Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
55031210
label
Austin Speech Politics of Meaning
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
55031210
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Austin Speech Politics of Meaning
citationUrl
collections
Records of the First Lady's Office (Clinton Administration)
Melanne Verveer's Subject Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
55031210
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
2068127-20130534S-058-014-2022
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
00526d0387eb4a53
ocrText
After the ruling, the prosecution
appeal was insuccessful.
ately
before
Lack of Effort Suspected
Mr. Ford, the defense
I
"I'm not satisfied the prosecution
tended that the state
Beliefs
May 29,1993
has made a diligent effort to establish
reversal of the earlier
Peter Steinfels
the facts," the judge said.
without offering new
Another prosecutor, Glenn D. Gold-
called that position a "m
berg, argued that officials were un-
After the ruling, he said
able to guarantee the young woman
ball revocation campaig
Hillary Rodham Clinton talks about moral
that her name and address would not
rebuffed at every stage of
have been publicized if she testified.
process. "Today was a d
Judge Cohen told Mr. Goldberg he
he said. "These issues the
values, just like millions of other Americans.
would have considered granting an
raising falsely now have
order protecting her anonymity if the
put to rest."
prosecutors had asked for one.
A representative of the
Seldom has a national figure
ing society, etc., etc. Mrs. Clinton's
The prosecutors also argued that
Organization for Women,
stirred so much wonder and specula-
talk of spirituality and moral values
under court rules, it was not their
sile, said after the hearing
tion in the news media by saying
fits comfortably in this genre. It
legal burden to prove that Mr. Archer
Cohen "had ignored the vi
things that most of the American pub-
makes her neither incoherent nor an
was dangerous. Rather, they said, the
case" and that Mr. Arch
lic consider unremarkable.
Orwellian Big Sister with New Age
rules required the defense to show he
Scherzer twins had receiv
In an April 6 speech in Austin, Tex.,
accessories.
was not dangerous.
benefits and all the privil
and several Interviews since then,
Her actual words were far more
The judge agreed. But he said the
"Why is this judge sidir
Hillary Rodham Clinton talked about
prosecution had first raised the Bos-
Girl Scout than goddess worship,
victed rapists?" she said.
the Golden Rule and the Ten Com-
ton College incident in court after Mr.
he siding with the commu
more concerned with strengthening
mandments and "common-sense
non-governmental groups than ex-
truth." She borrowed the Presidential
panding the state.
bully pulpit from her husband, and
Michael Kelly may have been se-
here is what she declared:
vere with Mrs. Clinton in parts of his
RELIGIO
9That the United States, despite its
revealing interview last Sunday in
wealth, was feeling an "undercurrent
The New York Times Magazine, but
of discontent" and a collapse of com-
he was on target when he wrote that
munity, of which urban violence and
Mrs. Clinton's liberalism is derived
THEOSOPHY
teen-agers' self-destruction were only
from her religious faith. Her politics
PRESSYTERIAN
the interdramatic symptoms
combine, he wrote, "a generally 'pro,
9That the dying Lee Atwater, the
gressive' social agenda with a strong
THEOSOPHY
impresario of bare-knuckled Republi-
dose of moralism, the admixture of
can campaigns, was right to warn of
United Lodge of Theosophists
MADISON AV
the two driven by an abundant faith in
347 East 72nd Street
PRESBYTERIAN CI
a "spiritual vacuum at the heart of
the capacity of the human intellect
American society."
SUNDAY 7:30 p.m.
Madison Avenue at 73rd
and the redeeming power of love."
That national renewal could not
"Death and Rebirth"
May 30, The Day of Pe
be found simply by shoring up Gov-
Cable Ch. 16 & 17. UHF 38, 44 & 84 9:30-10:00 p.m.
ernment programs or relying on the
Admittedly Mrs. Clinton is a com-
"Do Dreams Have Meaning?"
SUMMER Worship SCHEDU
marketplace but would require "an
plex, political woman who zig-zags
All Meetings Free
ethos of individual responsibility and
For Program & Free Literature
Worship: 10:30 am &
across stereotypes, both naturally
Phone: 535-2230
caring," a society that "makes us feel
and by calculation. But she has also
7:00 pm Holy Comm
that we are a part of something big-
Child Care Available during mon
become a kind of national Rorschach
ger than ourselves" and the reinvigo-
UNITY
test where commentators project
"The Holy Spiri
ration of "Intermediary institutions"
their own fears and weaknesses.
&
The Rev. Charles A. A
like families, local communities and
Her recent critics appear divided
Eric Butterworth
Associate Pastor, pre
voluntary groups.
between conservatives who suspect
John Weaver, Music Director/Or
Sunday 11 am
9That "there is no or should be
she does not mean what she is saying
Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center
Broadway at 64th St.
Wednesday, June 2: 6:1
no debate that our family structure
and liberals who fear that she does.
is in trouble" or that "our children
"The Tree of Life"
Summer Midweek Worship
They include people who are wary of
(Sanctuary and Chapel air DOI
Richard Barnes, Associate
need the stability, the predictability
any political figures talking about
Radio: Sunday 6:15 am WMXV 105.1
of a family."
values and spirituality and people
Unity Center, 213 West 58th St. 582-1300
Sometimes Mrs. Clinton sounded
who are just wary when Mrs. Clinton
CHRISTIAN SCIENCI
like Vaclav Havel, sometimes like
starts talking that way.
RELIGIOUS SCIENCE
Martin Luther King Jr., and some-
Convinced that the real meaning of
times, well, like George Bush with his
her words must be couched below the
Free CHRISTIAN SCIENCE
"vision thing" and a thousand points
surface, the commentators are por-
FIRST CHURCH OF RELIGIOUS SCIENCE
DIVINE LOVE: Its Healin
of light.
ing over the ideas of Michael Lerner,
Teaching the Science of Mind
By William C. Hill, c
the editor of the Jewish journal Tik-
DR. STUART GRAYSON
At SECOND CHURCH OI
The media have blinked with aston-
kun, whose phrase, "the politics of
SUNDAYS AT 11 a.m.
SCIENTIST, NEW
ishment, if not consternation. "She
meaning," Mrs. Clinton echoed in
Alice Tully Hall at Lincoln Center
Central Park West and 68th
sounded as if she's discovered spirit-
Broadway at 65th St.
Texas. And they are trying hard to
Church Bldg., 14 East 48th Street, 688-0600
ual truths that eluded Buddha and Je-1
THURSDAY, JUNE 3, 7
link Mrs. Clinton's remarks to her
sus," sniffed one columnist. Incoher-
roots in the youthful movements for
ent and didactic, sniffed others.
social change of the 1960's.
In her Austin speech and in the in-
ÀSSEMBLIES OF GOD
EPISCOPAL
But Mrs. Clinton's remarks actual-
ETHICAL C
terviews that followed, Mrs. Clinton
INDEPENDENT
ly reflect almost nothing of Mr. Ler-
praised her father's insistence that
ner's quite specific, highly psycholog-
ROCK CHURCH
SAINT THOMAS
NEW YOR
compassion for wrongdoers is not in-
153E St(Nr Lexington
FOR ETHIC
ical theory of "the politics of mean-
Fifth Avenue at 53rd Street
compatible with firm standards of
REV. A.A. SCIRMONT, MINISTER
ing" (which constitutes, by the way, a
The Rev. John Andrew, D.D., Rector
2W. 64 St. (at C
right and wrong. She talked of her
The Rev. Gary P. Fertig, M. Div., Vicar
Sunday Meeting,
critique of 1960's liberal and radical
Sunday 3:30 P M. A.A. Scirmont
Don Robert John
"The Miracle of the Church"
conviction that people can be evil, not
Holy Eucharist 8, 9 a.m. (sung)
AUTHENTICITY:
politics). She seems to have borrowed
Sunday 11 A.M. P
(Nursery Care at 11 a.m.)
ETHICAL
just socially conditioned. She suggest-
Rev. Stephen Yodice
During the Summ
no more from him than from any
Tues 3:30 & P.M.;
number of other thinkers whom the
THE DAY OF PENTECOST
broadcast over
ed that the nation had become too tol-
Sundays
erant of deviant behavior.
Clintons mine for ideas.
EPISCOPAL
But she also rested her vision of so-
It is not whether the First Lady's
ST. BARTHOLOMEW'S
11:00 am Festal Eucharist
cial renewal on, yes, the Golden Rule
Sermon by The Rector
HINDUISM
outlook is some rare political depar-
Park Avenue at 50th Street
and a personal change of heart. She
ture but whether it will have any im-
The Rt. Rev. Paul Moore
Imagined that lots of individual acts
Interim Pastor
4:00 pm Festal Evensong
pact on the policies of her husband's
RAMA
could add up to a big change, begin-
Administration that ought to be the
9:00 am Holy Eucharist
5:15 pm Organ Recital by
Lynn Trapp
VIVEKANA
ning with something as simple as not
focus of attention. What is being
telling a racist or sexist joke and
10:10 Christian Education:
Mon. The Visitation 12:10 pm
17 E.94 Swami Ad
called her moral crusade may be
Children & Adults
Tue Frt: 8am, 5:30pm
Sun. 11AM Peace
building to a larger awareness of eco-
(Sat: 10am)
Tue. 8PM Gospe
more compatible with the standard
Frt. 8PM
nomic hardships and inequities.
liberal agenda than either her conser-
Eucharist
Children, cover your ears.
vative or liberal critics recognize.
