of the eligible
communities and regions already have been identified.
Potential Negatives: This initiative may have limited broad-based appeal and could drawsome backlash from industry, fearing heavy-handed regulation.
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES
SMART GROWTH AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES INITIATIVE
Action: The President would announce creation of new funding and tax incentives to promote
"smart growth" and sustainable communities. The initiative would focus on ways to
encourage reinvestment in city centers and discourage suburban sprawl.
Background: After decades of disinvestment, our nation's central cities are experiencing the
cumulative effects of poverty, chronic unemployment, environmental decay and crime.
Meanwhile, continuing flight for the urban core is fueling poorly planned suburban sprawl.
Many suburbanites now find they are not immune to what were once considered urban ills.
Rapid growth has created severe traffic congestion, long commutes, higher local taxes and
reduced quality of life. Urban disinvestment and suburban sprawl are, in many respects, two
sides of the same coin.
These issues have been highlighted by the report of President's Council on Sustainable
Development. In a recent directive, the Vice President asked for an interagency report on
steps the federal government could take to combat sprawl and promote "smart growth." An
Executive Order could reinforce this effort by assisting states in developing smart growth
plans, and by creating a preference in Federal planning for projects that are based on sound
land use planning and do not contribute to sprawl.
Governors Glendening and Kitzhaber have been leaders in implementing state "smart growth"
policies and this initiative would help other states follow their lead. Nonetheless, all of the
Administration's efforts have identified the need for additional Federal resources to bolster
local planning efforts and to provide incentives for urban re-population, and this conclusion
has been vocally reinforced by the National Conference of Mayors, the National League of
Cities, and others. Funding could be used for enhancing local planning efforts and for
�targeted tax incentives to promote urban re-population.
Budget Implications: Funding would depend on the number of areas targeted, but a credible
proposal would likely require at least $1 billion over Five to seven years. This could be
allocated competitively by requiring states to meet threshold planning requirements.
Hill Implications: Strong support is likely from Democratic caucus, particularly among the
Black and Hispanic Caucuses. This support would be reinforced by the Conference of
Mayors, Governors, and other groups.
Status: An interagency effort is under way and could quickly complete any needed policy
development.
Potential Negatives: Possible opposition from development interests. An initiative might be
viewed as federal interference with local land use prerogatives.
�RURAL BENEFITS OF ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVES
Environmental initiatives, properly structured, present significant opportunities for building
support from rural constituencies.
Historically, environmental protection often has been viewed as antagonistic to rural
interests, particularly in areas with economies heavily dependent on agriculture and resource
extraction (timber, mining and grazing). However, as rural demographics have become more
diverse, traditional resource-based economies have weakened, and alternate economies
based on resource preservation (i.e. tourism) haveflourished,environmental goals have
come to be viewed more favorably.
If thoughtfully designed, environmental initiatives can not only ease past antagonisms but
draw support by addressing important rural concerns. The key is to structure them in ways
that promote environmental protection while helping to ease economic pressures facing rural
communities. Two important elements in such a strategy are the use of collaborative
approaches and the use of targeted economic incentives.
The creation of new economic incentives would be particularly well received in agricultural
areas facing the prospect of reduced farm subsidies.
Following are examples ofhow such strategies could be employed in two proposed
initiatives:
A Thousand Rivers Restored - A major objective of this clean water initiative would be
curtailing polluted runoff from farms. A traditional regulatory approach (establishing
standards and/or prescribing specific controls) is likely to meet considerable resistance. An
alternate approach would couple technical assistance with incentives for compliance.
USDA's Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program provides an instructive model. The
program, recently expanded to allow partnerships with states, rewards farmers who agree to
keep lands along rivers out of production, thereby reducing harmful runoff. The recent
announcement of a partnership with Maryland generated highly favorable press reports.
Smart Growth and Sustainable Communities - This initiative would aim in part to discourage
suburban sprawl. At present, farmers in fast-growing areas face tremendous pressure to sell
their land for development, particularly as rising land values drive up their property taxes.
Some states and municipalities give tax breaks to farmers who agree not to develop their lands
or grant them developmentrightsthat can be sold to property owners in areas where higher
density development is being encouraged. Both approaches serve to keep farmers farming.
The federal government, either directly or in partnership with states, could promote broader
use of these strategies.
�T H E WHITE H O U S E
WAS HIN GTO N
January 20, 1997
MEMORANDUM TO
THE PRESIDENT
FROM
RAHM EMANUEL
SUBJECT
SCHOOL MODERNIZATION
Attached is a survey on school modernization done by Greenberg Research that I thought you
wouldfindinteresting. I believe that the issue of school construction should not be about the
problems of the inner city but rather on the opportunities school construction provides to improve
learning, discipline and class size. This initiative must be positioned in a larger context in order to
gamer the greatest public support.
�BRE
E N BE R G
0 U I N L A N
RE
SEARCH
A National Bipartisan Survey on School Modernization
Key Findings
Sponsored by the
American Federation of Teachers
and the
National Education Association
Research by
Greenberg Quinlan Research
and
The Tarrance Group
January 1998
Introduction
The American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the National Education Association (NEA)
commissioned Greenberg Quinlan Research and The Tarrance Group to conduct a national
bipartisan survey of registered voters on the issue of school modernization (renovating existing
schools, building new schools due to enrollment increases, and upgrading all schools for
educational technology). Telephone interviews with 1,001 registered voters were conducted
between January 5-10, 1998, with a margin of error of +/- 3.1 percentage points.
The survey surfaced six key findings:
•
Education is a major national priority, driven by public concerns
about the quality of public education.
There is strong bipartisan support for a $30 billion, 10-year federal
school modernization proposal.
Public concerns about Hay she, technology, academic standards and
disciplinedrive public support for the proposal.
Voters choose school modernization overwhelmingly over a number
of other potential federal spending priorities.
Support of school modernization will benefit both Republican and
Democratic members of Congress.
While there is strong public support for the proposal, a number of
obstacles in public attitudes remain to be overcome.
�AFT/NEA Survey
I. Education as a National Priority
The survey found that meeting the educational needs of the country stands among the top
concerns of voters: (33 percent) - along with crime and drugs (41 percent), the decline in
moral values (37 percent) and health care and Medicare (37 percent^
When it comes to the federal budget, education is the top priority for additional national
spending: 29 percent, compared to 24 percent for health care, 22 percent for reducing the
national debt and 12 percent for tax cuts.
Balanced B u d get C o n te 11
The budget debate
In the context of the new budget debate — What should the country do as it faces the prospect
of a balanced budget? — the public is seriously entertaining increased spending on education:
• 48 percent favor increased spending on education (alone or in
combination with tax cuts)
•
44 percent favor tax cuts (alone or in combination with increased
spending on education)
•
35 percent favor reducing the national debt
The desire for new spending on education is rooted in a broad dissatisfaction with the job that
is being done in American education. The dissatisfaction is highest at the national level (67
percent) and still very high for people's own state (58 percent). Voters are divided on the job
being done by local schools: 48 percent satisfied and 46 percent dissatisfied.
Public concerns
When the public looks at the schools today, the biggest problems they see are students who are
undisciplined and disruptive (44 percent see it as a "very big problem" and 78 percent as a
"very big" or "senous" problem). After discipline, the main problems are overcrowded
classrooms (28 percent and 57 percent) and a lack of academic standards for promotion and
graduation (27 percent and 58 percent). There is less concern with the health and safety of the
schools and with unequal educational opportunity.
2
�AFT/NEA Survey
Increased spending on education
The result of the current national mood on education is strong support for increased spending
on education.
•
When thinking about education in the United States:
•
58 percent say the federal government is spending "too little"
•
9 percent think "too much."
•
While support for education is broad, it draws its principal energy from women and
particularly from people under 50 years of age. A remarkable three-quaners ot mose
under 30 and two-thirds of those 30 to 50 years of age say the country is spending too little
on education.
•
The support for increased spending on education carries across the "center" of the
American electorate in 1998: 64 percent of both conservative Democrats and moderate
Republicans say we are spending too little - as well as 72 percent of Ross Perot
supporters.
•
Finally, support for increased national spending on education is indeed national. A large
majority in every region of the country, including the South (54 percent), says we are
spending too little.
I I . Bipartisan support for a $30 billion, 10-year federal school
modernization proposal
The AFT and the NEA have developed a federal legislative proposal to provide $30 billion
over 10 years to help states and local school districts modernize public schools.
Proposal Support
The proposal would provide 30 billion dollars over 10 years to help local
school districts pay for repair, renovation and modernization of their
schools (Indirect Support). The federal government would provide grants
directly to local school districts to fund local school renovation and
modernization (Direct Support).
Indrtct Suppon
Dirccl Support
�AFT/NEA Survey
Three-quarters of voters (74 percent or 76 percent depending on whether
aid is indirect or direct) favor the idea, while iustunder 20 percent oppose
it.
The proposal earns two-thirds or more majority support among nearly every major
voter group including independents (65 percent) and Republicans (73 percent).
60 percent of conservative Republicans and 64 percent of Republican men (the
lowest support groups) tavor the idea, although strong support with both groups
drops below 30 percent.