Preacher: Bishop Moore
In 1976, Jimmy Carter rattled the
But if she is enunciating a view-
INTER-
press by explaining that he actually
point that sees national renewal more
HE. Mon Tues Thurs & Fri 12:10pm
DENOMIN
listened for God's guidance when fac-
in strengthening families and com-
ing important decisions. Apparently
Holy Eucharist Wed. 1:10pm
TRINITY CHURCH
munities and less in claims of individ-
unfamiliar with the processes of
Information: 751-1616
BROADWAY AT WALL STREET
ual rights and entitlements, if she is
THE CIT
Sunday Worship
prayer that most Americans take for
trying to marry social conservatism
9:00 am
Holy Eucharist
granted, some pundits wondered
with an economically interventionist
CATHEDRAL
8:30 to pm
Child Care
NEW
10:00 am
Education Program
whether the Baptist Mr. Carter was
government, sooner or later some
11:15 am
Holy Eucharist & Sermon
having apparitions.
ST. JOHN THE DIVINE
Preacher:
policy difference should emerge.
The Rt. Rev. Walter D. Dennis
Dr. R.
Their successors are showing no
The International Cathedral
Mrs. Clinton's soundest critics are
112th Street & Amsterdam Ave. NYC
Weekday Worship
more familiarity with the weekly ex-
8 am & 12 Noon
Holy Eucharist
not those who reflexively recoll at her
(212)316-7540
8
am Holy Eucharist, St. Paul Chapel
Sunday, M
hortations from a million American
talk about a spiritual vacuum and an
8:00am
Matins & Holy Communion
Tel. 212-602-0800
pulpits, exhortations about caring,
9:00am
Holy Communion & Homily
Dr. Daniel Paul Matthews, Rector
"How
ethos of individual responsibility and
9am- 1pm
searching for meaning, applying old
Nursery Care (to yrs
Fr. Masud Syedullah, Priest Charge
Child
caring, but those who fear that it is
9:30am
Santa Miss en Espanol
values to new problems, transform-
11:00am
Holy Communion & Sermon
only talk.
New York So
The Rev. Canon Joel A. Gibson,
64th Street
Sub Dean
Sign Language Interpreted 1st Sundays
7:00pm
Choral Vespers
The Riv
GRACE CHURCH
ASCENSION
Riverside
Broadway at Fast 10th Street
The Rev Dr
THE WHITE HOUSE
Not For ReleAse
Office of the Press Secretary
Immodiate Release
April 7, 1993
Internal
REMARKS OF THE FIRST LADY
AT LIZ CARPENTER'S LECTURESHIP SERIES
University of Texas
Austin, Texas
3:00 P.M. CDT
MRS. CLINTON: Thank you so much. I am reminded, in
following Anne Richards, of that old story of the fellow who died in
one of the early Arkansas floods and makes his way to heaven and is
met at the gates. And St. Peter says, "Well, you're just in time for
our monthly seminar. What do you want to talk about?" The man said,
"I want to talk about the most important experience that I have ever
encountered. I want to talk about what it is like to be in a flood.
I feel like I can make a real contribution to that dialogue." St.
Peter says, "Fine. You'll go on after Noah." (Laughter.) So, here
we are after Noah. (Applause.)
You know, it is not a common experience for me to be in
any Texas athletic facility and feel good about it -- (applause) --
but I must say that now that we're no longer in the same conferences,
my state and yours, that I am honored to be -- (laughter) -- in the
arena where the Lady Longhorns play. (Applause.) And I also have to
say -- and I hope that you feel the same way I did -- I was mighty
proud of Texas Tech, too. I thought that was a great victory.
(Applause.)
You know, when Liz Carpenter asked me to come speak at
her little seminar -- (laughter) -- it was one of those conversations
that you have with Liz -- those of us who are lucky enough to know
her and call her a friend -- where her enthusiasm just kind of takes
over. She said, I'm going to have some of my friends in, we're going
to do this lecture. You know, it will be fun. I'll get Anne to come
over and Mrs. Johnson will come over, and we'll just have a good old
time.
And I had this sort of mental image of being over in one
of the small rooms at the LBJ School and sitting with a bunch of my
friends, maybe with some students around a table. And then I just
MORE
- 2 -
put it out of my mind. And over the last two weeks, as Liz knows,
it's been kind of touch-and-go for me whether I thought I could be
here, and I told Liz that I would certainly try. And when it became
clearer that I could, I renewed contact with the people who were
helping her put this on and was then told that there were going to be
thousands, maybe 14,000 people at this event.
And my first response was no, no, no, you must have read
it wrong, there's an extra zero in there somewhere. But my second
was why would I doubt Liz Carpenter on anything? If she's going to
put on a lectureship that's like Anne says, it's going to be a big
one and besides it's in Texas. So what do we expect? And I'm just
pleased to be part of it. (Applause.)
I also want to say a special word of appreciation to
Mrs. Johnson. You know, there is that wonderful old saying about how
you never quite know what it's like until you've walked in another
person's moccasins. Well, I don't know if you've ever worn
moccasins, Mrs. Johnson, but I'm getting a sense of what it is like
to try to walk in the footsteps of you and the other women who have
been in the position that I now find myself in. And every day that
goes by, I am more impressed by the kind of qualities that you and
other women in this position have brought to taking care of your
personal business on behalf of your family and your husband, and also
trying to make your contribution to the country. And all of us in
this arena are grateful for the grace and beauty by which you carried
out both of those functions and as a wonderful example, not just for
me, but for all of us. And I very much wanted to say that to you
publicly. (Applause.)
You know, after you hear what I have to say, you'll
think that Governor Richards and I not only coordinated outfits but
coordinated comments. And I suppose the only thing left for me is to
get a hair-do like that. (Laughter.) You know, I'm actually due for
a new one and I figure that if we ever want to get Bosnia off the
front page, all I have to do is either put on a headband or change my
hair and we'll be occupied with something else. (Laughter and
applause.)
But what Anne Richards talked about is what I want to
expand on in my remarks leading into the panel discussion with all of
these distinguished panelists and with questions from many of you
that I understand were submitted. Because the problems that she
alluded to are not just American problems, they are not just
governmental problems. We are at a stage in history, I would
suggest, in which remolding society certainly in the West is one of
the great challenges facing all of us as individuals and as citizens.
MORE
- 3 -
And we have to begin realistically to take stock of
where we are, stripping perhaps away the romanticism that Governor
Richards referred to, to be able to understand where we are in
history at this point and what our real challenges happen to be.
And I say that it is not just an American problem
because if one looks around the Western world, if one looks at
Europe, if one looks at the emerging democracies, at Asia, if one
looks certainly here in North America, you can see the rumblings of
discontent, almost regardless of political systems, as we come face
to face with the problems that the modern age has dealt us.
And if we take a step back and ask ourselves, why is it
in a country as economically wealthy as we are despite our economic
problems, in a country that is the longest surviving democracy, there
is this undercurrent of discontent -- this sense that somehow
economic growth and prosperity, political democracy and freedom are
not enough that we lack at some core level meaning in our
individual lives and meaning collectively -- that sense that our
lives are part of some greater effort, that we are connected to one
another, that community means that we have a place where we belong no
matter who we are. And it isn't very far below the surface because
we can see popping through the surface the signs of alienation and
despair and hopelessness that are all too common and cannot be
ignored. They're in our living rooms at night on the news. They're
on the front pages; they are in all of our neighborhoods.
On the plane coming down I read a phrase in an article
in the newspaper this morning talking about how desperate conditions
are in so many of our cities that are filled with hopeless girls with
babies and angry boys with guns. And yet, it is not just the most
violent and the most alienated that we can look to. The discontent
of which I speak is broader than that, deeper than that. We are, I
think, in a crisis of meaning. What do our governmental institutions
mean? What do our lives in today's world mean? What does this
economic global event that Governor Richards spoke of mean? What do
all of our institutions mean? What does it mean to be educated?
What does it mean to be a journalist? What does it mean in today's
world to pursue not only vocations, to be part of institutions, but
to be human?
And, certainly, coming off the last year when the ethos
of selfishness and greed were given places of honor never before
accorded, it is certainly timely to ask ourselves these questions.
(Applause.)
One of the clearest and most poignant posings of this
question that I have run across was the one provided by Lee Atwater
as he lay dying. For those of you who may not know, Lee Atwater was
MORE
- 4 -
credited with being the architect of the Republican victories of the
'70s and the '80s. The vaunted campaign manager of Reagan and Bush.
The man who knew how to fight bare-knuckled in the political arena,
who was willing to engage in any tactics so long as it worked and he
wasn't caught at it.
And yet, when Lee Atwater was struck down with cancer,
he said something which was reprinted in Life Magazine, which I cut
out and carry with me in a little book I have of sayings and
Scriptures that I find important and that replenish me from time to
time that I want to share with you.
He said the following: "Long before I was struck with
cancer, I felt something stirring in American society. It was a
sense among the people of the country, Republicans and Democrats
alike, that something was missing from their lives, something
crucial. I was trying to position the Republican Party to take
advantage of it. But I wasn't exactly sure what it was. My illness
helped me to see that what was missing in society is what was missing
in me. A little heart, a lot of brotherhood.
The '80s were about acquiring -- acquiring wealth, power
prestige. I know. I acquired more wealth, power, and prestige than
most. But you can acquire all you want and still feel empty. What
power wouldn't I trade for a little more time with my family? What
price wouldn't I pay for an evening with friends? It took a deadly
illness to put me eye-to-eye with that true, but it is a truth that
the country, caught up in its ruthless ambitions and moral decay, can
learn on my dime.
I don't know who will lead us through the '90s, but they
must be made to speak to this spiritual vacuum at the heart of
American society, this tumor of the soul."
That to me will be Lee Atwater's real lasting legacy,
not the elections that he helped to win. (Applause.)
But I think the answer to his question -- "who will lead
us out of this spiritual vacuum" -- the answer is all of us. Because
remolding society does not depend on just changing government, on
just reinventing our institutions to be more in tune with present
realities. It requires each of us to play our part in redefining
what our lives are and what they should be.