Women (79 percent favor) are more likely than men (69 percent) to support the
idea. In fact, Republican women appear to be among the strongest support groups
with 81 percent overall approval and 38 percent strong approval of the plan.
III. The importance of class size, technology, academic standards and
discipline
There is a broad range of arguments that voters respond to when considering the AFT/NEA
proposal for school modernization, but two stand out because they relate so closely to_th
public's underlying concerns about education. These arguments emphasize some very basic
issues - reducing class size so discipline can be restored and learning improved, and
modernizing schools so children can have access to computers.
The survey found that the following specific arguments were the most convincing for
supporting the proposal:
•
"This school repair and modernization program is needed to reduce class size
which wilTmean less discipline piubletiis and liigher student achievement:" (50
percent found it either an "extremely convincing" or "very convincing"
argument).
•
"Nearly one half of all school buildings lack the basic wiring needed to give our
children access to computers in the classroom." (47 percent) "This school
repair and modernization program is needed if all classrooms are to have the
basic wiring to support computers." (46 percent)
In addition, the survey found that the following global themes around the proposal were the
most convincing:
Schools and the New Technological Age: "This program will mean that our
children and our schools will be able to compete in this new era of global,
technological change. We need modern, well-equipped schools where our
children can leam to meet these challenges." (81 percent found it "very" or
"somewhat convincing")
�AFT/NEA Survev
Every District Can Improve Its Schools: "This program will mean that all
school districts, not just the wealthiest ones, will be able to improve their
school buildings. The wealthiest districts will be fine, but this program makes
it possible for poorer and overtaxed districts to make improvements." (77
percent)
Class Size, Discipline and Learning: "This program will help students leam
better. It will increase the numbers of classrooms and reduce class size.
Teachers will be able to spend less time disciplining students and more time_
teaching." (75 percent)
Local Responsibility: "We can use federal funding to repair, renovate aric
modernize our nation's school buildings as long as state and local government
make the decisions on how the money is spent." (77 percent)
IV. School modernization and other potential federal spending priorities
When asked to rate the proposal against other potential federal spending priorities, voters
chose "school renovation and modernization" over:
•
"Loans to the International Monetary Fund to stabilize Asian economies"
by a margin of 84 percent to 9 percent;
•
"Prison construction" by a margin of 82 percent to 13 percent;
•
"Highway construction" by a margin of 79 percent to 15 percent; and
•
"Capital gains tax cuts" by a margin of 70 percent to 25 percent.
At least a two-thirds majority of every voter group, including conservative Republicans (except
when compared with a capital gains tax cut, which drops to a 56 percent majority) put
modernization and renovation over IMF loans, prisons, highways, and capital gains
expenditures.
V. Congressional Impact
To assess the potential advantages and liabilities in this issue, the survey asked voters how they
would respond to a Democratic or Republican member of Congress who voted for the
AFT/NEA proposal to modernize the schools. Such a vote mainly helps the members,
particularly Republican members.
Republican Members
In a follow-up to a series of arguments for and against the proposal. Republican respondents
were asked whether knowing that a Republican member of Congress voted for the $30 billion
dollar proposal would make them more or less likely to vote for that member. Approximately
75 percent of voters indicated they would be more likely to vote for a Republican candidate for
Congress who voted for the plan (though just 22 percent say "much more likely").
�AFT/NEA Survev
While the effects are not dramatic, support for this legislation clearly helps the Republican
member. The generic ballot contest narrows marginally in favor of the Republicans:from+3
points for the Democrats at the outset of the survey to an even contest after respondents are
informed of the vote in favor of the program. The shift toward the Republicans comes from
key swing groups, such as independent women (14 percent toward the GOP), single women
(13 percent), rural area voters (16 percent), and those from the Border states (13 percent).
At the same time, the Democrats' overall advantage on the education issue narrows to just 6
points, suggesting a small but consistent movement toward Republicans open to this kind of
education initiative.
Democratic Members
Overall, 72 percent of Democratic voters say they are more likely to vote for a candidate who
supported this initiative - and that is after hearing all the arguments against it. Only 23 percent
say they are less likely to support the member.
Additional findings
A vote for the AFT/NEA proposal wins a dramatic endorsement from younger voters (88
percent more likely), all voters under 50 (73 percent), and younger non-college voters (81
percent). It wins big majorities among independents (69 percent), and particularly among
conservative Democrats (87 percent) and moderate Republicans (76 percent). Perhaps more
important, 76 percent of the undecided voters in the race for Congress say they are more likely
to vote for the Democrat because of their vote on this issue.
In the congressional contest nationwide, Democratic congressional candidates hold their 4
percent margin. The Democratic candidate, after his or her support for school modernization,
enjoys an 11-point advantage on handling education.
V I . Obstacles in public attitudes
While the AFT/NEA proposal demonstrates support that is broad, there are some cautionary
findings in this survey:
•
While spending on education alone (19 percent) overtakes all other priorities
among large city voters (34 percent), Democrat men (35 percent), and Liberal
Democrats (41 percent), paying down the national debt alone (35 percent) has
much broader appeal. Men overall (41 percent), voters over fifty years old (43
percent), Republicans (42 percent), independents (37 percent), Catholics,
Protestants and whites overall (37 percent) - all have a plurality of their
voters prioritizing the debt. A large bloc of voters (29 percent) want to
increase spending on education and cut taxes.
Voters are much more focused on the issues of student discipline, academic
standards, school overcrowding, and modernizing schools for computers than
they are on the of health and safety of school buildings.
�AFT/NEA Survev
The public will clearly listen to both sides of this debate. The arguments
against the AFT/NEA proposal for school modernization score at least as well
as the arguments for it - despite the large overall majority for the program.
•
A majority (51 percent) of the publicfindsextremely or very convincing the
argument that rather than spending money on "fancy equipment in the
schools," we would be better off putting more effort into involving parents and
teaching the basics.
•
A majority of most voter groups also find convincing the contention that state
and local governments know what's best for schools (52 percent extremely or
very convincing).
These arguments against the proposal lose some of their strength among women and blacks
and among voters under age 50, particularly under 30. Indeed, age overshadows both gender
and race in explaining preferences on this issue. But both arguments against the proposal getting back to the basics and local/state control - gain increased support with older, and
therefore higher propensity, voters.
Conclusion
Still, it is striking that a large majority - 76 percent -support the AFT/NEA proposal
after hearing the arguments for and against it. The public may be open to the debate
and may not have intense views, but they are inclined to support this initiative.
�NATIONAL SURVEY
of
Registered Voters
Public School Renovation, Construction,
and Modernization
for the
National Education Association
and the
American Federation of Teachers
by
Greenberg Research, Inc.
and
The Tarrance Group
January 5-10,1998
�NEA-98.Q1
January 5-10, 1998
1001 Respondents
FREQUENCY QUESTIONNAIRE
Q.2 First of all, are you registered to vote at this address?
Yes
No
(refJOHN)
Total
100
-
Q.4 Many people weren't able to vote in the 1996 election for president between Bob Dole, Bill Cimton, and
Ross Perot. How about you? Were you able to vote, or for some reason were you unable to vote?
Voted
Ineligible/too young
Did not vote
(Can't remember/Don't know/Refused)
(ref:VOTE96)
Total
99
1
-
Q.5 Now, I am going to read you a bst of concerns that people have. Please tell me which TWO of these you
personally worry about the most?
Crime and drugs
Decline in moral values
Health care and Medicare
Education
Taxes and government spending
The economy and jobs
(No second concern)
(Don't know/refused)
(ref:CONCl)
Total
41
37
37
33
31
19
1
1
�National Education Association: Frequency Questionnaire, Jan. 5-10,1998
Q. 10 Even though you are not supporting the Democrat now, what are the chances that you might support
the Democratic candidate in the election for Congress this year
0
Fair Chance
A small chance
Just a slight chance
No chance at all
(Don't know/refused)
Democratic Supporter
(ref:GC3)
Total
22
9
10
9
5
44
Q. 11 Even though you are not supporting the Republican now, what are the chances that you might support
the Republican candidate in the election for Congress this year?
Fair Chance
A small chance
Just a slight chance
No chance at all
(Don't know/refused)
Republican Supporter
(ref:GC4)
Total
23
11
10
11
5
41
Q. 12 Let me ask something different. When you think about education in the United States today, are you
satisfied or dissatisfied with the job that is being done?
Very satisfied
Somewhat satisfied
Somewhat dissatisfied
Very dissatisfied
(Mixed/depends/neither sadsfied nor dissatisfied)
(Don't know/refused)
Total satisfied
Total dissatisfied
(ref:SCHOOLSl)
Total
5
23
34
33
3
2
28
67
GREENBERG QUINLAN RESEARCH, INC. / THE TARRANCE GROUP
�National Education Association: Frequency Questionnaire, Jan. 5-10,1998
5
Q. 16 When you think about education in your area today, where children here go to school, are you satisfied
or dissatisfied with the job that is being done?