We are caught between two great political forces. On
the one hand we have our economy -- the market economy which knows
the price of everything, but the value of nothing. That is not its
job. And then the state or government which attempts to use its
means of acquiring tax money, of making decisions to assist us in
MORE
- 5 -
becoming a better, more equitable society as it defines it. That is
what all societies are currently caught between -- forces that are
more complex and bigger than any of us can understand. And missing
in that equation, as we have political and ideological struggles
between those who think market economics are the answer to
everything, those who think government programs are the answer to
everything, is the recognition among all of us that neither of those
is an adequate explanation for the challenges confronting us.
And what we each must do is to break through the old
thinking that has for too long captured us politically and
institutionally, so that we can begin to devise new ways of thinking
about not only what it means to have governments that work again, not
only what it means to have economies that don't discard people like
they were excess baggage that we no longer need, but to define our
institutional and personal responsibilities in ways that answer this
lack of meaning.
We need a new politics of meaning. We need a new ethos
of individual responsibility and caring. We need a new definition of
civil society which answers the unanswerable questions posed by both
the market forces and the governmental ones, as to how we can have a
society that fills us up again and makes us feel that we are part of
something bigger than ourselves.
Now, will it be easy to do that? of course not.
Because we are breaking new ground. This is a trend that has been
developing over hundreds of years. It is not something that just
happened to us in the last decade or two. And so it is not going to
be easy to redefine who we are as human beings in this post-modern
age. Nor will it be easy to figure out how to make our institutions
more responsive to the kind of human beings we wish to be.
But part of the great challenge of living is defining
yourself in your moment, of seizing the opportunities that you are
given, and of making the very best choices you can. That is what
this administration, this President, and those of us who are hoping
for these changes are attempting to do.
I used to wonder during the election when my husband
would attempt to explain how so many of the problems that we were
confronting were not easy Democratic-Republican-liberal-conservative
problems. They were problems that shared different characteristics,
that we had to not only define clearly, but search for new ways of
confronting.
Then someone would say, well, you know, he can't make up
his mind, or he doesn't know what he wants to say about that. When
instead what I was hearing and what we had been struggling with for
MORE
- 6 -
years is how does one define these new issues. How do we begin to
inject some meaning? How do we take old values and apply them to
these new -- for many of us -- undreamed of problems that we now
confront? And that is what all of us must be engaged in in our own
lives, at every level, in every institution with which we interact.
Let me just give you some examples. If we believe that
the reconstruction of civil society with its institutions of family,
friendship networks, communities, voluntary organizations, are really
the glue of what holds us together; if we go back and read de
Toqueville and notice how he talked over and over again about the
unique characteristics that he found among Americans and rooted so
many of those in that kind of intermediary institution of civil
society that I just mentioned, then we know we have to better
understand what we can do to strengthen those institutions, to
understand how they have changed over time, and to try to find
meaning in them as they currently are.
That's why the debate over family values over the last
year, which was devised for political purposes, seemed so off-point.
There is no -- or should be no debates that our family structure is
in trouble. There should be no debate that children need the
stability, the predictability of a family. But there should be
debate over how we best make sure that children and families
flourish. And once that debate is carried out on honest terms, then
we have to recognize that either the old idea that only parental
influence and parental values matters, or the nearly as old idea that
only state programmatic intervention matters are both equally
fallacious.
Instead we ought to recognize what should be a common-
sense truth -- that children are the result of both the values of
their parents and the values of the society in which they live. And
that you can have an important debate over how best to make sure
parental values are the ones that will help children grow and be
strengthened, and how social values equally must be recognized for
the role they play in how children feel about themselves and act in
the world. And then we can begin to have what should be a sensible
conversation about how to strengthen both. That's the kind of
approach that has to get beyond the dogma of right or left,
conservative or liberal. Those views are inadequate to the problems
we see.
Any of you who have ever been in an inner city, working
with young people as I have over the years, will know as I do the
heroic stories of parents and grandparents who, against overwhelming
odds, fight to keep their children safe -- just physically safe; and
who hold high expectations for those children; whose values I would
put up against any other person in the country, but who has no
MORE
- 7 -
control over the day-to-day violence and influence that comes
flooding in the doors of that housing project apartment; and who need
a society that is more supportive of their value than the one they
currently have. (Applause.)
Equally, all of us know the contrary story of families
with enough economic means, affluent enough to live in neighborhoods
that are as safe as they can be in our country today, so they have
the social value structure of what we would hope that each child in
America could have in terms of just basic kinds of fundamental safety
and physical well-being, but whose parental values are not ones to
promote a childhood that is a positive one, giving children the
chance to grow up to achieve their own God-given potential. So that
the presence of values of society are not enough, either.
There are so many examples of how we have to think
differently and how we have to go beyond not only the traditions of
the past, but unfortunately for many of us, well-held and cherished
views of the past; and how we have to break out of the kind of
gridlock mentality which exists not just in the Congress from time to
time, but exists as well in all of us as we struggle to see the world
differently and cope with the challenges it has given us.
Yet I am very hopeful about where we stand in this last
decade of the 20th century, because for all of the problems that we
see around us, both abroad and at home, there is a growing body of
people who want to deal with them, who want to be part of this
conversation about how we break through old views and deal with new
problems. And we will need millions more of those conversations.
Those conversations need to take place in every family,
every workplace, every political institution in our country. They
need to take place in our schools, where we have to be honest about
what we are and are not able to convey to our children; where we have
to be honest about the conditions with which are confronting so many
of our teachers and our students day in and day out; where we have to
be honest that we do have to set high expectations for all children
and we should not discard any because of who they are or where they
come from. (Laughter.)
And where we need to hold accountable every member of
the educational enterprise -- parents, teachers and students. Each
should be held accountable for the opportunity they have been given
to participate in one of the greatest efforts of humankind, passing
on knowledge to children. And we have to expect more than we are
currently getting. (Applause.)
We also need to take a hard look at other institutions.
As Governor Richards said we are in the midst of an intensive effort
MORE
- 8 -
of trying to determine how we can provide decent, affordable health
care to every American. (Applause.) And in that process we have had
to ask hard questions about every aspect of our health care system.
Why do doctors do what they do? Why are nurses not permitted to do
more than they do? Why are patients put in the position they're in?
(Applause.)
And we have with us today Bill Moyers, who has helped to
enlighten all of us about how what we currently have is a system for
taking care of sickness. We do not have a system for enhancing and
promoting health. (Applause.) And what we need to do is recognize
how each of us, whether we are a care giver or a care receiver -- and
that role may change from time to time as we go through life -- will
have to think differently about health care. And we will have to
come up with a system that promotes wellness, promotes health and
provides care for us when we are sick that we can afford.
But to give you just one example about how this ties in
with what I have said before about how these problems we are
confronting now in many ways are the result of our progress as we
have moved toward being modern men and women: Our ancestors did not
have to think about many of the issues we are now confronted with.
When does life start; when does life end? Who makes those decisions?
How do we dare to impinge upon these areas of such delicate,
difficult questions? And, yet, every day in hospitals and homes and
hospices all over this country, people are struggling with those very
profound issues.
These are not issues that we have guidebooks about.
They are issues that we have to summon up what we believe is morally
and ethically and spiritually correct and do the best we can with
God's guidance. How do we create a system that gets rid of the
micromanagement, the regulation and the bureaucracy, and substitutes
instead human caring, concern and love? And that is our real
challenge in redesigning a health care system. (Applause.)
I want to say a word about another institution and that
is the media, because it is the filter through which we see ourselves
and one another. And in many ways the challenge confronting it is
just as difficult as those confronting any other institution we can
imagine. How does one keep up with the extraordinary pace of
information now available? How do we make sense of that information?
How do we make values about it even if we think we have made sense?
How do we rid ourselves of the lowest common denominator that is the
easiest way of conveying information? How do we have a media that
understands how difficult these issues are and looks at itself
honestly because the role it must play is so critical to our success
in making decisions about how we will proceed as a society?
MORE
- 9 -
I remember in the beginning of the campaign being asked
a question at an editorial meeting in South Carolina that my husband
was at to meet a lot of the editors and reporters from a lot of the
small-town papers. These were not folks who you'll see on a TV
station anywhere; these are people who got up every day and did the
best they could to put out the paper that covered their community or
their region. And one of the men, after hearing my husband speak,
said, "Now, you've talked about how we have to change. How we have
to change government, how we have to change society. But as a
journalist, how do I change to be able to understand and report on
those changes?" My husband said, "You know, I can't answer that.
That's something you have to answer. But I'm really glad you asked
the question, because every institution in our life has to ask those
hard questions about who we are, what contribution we make to dealing
with our problems and to injecting meaning again in the lives of us
all."
So every one of our institutions is under the same kind
of mandate. Change will come whether we want it or not, and what we
have to do is to try to make change our friend, not our enemy. But
probably most profoundly and importantly, the changes that will count
the most are the millions and millions of changes that take place on
the individual level as people reject cynicism, as they are willing
to be hopeful again, as they are willing to take risks to meet the
challenges they see around them, as they truly begin to try to see
other people as they wish to be seen and to treat them as they wish
to be treated, to overcome all of the obstacles we have erected
around ourselves that keep us apart from one another, fearful and
afraid, not willing to build the bridges necessary, to fill that
spiritual vacuum that Lee Atwater talked about.
You know, one of my other favorite quotes is from Albert
Schweitzer. And he talks about how you know the disease in Central
Africa called sleeping sickness; there also exists a sleeping
sickness of the soul. The most dangerous aspect is that one is
unaware of it's coming. That is why we have to be careful. As soon
as you notice the slightest sign of indifference, the moment you
become aware of a loss of character or a serious longing of
enthusiasm, it is best, take it as a warning. You should realize
that your soul suffers if you can't live superficially. Not just
your soul, but your society. Being here on this great campus, with
so many thousands of people who care about learning and are committed
to making a difference. Let us be willing to remold society by
redefining what it means to be a human being in the 20th century,
moving into a new millennium. Let us be willing to help our
institutions to change, to deal with the new challenges that confront
them. Let us try to restore the importance of civil society by
committing ourselves to our children, our families, our friends; and
to reaching out beyond the circle of those of whom we know, to the
MORE
- 10 -
many others on whom we are dependent in this complex society; and
understanding a little more about what their lives are like and doing
what we can to help ease their burdens.
Our greatest opportunities lie ahead, because so many of
the struggles of the Depression and the World War and the other
challenges posed by the Cold War and communism are behind us. The
new ones are equally threatening. But we should have learned a lot
in the last few years that will prepare us to play our part in
remolding a society that we are proud to be a part of.
Thank you all very much. (Applause.)
END
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
Internal Transcript
April 16, 1993
REMARKS BY THE FIRST LADY
AT HEALTH CARE BRIEFING
Lincoln, Nebraska
MRS. CLINTON: Thank you very much. It is a great
delight for me to be here. I am especially pleased to be with your
Senator, whom I have known for a number of years since he served as
your governor when my husband was also a governor, and have admired
and respected his commitment and concerns on issues; but,
particularly, his concern and commitment to the issue of health care
in this country.
I don't quite know how to take the Navy Seal analogy.
(Laughter.) It is a little bit too apt, too close to home. But
throughout this process, when I have been treading through very
choppy and dangerous waters, Bob Kerrey has given good advice and
good counsel and, I think, made my task much easier by the fact that
he has been there before. And I am personally very grateful for his
lifelong commitment to doing what he believes is right and,
particularly, his willingness to put himself on the line in the last
couple of years on behalf of better health care for all Americans.
It's a real tribute, Bob. (Applause.)
I'm also pleased to be here with Governor and Mrs.
Nelson. They have become friends of my husband's and mine. I always
enjoy being with them, and I always learn something. I learned just
a few minutes ago about how the Governor is not only enormously
popular in this state for a lot of very obvious and strong reasons,
but how he handles the bane of all people in political life, and that
is the unfair, unjust, inaccurate reporting that goes on from coast
to coast, north to south, east to west. (Applause.) And he has
given me some tips that I think I'll start putting into effect. I'm
not going to share them with you right now. (Laughter.) But I'm
very grateful to the Governor.
And I'm also pleased to be here with another governor
whom you'll hear from in a few minutes: Governor Howard Dean from
Vermont is a practicing physician as well as the governor of his
MORE
- 2 -
state, and has been intimately involved with the work of the
President's task force. And it's a remarkable combination to have
someone who sees this complex issue from the ground up as a
practicing physician whose wife is also a practicing physician, and
from the policy perspective of a governor's office. And I know that
you will find Governor Dean's remarks as useful and provocative, as I
always do, and am delighted to be here with him.
Those of you who are here are obviously concerned about
the subject of this conference and wanting to know more about it. I
assume from the great size of this crowd there are people from all
walks of life and from very differing perspectives -- people who
deliver health care, people who receive it, people who study about
it, people who are concerned as citizens, as parents, as members of
the community that you live in.
That is a very good sign. Because part of what we have
tried to accomplish in the last several months is exactly the sort of
conversation that this conference represents and which your presence
exemplifies. We have to be willing to strip away the years and years
of papering over the problems in our health care system, of denying
the reality that was all about us and impinging upon us and be honest
with one another. That is where we have to start. We have to be
willing to talk about our problems, put aside our own personal
interests, our own prejudices, our own experiences insofar as that is
humanly possible.
Physicians and nurses and patients and insurers,
business people of all sizes, working people -- all of us must
recognize we are all part of the problem and we will all have to be
part of a solution if it is going to work for America.
Starting from that premise, let me share with you some
of the facts that have made it impossible to ignore this problem any
longer, and which prompted the President to commit himself as he has
to trying to make our country provide quality, affordable health care
to all Americans.
First of all, there is a lot that is right about our
health care system. No one can deny that. We are always proud of
the accomplishments and achievements within the various sectors of
our health care community. We are secure in the knowledge that we
have among the best health care in the entire world, and in many,
many respects the very best. And we want to do all we can to make
sure that our children and our grandchildren will be able to say that
as well.
What is happening, however, is that beneath that
statement of fact, there are many other facts that now are breaking
MORE
- 3 -
through the surface that we have to deal with as well. The security
that many of us have come to take for granted -- that the doctor, the
nurse, the hospital would be there for us in time of care and
need -- the fact that so many of us have relied on the kind of care
that we have grown accustomed to and that we feel comfortable with,
as we look around our country today, that fundamental, personal
security can no longer be taken for granted.
Instead, what we find is not only skyrocketing costs,
but the effects of those costs. We find the growing numbers of
people who work hard for a living who do not have access to health
care. We find that more than 100,000 Americans move into the ranks
of the uninsured each month. And more than half of the uninsured in
1990 were full-time workers and their families, and the rest were
part-time workers, seasonal workers, people who worked.
Now, that's the kind of statement that, taken in a
vacuum, sounds frightening. But if you're not in that group, you
wonder to yourself: Well, that's not me and that's not those whom I
know. But it could be. Because now more than ever, Americans worry
about losing the insurance that they have, that they have taken for
granted.
I wish all of you could have come with me on the visits
I've been privileged to make around the country, talking to people
about health care. It is very hard to explain, as I tried to explain
to a group of working people in New Orleans a month ago why they, who
had worked for the same employer, some of them for 20 years and 30
years, did not have insurance, could not afford it for them or their
families, but lived down the block from people who were poor enough
and not working that they were eligible for Medicaid.
It was very difficult for me to look at the woman who
worked in the clerical office of that small steel company who could
not afford insurance, her company could not afford, they believed, to
offer any help to her in purchasing that insurance, but she tried to
take care of herself. She was a single woman who had raised a child,
and she went every year to have a physical exam. She tried to read
what she needed to read, to eat the right things. She said to me she
even tried to start exercising a few years ago and tried to walk
every day.
But when she went for her physical exam, her doctor
found a lump in her breast and referred her to a surgeon. And then
when she kept that appointment with the surgeon, she reported to me
that following the appointment the surgeon said, you know, if you had
insurance, I would biopsy that. But since you don't, we will just
watch it for a while.
MORE
- 4 -
It's very hard to look in the eyes of working Americans,
people who are really at the backbone of this country and always have
been, and to know that some, by the grace of their employer, have an
insurance, and some do not. Some women can be referred to a surgeon
for a biopsy and some will just have that lump watched.
Or to listen to a veteran in that same group who had
worked in that same business for many years but who wasn't eligible
for VA benefits because he didn't have a service-connected disability
and he was working and wasn't poor enough to access the VA system.
So, again, without insurance the emergency room was his physician.
And he talked about how he hated to go to the emergency room because
it was always so expensive. He tried not to go, but the times that
he did have to go often he couldn't pay the bill he was presented.
And he felt bad about that as well.
So, there is, beneath the security that many of us still
feel, because we can afford insurance, we are lucky enough to work
for someone who helps us pay for that insurance, there are millions
and growing numbers reaching millions more of Americans who are not
so lucky. I call that the "there-but-for-the-grace-of-God-go-I"
group, because many of us are one job away, one layoff away from not
being able to afford insurance ourselves.
And then there are so many others who are in the
position of being self-employed. Many of the farmers and ranchers in
this state are like the ones that I met in Iowa when I sat for over
an hour and listened to four farm families talk to me about how they
could not afford insurance. And these were people who put literally
the food on our table. And what they did was despite the fact it
made no sense by any accounting measure, they just squeezed every
possible dollar out of everything else so that they paid for those
very expensive single-family policies that they were able to access.
Or they even went through their local farm bureau; but
because it wasn't a very big policy or they had a preexisting
condition, they were still paying more and more every year with the
cost continuing to escalate.
And I sat there in the living room of this farmhouse
thinking to myself: Why on Earth would we want, literally, to drive
out of business, which is what we are doing, farm families and ranch
families who are still among the most productive workers in our
entire country? Why would we want our government to look at their
balance sheet when they come in for some kind of loan from some
government-supported program and have the government representative
say, you know, you're not really in a good position to borrow as much
money as you want because your assets are obviously highly mortgaged.
You can't really afford much but if you cut out your monthly health
MORE
- 5 -
insurance, we think we can make this work for you? Why are we doing
that to ourselves, why are we doing that to the people who work for
us?
We also know that in addition to the 37 to 40 million
Americans who are uninsured, to the group of Americans who are paying
for insurance at extremely high rates for a variety of reasons such
as preexisting conditions, there are 22 million more Americans who do
have insurance but whose insurance is the barest bones insurance that
often when the catastrophe strikes, the accident occurs, the illness
worsens, they find they are not covered for all that they expected.
I always wonder when people start playing with the
numbers, when they say, well, this is really just a problem of the
uninsured if they have not talked to same people I've talked to, if
they haven't talked and looked into the faces of people who are
uninsured, who are barely insured, who are insured at extraordinary
costs that never seem to reach an endpoint. And then if they don't
talk with the rest of us who worry that it could happen to us next.
If we do nothing, if we just say to ourselves: this is
such a complicated problem, we really don't think we will ever come
up with a comprehensive solution to solve all of the aspects of it,
then here is what we can look forward to. Experts estimate that the
annual cost of health care for an American family will more than
double by the end of the decade to approximately $14,000 per family.
Workers will lose about $655 in income each year if health care costs
are allowed to continue to eat up wage increases.
So, if we just keep our focus on the individual and on
the household and think about what is at stake, we can see how big an
issue this is for most Americans. But it is not just an individual
and family issue, it is also a business issue. And it is a business
issue in a number of respects. Right now, two-thirds of small
businesses do provide their employees with health insurance. Many
small businesses do so at great cost and at sacrifice. And about the
most poignant meetings that I think I have personally had in the last
months have been with small business owners who have told me in great
detail the struggle they have gone through to try to continue to
insure their two or five or nine or 10 employees.