Total
18
30
23
23
2
3
Very satisfied
Somewhat satisfied
Somewhat dissatisfied
Very dissatisfied
(Mixed/depends/neither satisfied nor dissatisfied)
(Don't know/refused)
Total satisfied
Total dissatisfied
(ref:SCHOOLS3)
48
46
Q . 17 Do you think the local government in your area is spending too much, too little or about the right
amount on education
9
Total
8
41
46
6
Too much
About the right amount
Too little
(Don't know/refused)
(ref:SCHOOLS3A)
Q. 18 I am going to read you a list of potential problems in the schools today. Please tell me whether each one
is a very big problem, a serious problem, a minor problem, or not much of a problem at all.
Very
Not
Very Minor/
Minor Much DKJ Big/
Not
Big Serious
Prob Prob Ref Serious Much
Prob Prob
18 Students who are undisciplined and disruptive .. ..44
34
15
4
3
78
19
19 Overcrowded classrooms
28
28
23
16
4
57
39
20 Public school buildings that are in
unsafe or unhealthy condition
21
23
26
26
3
45
52
21 Unequal educational opportunity for all students . . 19
22
26
30
3
41
56
22 A lack of academic standards for
promotion and graduation
(refPROBl)
31
23
17
3
58
40
27
GREENBERG QUINLAN RESEARCH, INC. / THE TARRANCE GROUP
�National Education Association: Frequency Questionnaire, Jan. 5-10, 1998
7
(475 Respondents)
Q.26 (SPLIT D) I am going to read you a new proposal that will be considered by the Congress this year. The
proposal would provide 30 billion dollars over 10 years to help local school districts pay for repair,
renovation and modernization of their schools. The federal government would provide grants directly to local
school districts to fund local school renovation and modernization. Do you favor or oppose this proposal?
Total
43
34
7
12
5
Strongly favor
Somewhat favor
Somewhat oppose
Strongly oppose
(Don't know)
Total favor
Total oppose
(ref:INFRAD)
76
19
Q.27 When you think about school renovation and modernization, which of these problems seems to be
greatest in the country and most in need of attention?
Total
Overcrowded schools that undermine teaching and student learning . . . 36
Older schools, not wired for computers, that can't prepare students
for college and the job market
31
School buildings which are unsafe and unhealthy
14
School classrooms in poor physical condition that provide a bad
learning environment
12
(Don't know/refused)
8
(ref:INFRA2)
(491 Respondents)
Q.29 (SPLIT E) For the most part, state government and local school districts pay for school renovation and
modernization.
Do you think that the needs for increased spending for school renovation and modernization should be funded
entirely by state and local school districts or do you think the federal government should provide some
funding too.
Funded entirely by state and local
Some federal funding
(Don't know/refused)
(ref:INFRA4E)
Total
29
70
2
GREENBERG QUINLAN RESEARCH, INC. / THE TARRANCE GROUP
�National Education Association: Frequency Questionnaire, Jan. 5-10,1998
I
A
Extrem Very Smwht Little
Conv. Conv. Conv Conv
Not
At All DKJ
Conv Ref.
36 The federal government and bureaucrats vvill
direct the money to the poorest cities, and not
very much will go to the school districts where the
majority of children attend school
9
15
33
14
26
3
37 Thirty billion dollars for the nation's schools is a drop
m the bucket and will not really solve the problem
11
18
29
14
24
4
12
19
27
13
27
3
3 8 The federal government and bureaucrats will direct
the money to mismanaged urban school districts, like
Washington, D.C, that will only waste
the taxpayer's money
(ref: DOUBTS)
Q.39 Let me read you a series of statements made by supporters of the school renovation and modernization
program. For each statement, please tell me whether you find it extremely convincing, very convincing,
somewhat convmcing, a little convincing, or not at all convincing?
A
Not
Extrem Very Smwht Little At All DK'
Conv. Conv. Conv Conv Conv Ref.
39 It will cost 112 billion dollars nationally to make
17
5
9
22
35
12
40 6,000 new schools will have to be built in the
next decade to handle the increased student enrollment
13
27
32
11
13
41 One third of all school children in America go to
schools needing extensive physical repairs
11
27
34
11
12
42 Nearly one half of all school buildings lack
the basic wiring needed to give our children
access to computers in the classroom
13
34
30
9
11
43 30 billion dollars will help state and local governments
significantly address the need to repair, renovate,
and modernize the nation's school buildings
9
24
39
13
14
34.
26
10
12
44 This school repair and modernization program is needed
if all schools are to be accessible to the handicapped
17
GREENBERG QUINLAN RESEARCH, INC. / THE TARRANCE GROUP
�National Education Association: Frequency Questionnaire, Jan. 5-10, 1998
11
(526 Respondents)
Q.51 (SPLIT C: REPUBLICAN) Now I'm going to read you a series of statements about a Republican
member of the Congress. Please tell me whether each description, if it were accurate, would make you much
more likely, somewhat more likely, somewhat less likely or much less likely to vote for that member of
Congress.