Some have been able to continue to meet those costs by
doing all kinds of things. Certainly, by doing the obvious of
increasing co-pays and deductibles and all. Some by taking members
of their families off the health insurance and putting them on
another health insurance that another member of a family had. There
have been enormous efforts made by so many small businesses who do
provide insurance to keep doing SO.
MORE
- 6 -
For many others, they have not been able to. And I can
recall, particularly, sitting in a small restaurant in a suburb of
Boston talking to a group of small business people who told me in
excruciating detail the struggles they had undertaken to try to
provide and continue health insurance.
One man who owns a small family bowling alley has one
employee. That one employee had a son with a serious illness and the
illness was one that was difficult to continue to insure for and the
costs continued to go up. And the owner looked at me with tears in
his eyes and he said, look at the choice I'm asked to make. This man
has worked with me like a member of my family. And now I'm either
going to have to make a decision to just cut him and his family off
of health insurance or to tell him to see if there's any other place
he can go to work where he might get it, but I've checked for him and
I don't think that's possible. Or to continue to try to pay the
insurance when we don't make all that much money. What am I supposed
to do?
The human side of the business story is one that is
filled with tales like that. There's another side as well. And that
is that small businesses because they are small pay premiums that are
one-third higher on average than large employers and those premiums
have continued to increase 50 percent faster than premiums for larger
employers.
So, it's a never-ending cycle. It's not enough just to
make it one year. Given the history we've had in the last several,
it keeps getting worse. There's also a competitiveness issue here
with business. Our large businesses very often have a tradition of
insuring their workers; and not only workers but their retirees. As
a result, they have paid out millions and by now billions of dollars
in both premium and costs that they will never recover in terms of
investing in more jobs and opportunities for Americans.
In 1990, for example, General Motors spent $3.2 billion
in medical coverage for its 1.9 million employees and retirees --
$3.2 billion. This was more money than the company spent on steel to
build new cars.
Health care costs add $1,100 to the price of every car
made in America. How can we expect to revitalize the manufacturing
sector of this country if we basically have told our large employers:
Fight the global economic battles with two arms tied behind your
back. So it is not just the human side when it comes to business,
insurance, and health care costs, it is a question that every
American needs to be aware of because it impacts on our quality of
life and the economy of this country.
MORE
- 7 -
In addition though to business, we have government. But
governmental costs for health care are the primary reason behind the
increase in the government deficit. I want to stress this point
because so many people when we hear about the enormous deficit that
has swallowed up so much of the investment potential in this country,
it is such a big number, it has grown so much in the last 10 years
that it's almost hard even to grasp.
But right now we are currently spending 14 percent of
every dollar that your country produces -- and that's referred to as
the Gross Domestic Product -- 14 cents out of every dollar is spent
on health care in this country and the government's share of that is
growing faster than the private sector's share of it. If we continue
at the same rate of growth, then we are likely to see that in seven
years almost one dollar out of every five dollars earned by Americans
will go to health care spending, and more than half of the increase
in federal revenues that we hope to see in the next four years
because of economic growth will be absorbed by health care cost
increases.
If we do not deal with the costs of health care in the
federal and the state and the local government budgets, we will
bankrupt cities and counties and states. They may never go to a
bankruptcy court because we don't have a system big enough even to
comprehend that. But they will continue to do what they have done
for the last years -- run enormous deficits which will never ever
quite get closed and the federal government will be in a position, as
it has been in the last years, of pretending that there is an answer
to a budget deficit that grows by leaps and bounds because we will
not face up to the role that health care costs play in keeping that
growth accelerated.
When my husband made his announcements about what he
wanted to do with the budget, and he spoke to the Joint Session of
Congress, he made it very clear that what we were facing was a budget
deficit that had to be addressed on several fronts at once -- had to
be addressed by cutting spending, which is being done dramatically
and honestly for the first time in a very long time. But it also had
to be addressed by reining in health care costs in both the public
and the private sector.
Now, these are the facts that, no matter how much we
would like to deny them and wish they would go away, are really
framing the debates about what we should do in health care. And you
have heard in this conference, and will continue to hear, from people
who have spent a lot of time thinking about the best answers.
What the President did when he established the Health
Care Task Force was to say, look at everything everywhere that might
MORE
- 8 -
work. Make sure every issue that has an impact on health care, its
cost, its quality, its availability, is pulled out to the light of
day and evaluated.
To that end, hundreds and hundreds of Americans have
been spending countless hours trying to make sure that the
President's charge to them has been met. People from all over the
country, all walks of life, more than a hundred medical
practitioners, nurses, others who are on the front lines of health
care, many people who have studied the issue from a different
perspective, whether it be the VA's problems or the Indian Health
Services problems; and countless others have given of their time and
energy to be consulted with on an ongoing basis.
And one thing that is clear from having looked at the
extraordinary range of issues is that any attempt to try to rein in
our health care costs cannot just attack one part of the problem. To
do that would be leaving opportunities for explosions of costs and
continuing growth in other parts of the system. So the President has
called for recommendations of a comprehensive approach to try to
reform the health care system, put it on a sound financial footing
for the future, retain the qualities of choice and opportunities that
currently exist, and be sure that all Americans have access to health
care.
And to that end, a number of different programs and
potential models have been examined in an effort to come up with an
American solution to an American problem, to make sure that what was
proposed would provide flexibility to states like Nebraska or
Vermont, because the people in different localities might need
different approaches if they were to solve their own health care
problems.
The costs associated with trying to provide a
comprehensive solution are ones that we have to also be honest about.
We believe that there is money in the system now that can be
reallocated and used to meet a new system's more realistic
requirements. We believe there is money to be saved in ridding the
system of unnecessary paperwork and bureaucracy and red tape and
micromanagement that has stood in the way of delivering health care.
We believe that insurance companies like the great one that is
headquartered here can help a great deal by coming up with uniform
reporting forms and making it possible to move toward a computer-
based information system that would save in the future billions of
dollars.
We also believe that changes have to be made in our laws
as they currently exist -- laws like antitrust laws that prohibit
physicians or hospitals from cooperating instead of competing. There
MORE
- 9 -
are communities in this country that tried to bring their hospitals
together so that they could work out sharing arrangements of
expensive equipment like MRIs or CAT scans. And we're told that if
all the hospital administrators met in the same room, they would
violate the antitrust laws. So instead, they all went out and bought
their own machines. And that's one of the reasons Tylenols cost $50
when you go to the hospital, because you have to amortize the costs
of those machines. You have to make them pay for themselves, even
though the volume demand may not warrant it.
So there are so many issues to be looked at, all of
which are being considered, evaluated, and serving to make
recommendations for the President.
But I want to say something very clearly about the
principles that need to underlie whatever the President proposes.
The first principle has to be that Americans will be secure in
knowing they will have access to quality, affordable health care, no
matter who they are, no matter where they live, and no matter what
their health status is. They also have to be given the security that
the costs that they pay for health insurance will not continue to
skyrocket, but instead, will be controlled in some way by the
marketplace so that they will understand that they can budget for
that, businesses can budget for it, that will not be hit by surprises
on a yearly basis, and not be able to deal with the costs.
We also have to recognize that there are values in our
health care system that we need to promote and some we need to
introduce. Individuals will have to be more responsible for their
own health care. They will have to behave in ways that will promote
health care. Now, how can we do that? We can't write a law that
says go out and be responsible and take better care of your health,
but we can put incentives into our system to try to promote certain
kinds of behavior and discourage others.
We also need to value the full range of health care
professionals. We have subsidized through the Medicare system the
creation of many subspecialties in medicine. Those are important.
But we have now 70 percent of our physicians who are specialists and
only 30 percent who are generalists. You cannot run a system of
health care that will tend to the primary and preventive health care
needs of Americans when only 30 percent of the physicians currently
in practice and only 15 percent of those attending medical school now
will be there to provide primary and preventive health care. So the
incentives that have traditionally gone into medical education to
promote specialists now have to go into medical education to promote
generalists.
MORE
- 10 -
We also need to expand the work force composition in
health care. We need more nurse midwives, we need more nurse
practitioners and other advanced practice nurses. We have to have a
health care profession that reflects the broadbased needs of
Americans.
So the kinds of values that we are struggling with, the
kinds of issues that you live with, whether you're in a household or
as an individual or in a business or part of the health care system,
are all being looked at so that we can come up with answers to what
we think will be the best American response.
Now, how will this program affect your life? We hope it
will not change much about how you actually access and receive
medical care. We do hope that you will have a card which is your
passport, as Senator Kerrey has said, to health care in America. We
hope that you will continue to have choice in the doctors and other
health care professionals whom you choose to go to receive care. And
we hope that the states will be willing to take on a lot of the
responsibility for making sure that the system actually fits the
needs of the real people in a region.
Before coming out here, I was privileged to meet with
representatives of the Lancaster County Medical Society and the local
public health and social services offices and representatives from
the state who have innovated a program here in this county to be able
to care for Medicaid recipients by using private physicians through a
referral system run by the public health system.
That is the kind of partnership and cooperation that we
have to have if we're going to have a true comprehensive system that
provides a continuum of care.
I like the word "cooperation" when I think about the
health care system in the future. We have spent too much time in the
past arguing and fighting over shrinking dollars that are creating
barriers to access instead of expanding opportunities and removing
those barriers.
When the President comes forward with his proposal, it
will be based on extensive and lengthy and thoughtful suggestions
from literally hundreds of thousands of Americans. But we will need
you to take a hard look at it and to continue the process of
consultation and suggestion through your senator, through your
governor, because there is no magic bullet out there. There isn't
any one simple model that can take care of Alliance and Broken Bow
and Omaha and Lincoln, or Little Rock and Los Angeles. We need a
national system with state and local opportunities to make sure that
differences can be adequately met.
MORE
- 11 -
We're looking for a chance not only to change our health
care system, but to reassert some fundamental values in this country
that have been forgotten -- values like individual responsibility,
values like community. We want to restore some of the compassion and
caring that we took for granted when I was growing up and which have
been lost, not just because of the pressures of change in our
society, but because of big institutions and bureaucracies and the
distance that they create between people.
When I was meeting with the Lancaster County Medical
Society representatives and the other folks, they told me that one of
the reasons that this innovative Medicaid treatment program worked is
because the people behind it had been humanized. Private physicians
could see real faces of real people. Social workers paid calls on
physicians and on patients. People began to help one another and
once again to identify with each other as human beings, not as
numbers, not as insureds, not as providers, but as people.
This is an incredible challenge and opportunity for our
country. It's not going to be easy. It's not going to be done
overnight. But it has the promise, not only of providing health care
in an affordable, quality way to all Americans, but reasserting some
of the common values about what it means to be members of a community
where people are joined together in caring and commitment. Because
we all have a stake in the future, and the surest way for us to
realize a better future is through cooperation and a commitment to
making a health care system that really works so that Americans can
once again be secure.
Thank you very much. (Applause.)
END
MORE
Date: 04/21/93 Time: 09:04
Health Policy Makers Wrestling Over Whether To Cover Illegal
WASHINGTON (AP) The White House is trying to decide whether
President Clinton's health reform plan should provide the same
medical benefits to illegal aliens as it would to low-income
Americans.
Congressional aides and Hispanic advocates, speaking on
condition of anonymity, say the task force staff favors extending
health care coverage to the 5 million undocumented immigrants
living and working in the United States.
Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala also told USA
Today last week that illegal aliens are now helped through the
country's public health care system and we need to continue to do
that.
But Hillary Rodham Clinton, who heads the task force, told a
group of Hispanic advocates last week that illegal aliens would not
be protected under the president's plan, several of the advocates
said Tuesday.
One said the White House was considering a range of options
from covering illegal aliens to eventually excluding them from even
the basic health care coverage they now receive.
'`It's clear that all options are on the table and that the next
few weeks will be critical, the advocate said.
Clinton is expected to introduce his health reform package in
mid-May, and his decision on illegal aliens is sure to arouse
passions on all sides.
Serving all people is a public health issue, but I'm concerned
that it's getting caught up in the xenophobia running amuck across
the country, says Jane Delgado, president and chief executive
officer of the National Coalition of Hispanic Health and Human
Services Organizations.
The Center for Immigration Studies, a research organization,
estimates that undocumented immigrants cost the government $5.4
billion in health care, housing and energy assistance, education,
welfare and prison expenses in 1990.
A leading Hispanic organization says it would oppose any plan
that cuts medical benefits for immigrants, especially if it also
calls for a national health identification card that uses Social
Security numbers.
But supporters of tougher immigration laws say any improvement
in health care benefits for the undocumented is an invitation to
Third World immigrants to sneak across U.S. borders for their
medical care and run up a bill that many taxpayers will refuse to
pay.
Public health specialists on the task force believe there are
public health benefits to providing medical care to undocumented
workers living and working in the United States, such as
controlling the spread of tuberculosis, cholera and hepatitis,
congressional sources say.
Tuberculosis does not discriminate. People who are carrying
these kinds of communicable diseases can infect all of the
population, says Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard, D-Calif.
Advocates of extending health care to aliens also say that a
system based on citizenship would be an administrative nightmare
for health care providers who would have to sort through
complicated immigration regulations to decide whether a person was
eligible.
Look at the various labels given to immigrants it's an
absolutely unmalleable morass of complications for the health care
provider, says Rep. Ron Coleman, D-Texas.
It would not be unprecedented for the government to ignore
citizenship requirements in providing health benefits. Illegal
aliens can get emergency medical care and it is the general
practice of federally funded community and migrant health centers
not to inquire about the legal status of those seeking treatment.
Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, says he worries that improving the
medical benefits available to the undocumented would be like
posting a big welcome sign on our border to illegal aliens just
get across the border and we'll take care of their medical needs.
If you provide health care for people who are here illegally
they will come in as quickly as you can build hospitals, adds Dan
Stein, executive director of the Federation for American
Immigration Reform, which favors stricter immigration measures.
Clinton's 1994 budget seeks $400 million for a new Medicaid
grant program for states that have large populations of
undocumented aliens.
APNP-04-21-93 0905EDT
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
April 6, 1993
REMARKS OF THE FIRST LADY
IN QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION
AT LIZ CARPENTER LECTURESHIP SERIES
University of Texas
Austin, Texas
Q
Now, I've heard that Barbara Jordan is willing to
consider an appointment to the Supreme Court. (Applause.) But I've
also heard she said it's on the condition you move the Court to
Manchek. (Laughter.) If that were not possible, do you have any
clues for us as to the person or type of person we might look to
replace Justice White on the U.S. Supreme Court? (Laughter.)
MRS. CLINTON: The only clues that I have are that the
President has said over and over again that he wants somebody who
will be a symbol of excellence and have some understanding of what
life is really like beyond the halls of academia or the previous
administration's. And I think that he is hopeful that the person he
selects will have the kind of universal appeal that everyone will
say, there was a good choice.
We have returned to choosing people who are uniformly
acknowledged as being excellent choices without the kind of problems
and strive that we've had in the past. (Applause.)
* * *
Q
I think when we start questioning our motives and
thinking on an individual level, we can start feeling on a societal
level. And I think that raises the question, what can we do in our
own daily and individual lives to change our perspective on society
and start looking for success?
MRS. CLINTON: Well, I think there are a lot of ways of
answering that. I would hope that particularly here on this campus
which provides so many people maybe the last or only opportunity to
take a little time to think about the meaning of life and to think
about who you are -- that those will not seem to be trivial or
irrelevant pursuits. That really trying to think through your
particular gifts is a very important part of defining who you are and
what kind of contribution you can make. Developing a sense of
MORE
- 2 -
confidence in your capacity to influence events around you and to
help other people.
And I would also hope, spending some time to develop
your own spiritual life, because part of what we are confronting is
such a -- (applause) -- such a challenge to how we get through the
days, the years ahead of us. That how everyone defines it, it is
very hard to imagine that we will remold society or to heal it, in
Ronnie's terms, without some spiritual awakening and without some
understanding that eternal truths are eternal for a reason -- they
have stood the test of human experience and they need to be
reinvigorated in our individual lives.
Because how one defines success can be either very
fulfilling or very empty. And that I think is what each of us has to
challenge ourselves about on a daily basis. And there are few venues
better for doing that than a university campus, and few greater
opportunities than students have to try to come to grips with those
sorts of issues. (Applause.)
***
Q
People do have hope and I think they want to
believe that government can be a partner with them in doing what they
want to do rather than an obstacle. What do you think from your
vantage point in Washington, what can the federal government do to
help local communities and help these institutions rebuild
themselves?
MRS. CLINTON: Well, I think you've put it the right
way; government needs to be -- the federal government anyway needs to
be a partner, government needs to be a partner on all levels. But
government cannot and should not try to replace individual initiative
or community efforts or empowerment -- the kinds of things that Ernie
Cortez and others have fought for and stood for. But what we're
trying to figure out how to do at all levels of government, here in
the state of Texas with Governor Richards, or in Washington with the
President, is to use government to reempower people who have lost
hope, who have felt alienated not just from government but from
themselves, their neighbors; to give them some tools so that they can
become independent and to end the cycle of dependency that has for
too long fueled government programs.
I mean, government began to exist more for those who
were beneficiaries than for the common good. And particularly we see
that in the examples that Ann gave earlier about how programs go on
whether or not they have any legitimate purpose that is being served;
but we also see it in the kind of perpetuation of dependency on
MORE
- 3 -
government that is not healthy for either government or the
individuals.
So by pursuing welfare reform, by trying to create
entrepreneurial activities, by trying to give, for example, housing
projects back to tenants so that they are responsible for themselves,
by trying to give the kind of incentive that will enable individuals
to take personal responsibility and to bring communities together
around that, the government can become a true partner in creating
individual responsibility. And I think that will lead to better
citizens and will lead to a better government. (Applause.)
* * *
Q
Let me take that point to a different level for a
question to Mrs. Clinton. You talk about we all belong to
communities. We also all belong to interest groups, which say --
Robert Reich, the Secretary of Labor said that interest groups have
replaced communities in the tradition sense of the dominant organized
force in American life. Mrs. Clinton, can you create a comprehensive
health care reform that the most powerful interest groups in
Washington cannot frustrate? (Applause.)
MRS. CLINTON: Very well put. Well, I don't mind if
they frustrate as long as they don't beat it. (Applause.) You know,
they're going to be obviously directly interested in all of this.
I want say just a word, though, Bill, when you said the
difference between communities and interest groups, there is a
difference. I mean, one of things that I have found is that interest
groups by definition employ people whose livelihood depends upon
keeping the interest group agitated so that they will have to
continue employing them to try to solve problems that the employees
of the interest groups have made up. (Applause.) So I find all the
time, not just with health care, but on other issues, that the paid
representatives of the interest group often don't speak for the
community of interests that they are paid to represent. (Applause.)
Now, is it going to be difficult to bring about change
in a system as complicated as our health care system, which
represents one-seventh of our economy? It will be absolutely very
difficult. But if we approach the changes that are going to be
proposed with good faith on the part of all of us, no matter who we
are or who we represent, I believe there will be a consensus that
reflects the national consensus that we have to change the way our
health care system operates. And that in order to achieve that
change, every single interest represented in the health care system
will have to give up something. We will all have to change for the
better good of the entire system. And that, I hope, will be a
MORE
compelling enough argument to overcome the strong objections of some
of those who will be asked to change the way they've been doing
things.
Q
Do you wish that you had not imposed a deadline for
finishing the program? Would you like to have more time?
MRS. CLINTON: Well, I think that what the President did
was to impose a deadline in part to make sure it got finished. You
know, there's a way in Washington of never finishing anything that
you start. (Applause.) I think that as long as it is finished in
May -- we may not be as early in May because of some delays that
we've experienced -- but certainly, as long as it's finished in May,
I think the President will be satisfied, because he wants to move it.