Much Smwt Smwt Much
Total Total
more more
less
less DK/ more less
likely likely likely likely Ref. likely likely
51 The member voted in favor of the
proposal for school building renovation
and modernization
22
53
13
8
4 74
21
52 The member voted in favor of the
proposal because it will encourage and
assist local, state and private efforts
to meet our local school needs
(refPARTISANl)
24
53
12
77
20
(526 Respondents)
Q.53/54 (SPLIT C) Let me ask again about Congress. In this year's election, do you plan to vote for the
Democratic candidate or the Republican candidate in your district?
Democratic candidate
Lean Democra'tic candidate
Republican candidate
Lean Republican candidate
(Undecided)
Total Democratic candidate
Total Republican candidate
(ref:PARTISAN2)
Total
32
8
30
11
19
41
41
GREENBERG QUINLAN RESEARCH, INC. / THE TARRANCE GROUP
�National Education Association: Frequency Questionnaire, Jan. 5-10,1998
13
(475 Respondents)
Q.58/59 (SPLIT D) Let me ask again about Congress. In this year's election, do you plan to vote for the
Democratic candidate or the Republican candidate m your district
Total
Democratic candidate
33
Lean Democratic candidate
10
Republican candidate
30
Lean Republican candidate
9
(Undecided)
19
7
Total Democratic candidate
Total Republican candidate
(ref:PARTISAN2B)
43
39
Q.60 (SPLIT D) Let me ask now, do you think the Democrats or the Republicans would do a better job on
education?
Democrats much better
Democrats somewhat better
Republicans somewhat better
Republicans much better
(Both)
(Neither)
(Don't know/refused)
Total Democrats better
Total Republicans better
(ref:PARTISAN3B)
Total
17
24
19
12
5
4
20
41
30
Q .61 Now, let me read you a series of reasons to support increased federal action on school renovation and
modernization. Please tell me whether this is a very convincing, somewhat convincing, a little convincing or
not at all convmcing reason to support increased federal funding for school repair, renovation and
modernization.
A
Not Very/ Little/
Very Smwht Little At All DK/ Smwht Not
Conv Conv Conv Conv Ref. Conv Conv
61 This program will help students leam
better. It will increase the number of
classrooms and reduce class size.
Teachers will be able to spend less time
disciplining students and more time
teaching
40
35
12
12
2 75
24
GREENBERG QUINLAN RESEARCH, INC. / THE TARRANCE GROUP
�National Educarion Association: Frequency Questionnaire, Jan. 5-10,1998
15
Q.67 I am going to read you a senes of choices facing the Congress in the budget. Please tell me, for each
choice, which choice you would make.
(494 Respondents)
67 School renovation and modernization
OR Prison constmction
1st
1st 2nd 2nd DK/
Total Total
Str Not Str Str Not Str Both Neither Ref 1st 2nd
71
11
5
7
2
2
2
82
13
(507 Respondents)
68 School renovation and modernization
OR Highway construction
65
14
6
9
4
1
1
79
15
69 School renovation and modernization
OR Capital gains tax cuts
58
12
10
15
1
2
3
70
25
9
5
4
0
3
4
84
9
70 School renovation and modernization
OR Loans to the International Monetary Fund
to stabilize Asian economies
74
(refCONTRASTS)
Q.71 Finally, I would like to ask you a few questions for statistical purposes. Generally speaking, do you
think of yourself as a Republican, a Democrat or what?
Total
Strong Democrat
20
Weak Democrat
17
Independent-lean Democrat
9
Independent
6
Independent-lean Republican
11
Weak Republican
18
Strong Republican
15
(Don't know/refused)
3
Total Democrat
Total Republican
(ref.PTYIDl)
37
33
GREENBERG QUINLAN RESEARCH, INC. / THE TARRANCE GROUP
�National Education Association: Frequency Quesrionnaire, Jan. 5-10,1998
17
Q.77 In the presidential election last November, did you vote for Republican Bob Dole, Refonn Party Ross
Perot or Democrat Bill Clinton?
Republican Bob Dole
Reform Party Ross Perot
Democrat Bill Clinton
(Didn't vote: ineligible, too young)
(Didn't vote)
(Can't remember/don't know)
(Refused to tell how voted)
(ref:VHISTORY4)
Total
36
10
46
1
1
1
6
Q.78 In the 1996 election for the U.S. Congress, did you vote for the Republican candidate or the Democradc
candidate in your own district?