Because if we do not deal with health care while we are trying to
deal with the deficit, we have not dealt with the deficit.
(Applause.)
The majority of Americans understand that, because even
though the President's budget has received extraordinary support in
the country and in the Congress, even cutting the deficit by the
approximate $500 billion that is now projected over the next four to
five years will not be sufficient unless we gain control over the
exploding health care costs that will perpetuate and eventually
increase the deficit to the level that it would have been had we not
taken the steps the President has outlined, and even greater deficits
will result.
So dealing with health care is not just a human
imperative, it is a budgetary necessity not just for the federal
government, but as the Governor can tell you, for every state
government, for most country governments, and equally important, for
most businesses and households in this country. So I hope that the
speed with which the President is trying to move on this, which
reflects his sense of urgency about it, will be recognized and acted
upon by the Congress. But, of course, the only way to make sure that
happens is if the people in this arena bring some pressure and
urgency to bear once the plan is unveiled and the President moves
forward with it. (Applause.)
***
Q
I would like to ask Mrs. Clinton her thoughts about
the concepts that are floating and many -- they vary around managed
competition from a more purist form to those which encompass global
budgeting. And I would like to ask if you believe the move towards a
managed competition kind of plan would allow us to have the kind of
reform which we so desperately need, including benefits for mental
health and long-term care. (Applause.)
MRS. CLINTON: The kind of plan that the President
talked about during the campaign and that he believes would most
likely work in our country is a form of delivery that would use as
MORE
- 5 -
its base a standard comprehensive package of benefits for all
Americans. Depending on how much we are willing to pay, those
benefits can include some mental health benefits, substance abuse
benefits and can begin toward moving us to a system of long-term
care.
Part of the challenge that we face in putting this
package of benefits together is to strike the right balance that is
fair to all Americans, those who are currently insured but not
adequately ensured; those who are uninsured; those who are paid for
by Medicaid and government programs; so that we have a benefit
package that all of us will feel will meet our hospitalization, our
primary and preventive health care needs, our catastrophic needs and
hopefully mental health, substance abuse, and some beginning efforts
on long-term care.
Now, in order to be able to do that, you have to face
some really tough questions about how it's going to be paid for and
who's going to pay for it. And I think that what the President
believes is that maintaining choice, maintaining quality control,
maintaining some competitive public-private system is more likely to
produce the kind of long-term gains that we hope to see in this
system through controlling costs than any other system that we could
try at this time.
Now, what he also believes is that we need to have some
flexibility at the state level so that states are able to if they
are already moving in a certain direction that is compatible with
controlling costs, providing universal access and ensuring quality,
they can have some flexibility to do that; where they are not, then
they will be mandated to achieve certain objectives that the federal
government would set.
***
Q
It seems to me there are two real issues. One, how
do we get a whole lot more people involved in leadership? And we're
trying to encourage our students here to do that. How do we tell
them why they should do it? And, second, when you were doing your
last phrasing about, if you get to a certain point, you need
spiritual healing -- and I thought about how do we keep our energy
up? How do we have that healing of the soul that allows us to go?
And I would love for you to comment on either of those for my
students and others who are in this audience.
MRS. CLINTON: Those are two large questions that we
could spend the next hour on. I think you're right about leadership.
And when Liz introduced Governor Richards, she said that 20 years ago
when the National Women's Political Caucus started, it started with
MORE
- 6 -
faith that women would be recognized as leaders. And I don't know
that anybody would have predicted that in just 20 years, one of the
largest states in the country would have one of the most popular
governors in the country, and she would be a woman. (Applause.)
But I think that what is out there for anyone is a
chance to be a leader at all kinds of levels. And you're so right
there to say that we need lots of leaders. If you look at any of our
institutions, they need leadership. And they need leadership that is
willing to take risks and to say things as they see them at the risk
of being unpopular; to be willing to change direction when necessary;
to be willing to admit mistakes. Those are not easy things to do,
but the rewards are great, even in something as personal as just your
own personal growth and, hopefully, beyond that in the kinds of
contributions you can make to whatever institution you're committed
to and to the larger society.
So leadership doesn't have to be with a capital L at the
gubernatorial or the presidential level to make a difference. It can
be in a family; it can be in a church; it can be in a workplace; it
can be in a voluntary organization. There are so many opportunities,
and those can lead somewhere else. So I think that any way we can
encourage people to have enough confidence in themselves to believe
they can be leaders, we will all be better off for it.
Q
In the last 10 minutes, we're going to give Paul
and Ronnie the chance to ask some of the very specific questions that
you've collected from students in our last 10 minutes. But let me
just ask a final personal question of you. There's a wonderful story
about the medieval knight who comes riding back into the castle; his
armor is all tattered, his horse is dragging and drooping, his spear
is lanced, is bent. He's clearly been -- he's disheveled. He's
clearly been in some major event. And the king says to him, "Sir
knight, what in the world has happened to you?" He said, "Where have
you been?" And the knight says, "Oh sire, I've been out ravaging and
plundering and pillaging your enemies to the west." And the king
says, "I have no enemies in the west." And the knight says, "Now you
do, sire. Now you do." (Laughter.) I'm wondering, have you been
surprised by the enemies you've made? (Laughter.)
MRS. CLINTON: Well, sure, I'm surprised I've made any.
(Laughter and applause.) I've been more surprised -- I don't know
that I've earned any enemies, although I do think having some
enemies, depending upon who they are, is probably a compliment in
lots of quarters. (Applause.)
I guess I've been more personally surprised at how much
interest there is in me and, since I have read a lot of history in
the last couple of months, how it's really deja vu all over again.
MORE
- 7 -
So many of the same things that are being said about me were said
about Abigail Adams or Dolly Madison or Eleanor Roosevelt, or a lot
of the women who have been in this position. It just makes good
copy, so it kind of keeps getting redone over and over again. So I'm
more surprised by that.
And I suppose that both the President and the Vice
President and everybody associated with this administration will be
make enemies because they're trying to change the status quo; and the
status quo, just like the knight on the horse, is a very strong and
noble enemy to have, but it's one that needs to be taken on. And so
we'll probably have some enemies because of that. (Applause.)
* * *
Q I very much would like to raise some questions that
have been put to me by my fellow students. Having spoken to many
students who, like myself, intend to be physicians, there is a great
deal of insecurity about the field that we are headed into,
especially nowadays. One of the most common problems that physicians
indicate they have is dealing with a public that often holds
unrealistic expectations of what modern medicine can achieve for
them. When these often unattainable results are not produced,
lawsuits are often the results. Physicians today spend about half
their time thinking about how to cure their patient, and the other
half of the time figuring how they can defend themselves from future
lawsuits. This concern with excessive liability is one of the
greatest obstacles that physicians cite as bogging down the medical
system. (Applause.) How can the upcoming health care reform provide
physicians with relief from this binge on litigation and all the
destructive effects that that litigation has?
MRS. CLINTON: You're right to express the feelings of
physicians who do believe that both the cost of malpractice insurance
and lawsuits arising out of allegations of malpractice, along with
the kind of defensive medicine that they believe they have to
practice are major problems for physicians today. And there will be
some steps taken to address the extraordinary burdens that
malpractice premiums place on physicians to try to remove that
financial disincentive toward the responsible practice of medicine.
And there will also be steps taken to provide some alternative
approaches to trying to resolve disputes that arise in the context of
the doctor-patient relationship, while maintaining access to the
courts for those individuals and cases that need to be there.
END
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Internal Use
April 7, 1993
REMARKS OF THE FIRST LADY
AT LIZ CARPENTER'S LECTURESHIP SERIES
University of Texas
Austin, Texas
3:00 P.M. CDT
MRS. CLINTON: Thank you so much. I am reminded, in
following Anne Richards, of that old story of the fellow who died in
one of the early Arkansas floods and makes his way to heaven and is
met at the gates. And St. Peter says, "Well, you're just in time for
our monthly seminar. What do you want to talk about?" The man said,
"I want to talk about the most important experience that I have ever
encountered. I want to talk about what it is like to be in a flood.
I feel like I can make a real contribution to that dialogue." St.
Peter says, "Fine. You'll go on after Noah." (Laughter.) So, here
we are after Noah. (Applause.)
You know, it is not a common experience for me to be in
any Texas athletic facility and feel good about it -- (applause) --
but I must say that now that we're no longer in the same conferences,
my state and yours, that I am honored to be -- (laughter) -- in the
arena where the Lady Longhorns play. (Applause.) And I also have to
say -- and I hope that you feel the same way I did -- I was mighty
proud of Texas Tech, too. I thought that was a great victory.
(Applause.)
You know, when Liz Carpenter asked me to come speak at
her little seminar -- (laughter) -- it was one of those conversations
that you have with Liz -- those of us who are lucky enough to know
her and call her a friend -- where her enthusiasm just kind of takes
over. She said, I'm going to have some of my friends in, we're going
to do this lecture. You know, it will be fun. I'll get Anne to come
over and Mrs. Johnson will come over, and we'll just have a good old
time.
And I had this sort of mental image of being over in one
of the small rooms at the LBJ School and sitting with a bunch of my
friends, maybe with some students around a table. And then I just
MORE
- 2 -
put it out of my mind. And over the last two weeks, as Liz knows,
it's been kind of touch-and-go for me whether I thought I could be
here, and I told Liz that I would certainly try. And when it became
clearer that I could, I renewed contact with the people who were
helping her put this on and was then told that there were going to be
thousands, maybe 14,000 people at this event.
And my first response was no, no, no, you must have read
it wrong, there's an extra zero in there somewhere. But my second
was why would I doubt Liz Carpenter on anything? If she's going to
put on a lectureship that's like Anne says, it's going to be a big
one and besides it's in Texas. So what do we expect? And I'm just
pleased to be part of it. (Applause.)