Democradc candidate
Republican candidate
(Independent/3rd party)
(Didn't vote: ineligible, too young)
(Didn't vote)
(Can't remember/don't know)
(Refused to tell how voted)
(ref:VHISTORY5A)
Total
43
-43
0
2
9
3
Q.79 How would you describe the area in which you live--Do you live in a city with over a million people, in
a smaller city, in a suburban area outside a city, in a small town, or in a rural area?
City(l million+)
Smaller city
Suburban area
Small town
Rural area
(Don't know/refused)
(refCITYSIZE)
Total
11
21
24
23
19
2
Q.80 What is your religion?
Protestant
Catholic
Jewish
(Other/none/refused)
(refRELIGl)
Total
51
25
2
22
GREENBERG QUINLAN RESEARCH, INC. / THE TARRANCE GROUP
�National Education Association: Frequency Questionnaire, Jan. 5-10.1998
19
Q.85 What is your race?
White
Black
Hispanic
Asian
(Other)
(Don't know/refused)
(ref:RACE)
Total
83
10
2
0
3
2
Q.3 Sex of respondent
Male
Female
(ref: GENDER)
Total
48
52
GREENBERG QUINLAN RESEARCH, INC. / THE TARRANCE GROUP
�November 6, 1997
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
FIRST LADY HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON
ELLEN McCULLOCH-LOVELL
SUBJECT:
Save America's Treasures Act of 1998
When you announced the Millennium Program at the National Archives, you said we would, as a
nation, seek ways to "honor the past and imagine the future". One way to translate that theme
into practical action is for you to champion a national, bipartisan, public-private effort to save
America's treasures.
Our past is literally crumbling, chipping and disintegrating away in our libraries, museums,
archives, historic sites and private holdings. There is a truly urgent need to save the papers, art,
publications, artifacts, buildings and sites that tell our history and preserve our identity as
Americans —fromthe Star Spangled Banner, to the Declaration of Independence, to the archives
of historically black colleges, Native American archeological sites, and ancestral portraits in
unheated New England historical societies.
As the White House Millennium Program and Congress plan for ways to mark both the 200th
anniversaries of the White House and Capitol and the millennium, there is a unique opportunity to
create a new preservation program to "Save America's Treasures".
A compelling list of records, monuments, sites and other artifacts that need to be "saved" could be
quickly compiled, and a strong case made for the urgency of the need. For example:
•
The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and Bill of Rights are atriskif their
storage problems are not solved within three years.
The restoration of the Star Spangled Banner, theflagthatflewover Fort McHenry that
inspired Francis Scott Key's poem, is thefirstpreservation priority for the Smithsonian
Institution, at a cost of $15 million.
•
The National Park Service, which manages Thomas Edison's laboratory and house in New
Jersey, describes their condition as dire ~ all of his papers must be catalogued and
conserved. Large numbers of artifacts at the Gettysburg Battlefield site are undocumented
and disintegrating for lack of proper storage. At Gettysburg, twenty-nine monuments and
�outdoor sculptures, some designed by renowned artists, are in grave danger. Some have
fallen, like those they commemorate: others are worn by weather and defects. Together
they comprise the largest collection of sculpture at any Civil War battlefield and they must
be saved.
•
The National Endowment for the Humanities reports that 80 milhon brittle books in
libraries and other collections need to be saved through repair and digitization; NEH has
set a goal of preserving three million of the most valuable by 2010.
•
Both the Library of Congress and the National Endowment for the Arts describe the
urgent need to save America's classicfilms,as well as photos and historicfieldrecordings,
by transferring them to more stable media.
The Library of Congress mustfindways to conserve their collectionsfromhistoric figures,
such as Ralph Ellison and Leonard Bernstein.
•
Among the "eleven most endangered historic places" listed by the National Trust of
Historic Preservation in 1997 are: the Ellis Island National Monument, where decay and
lack of maintenance threaten the historic buildings of the main gateway to America from
1892-1954; Congressional Cemetery in Washington, DC, thefinalresting place of
American tribal chiefs. Revolutionary War heroes and members of Congress — which is in
serious dechnefromneglect, vandalism and theft; and Vicksburg Campaign Trail, where
landmark buildings are crumbling and development threatens unprotected areas
surrounding the Military Park.
•
The non-profit National Institute for Conservation reports instances of pending loss all
over the country. For example, 50,000 glass plate negatives of major sites in Egypt that
no longer exist are in need of preservation at the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston. Over
half our outdoor sculptures in major parks and small towns across the nation are in need
of repair, including the statue of Wyoming Territory's equal rights advocate, Esther
Hobart Morris, in Cheyenne.
Federal agencies are currently carrying out preservation programs but at a lower level of activity
than what is urgently needed.
NEH has invested $50 million since 1989 in preserving brittle books. IMLS spends $2.5 million
annually on conservation grants for museum collections, one of its major programs. The Library
of Congress has the largest conservation lab in the world - and spends $5 million a year. The
Library also runs the largestfilmpreservation lab and is the major restorer of our motion picture
heritage. The Library recently restored its two copies of Lincoln's Gettysburg address and the
Thomas Jefferson draft of the Constitution. The National Endowment for the Arts allocates about
$4.5 million a year for preservation funding projects, such as grants to restore historic adobe
churches, conserve a Rembrandt Peale portrait housed in. Ohio, resurrect old musicals that would
be lost, and save archival tapes of legendary performances by Woodie Guthrie and Jelly Roll
Morton. The 20th century was the American century is dance, but without preservation the
�works of master choreographers wtil die with them.
The General Services Administration is a major conservator of buildings and art. Among its
holdings are 200 buildings that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places; GSA also
maintains the government's collection of WPA art and the works commissioned with new
construction.
The National Archives and Records Administration presents a special challenge, as there is a back
log of work needed to salvage deteriorating records, convert many to more stable media, expand
storage and renovate facilities. It has submitted a strategic plan with a significant budget increase
that should be considered on its own. The needs of the National Archives, however, are entirely
consistent with this recommendation of a major administration preservation program and could be
presented with other urgent needs. For example, to save the Declaration of Independence, the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights, Archives proposes a series of steps - removing the Charters
from their deteriorating cases, placing them in new state-of-the-art cases, renovating the vault
system and renovating the National Archives building. The cost estimate for FY 99 is $87 million;
for FY '00 it is $121 million. In addition. Archives proposes to save elearonic records ($2.3 M),
improve storage and preservation ($3.6 M); expand public access to collections ($5.6 M); and
promote records management by federal agencies ($2.3 M).
The needs of the National Park Service are compelling; the National Park System that President
Roosevelt created a century ago now suffersfromneglect in maintenance and in preservation —
needs that must begin to be addressed. NPS owns 15,000 buildings and 35 million artifacts; only
about seven percent receive conservation each year. Work on even a selective list of endangered
sites would cost at least $64 million. Yet, work must begin — and with the federal impetus and
the spotlight of attention, many of the projects could attract private support.
We could have a major impact by including at least $100 million in the FY 99 budget and between
5100 milhon and $200 million in the FY '00 budget to "Save America's Treasures". These
amounts would be allocated proportionate to need, and capacity to regrant new funds, through
the federal agencies and the major preservation non-profits. Because a number of agencies and
NGOs are already "in the business" of preservation, we should be able to begin a well-organized
preservation program on October 1, 1999.
Federal funding should be made available to institutions and citizens' groups on at least a one-toone matching basis. There is strong evidence that there would be substantial support in the
private funding sector: corporate, foundation and individual donors. One recent example of the
private focus on preservation is thefivemillion dollars granted by the American Express
Foundation to help create the World Monuments Fund. The J. Paul Getty Trust has invested
$24.8 million in 1996 alone in national and international preservation projects. (Yesterday, the
Getty and the World Bank signed an agreement whereby the foundation will provide expertise on
the role of cultural heritage in the Bank's sustainable development funding.) Just last week a
major U.S. foundation called to say that, inspired by the White House Millennium Program, they
were ready to commit at least $5 million to the Smithsonian and the National Archives for their
preservation priorities.
�A national "Save America's Treasures" program could stimulate a private fund-raising campaign
to capture the commitment and doUars of citizens. A non-profit organization, such as the
National Trust for Historic Preservation, which already has state chapters and thousands of
members, could help launch both the national campaign and local versions. School children could
learn their history as well as the value of philanthropy by participating in fund-raising: perhaps by
collecting 2,000 pennies.
A national preservation program will link strongly to a public-private partnership to digitize
intellectual and cultural material, to enrich the content of the national infonnation infrastructure.
While digitization is not the only — nor permanent - method of preservation, it does capture
images and content, making records and objects accessible to a wide public of students, parents,
teachers, writers and researchers. Additional funding for digitization would help the Smithsonian
Institution digitize parts of its collection and allow other federal institutions with collections, such
as the National Archives, to enrich the content of the Intemet. In addition, small amounts (S2 $4 million each) to NEH, NEA, and IMLS will stimulate projects in non-profit institutions to
digitize their own collections, and to develop curricula around this material. A national
digitization project is similar to, although not identical to, a preservation program; however, one
supports the other. Together they would be a significant gift to the nation: to save and create
access to our history and culture.
�
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
SOTU [State of the Union] Policy Memos [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 41
<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-Seg2-041-010-2015