I also want to say a special word of appreciation to
Mrs. Johnson. You know, there is that wonderful old saying about how
you never quite know what it's like until you've walked in another
person's moccasins. Well, I don't know if you've ever worn
moccasins, Mrs. Johnson, but I'm getting a sense of what it is like
to try to walk in the footsteps of you and the other women who have
been in the position that I now find myself in. And every day that
goes by, I am more impressed by the kind of qualities that you and
other women in this position have brought to taking care of your
personal business on behalf of your family and your husband, and also
trying to make your contribution to the country. And all of us in
this arena are grateful for the grace and beauty by which you carried
out both of those functions and as a wonderful example, not just for
me, but for all of us. And I very much wanted to say that to you
publicly. (Applause.)
You know, after you hear what I have to say, you'll
think that Governor Richards and I not only coordinated outfits but
coordinated comments. And I suppose the only thing left for me is to
get a hair-do like that. (Laughter.) You know, I'm actually due for
a new one and I figure that if we ever want to get Bosnia off the
front page, all I have to do is either put on a headband or change my
hair and we'll be occupied with something else. (Laughter and
applause.)
But what Anne Richards talked about is what I want to
expand on in my remarks leading into the panel discussion with all of
these distinguished panelists and with questions from many of you
that I understand were submitted. Because the problems that she
alluded to are not just American problems, they are not just
governmental problems. We are at a stage in history, I would
suggest, in which remolding society certainly in the West is one of
the great challenges facing all of us as individuals and as citizens.
MORE
- 3 -
And we have to begin realistically to take stock of
where we are, stripping perhaps away the romanticism that Governor
Richards referred to, to be able to understand where we are in
history at this point and what our real challenges happen to be.
And I say that it is not just an American problem
because if one looks around the Western world, if one looks at
Europe, if one looks at the emerging democracies, at Asia, if one
looks certainly here in North America, you can see the rumblings of
discontent, almost regardless of political systems, as we come face
to face with the problems that the modern age has dealt us.
And if we take a step back and ask ourselves, why is it
in a country as economically wealthy as we are despite our economic
problems, in a country that is the longest surviving democracy, there
is this undercurrent of discontent -- this sense that somehow
economic growth and prosperity, political democracy and freedom are
not enough -- that we lack at some core level meaning in our
individual lives and meaning collectively -- that sense that our
lives are part of some greater effort, that we are connected to one
another, that community means that we have a place where we belong no
matter who we are. And it isn't very far below the surface because
we can see popping through the surface the signs of alienation and
despair and hopelessness that are all too common and cannot be
ignored. They're in our living rooms at night on the news. They're
on the front pages; they are in all of our neighborhoods.
On the plane coming down I read a phrase in an article
in the newspaper this morning talking about how desperate conditions
are in so many of our cities that are filled with hopeless girls with
babies and angry boys with guns. And yet, it is not just the most
violent and the most alienated that we can look to. The discontent
of which I speak is broader than that, deeper than that. We are, I
think, in a crisis of meaning. What do our governmental institutions
mean? What do our lives in today's world mean? What does this
economic global event that Governor Richards spoke of mean? What do
all of our institutions mean? What does it mean to be educated?
What does it mean to be a journalist? What does it mean in today's
world to pursue not only vocations, to be part of institutions, but
to be human?
And, certainly, coming off the last year when the ethos
of selfishness and greed were given places of honor never before
accorded, it is certainly timely to ask ourselves these questions.
(Applause.)
One of the clearest and most poignant posings of this
question that I have run across was the one provided by Lee Atwater
as he lay dying. For those of you who may not know, Lee Atwater was
MORE
- 4 -
credited with being the architect of the Republican victories of the
'70s and the '80s. The vaunted campaign manager of Reagan and Bush.
The man who knew how to fight bare-knuckled in the political arena,
who was willing to engage in any tactics so long as it worked and he
wasn't caught at it.
And yet, when Lee Atwater was struck down with cancer,
he said something which was reprinted in Life Magazine, which I cut
out and carry with me in a little book I have of sayings and
Scriptures that I find important and that replenish me from time to
time that I want to share with you.
He said the following: "Long before I was struck with
cancer, I felt something stirring in American society. It was a
sense among the people of the country, Republicans and Democrats
alike, that something was missing from their lives, something
crucial. I was trying to position the Republican Party to take
advantage of it. But I wasn't exactly sure what it was. My illness
helped me to see that what was missing in society is what was missing
in me. A little heart, a lot of brotherhood.
The '80s were about acquiring -- acquiring wealth, power
prestige. I know. I acquired more wealth, power, and prestige than
most. But you can acquire all you want and still feel empty. What
power wouldn't I trade for a little more time with my family? What
price wouldn't I pay for an evening with friends? It took a deadly
illness to put me eye-to-eye with that true, but it is a truth that
the country, caught up in its ruthless ambitions and moral decay, can
learn on my dime.
I don't know who will lead us through the '90s, but they
must be made to speak to this spiritual vacuum at the heart of
American society, this tumor of the soul."
That to me will be Lee Atwater's real lasting legacy,
not the elections that he helped to win. (Applause.)
But I think the answer to his question -- "who will lead
us out of this spiritual vacuum" -- the answer is all of us. Because
remolding society does not depend on just changing government, on
just reinventing our institutions to be more in tune with present
realities. It requires each of us to play our part in redefining
what our lives are and what they should be.
We are caught between two great political forces. On
the one hand we have our economy -- the market economy -- which knows
the price of everything, but the value of nothing. That is not its
job. And then the state or government which attempts to use its
means of acquiring tax money, of making decisions to assist us in
MORE
- 5 -
becoming a better, more equitable society as it defines it. That is
what all societies are currently caught between -- forces that are
more complex and bigger than any of us can understand. And missing
in that equation, as we have political and ideological struggles
between those who think market economics are the answer to
everything, those who think government programs are the answer to
everything, is the recognition among all of us that neither of those
is an adequate explanation for the challenges confronting us.
And what we each must do is to break through the old
thinking that has for too long captured us politically and
institutionally, so that we can begin to devise new ways of thinking
about not only what it means to have governments that work again, not
only what it means to have economies that don't discard people like
they were excess baggage that we no longer need, but to define our
institutional and personal responsibilities in ways that answer this
lack of meaning.
We need a new politics of meaning. We need a new ethos
of individual responsibility and caring. We need a new definition of
civil society which answers the unanswerable questions posed by both
the market forces and the governmental ones, as to how we can have a
society that fills us up again and makes us feel that we are part of
something bigger than ourselves.
Now, will it be easy to do that? Of course not.
Because we are breaking new ground. This is a trend that has been
developing over hundreds of years. It is not something that just
happened to us in the last decade or two. And so it is not going to
be easy to redefine who we are as human beings in this post-modern
age. Nor will it be easy to figure out how to make our institutions
more responsive to the kind of human beings we wish to be.
But part of the great challenge of living is defining
yourself in your moment, of seizing the opportunities that you are
given, and of making the very best choices you can. That is what
this administration, this President, and those of us who are hoping
for these changes are attempting to do.
I used to wonder during the election when my husband
would attempt to explain how so many of the problems that we were
confronting were not easy Democratic-Republican-liberal-conservative
problems. They were problems that shared different characteristics,
that we had to not only define clearly, but search for new ways of
confronting.
Then someone would say, well, you know, he can't make up
his mind, or he doesn't know what he wants to say about that. When
instead what I was hearing and what we had been struggling with for
MORE
- 6 -
years is how does one define these new issues. How do we begin to
inject some meaning? How do we take old values and apply them to
these new -- for many of us -- undreamed of problems that we now
confront? And that is what all of us must be engaged in in our own
lives, at every level, in every institution with which we interact.
Let me just give you some examples. If we believe that
the reconstruction of civil society with its institutions of family,
friendship networks, communities, voluntary organizations, are really
the glue of what holds us together; if we go back and read de
Toqueville and notice how he talked over and over again about the
unique characteristics that he found among Americans and rooted so
many of those in that kind of intermediary institution of civil
society that I just mentioned, then we know we have to better
understand what we can do to strengthen those institutions, to
understand how they have changed over time, and to try to find
meaning in them as they currently are.
That's why the debate over family values over the last
year, which was devised for political purposes, seemed so off-point.
There is no -- or should be no debates that our family structure is
in trouble. There should be no debate that children need the
stability, the predictability of a family. But there should be
debate over how we best make sure that children and families
flourish. And once that debate is carried out on honest terms, then
we have to recognize that either the old idea that only parental
influence and parental values matters, or the nearly as old idea that
only state programmatic intervention matters are both equally
fallacious.
Instead we ought to recognize what should be a common-
sense truth -- that children are the result of both the values of
their parents and the values of the society in which they live. And
that you can have an important debate over how best to make sure
parental values are the ones that will help children grow and be
strengthened, and how social values equally must be recognized for
the role they play in how children feel about themselves and act in
the world. And then we can begin to have what should be a sensible
conversation about how to strengthen both. That's the kind of
approach that has to get beyond the dogma of right or left,
conservative or liberal. Those views are inadequate to the problems
we see.
Any of you who have ever been in an inner city, working
with young people as I have over the years, will know as I do the
heroic stories of parents and grandparents who, against overwhelming
odds, fight to keep their children safe -- just physically safe; and
who hold high expectations for those children; whose values I would
put up against any other person in the country, but who has no
MORE
- 7 -
control over the day-to-day violence and influence that comes
flooding in the doors of that housing project apartment; and who need
a society that is more supportive of their value than the one they
currently have. (Applause.)
Equally, all of us know the contrary story of families
with enough economic means, affluent enough to live in neighborhoods
that are as safe as they can be in our country today, so they have
the social value structure of what we would hope that each child in
America could have in terms of just basic kinds of fundamental safety
and physical well-being, but whose parental values are not ones to
promote a childhood that is a positive one, giving children the
chance to grow up to achieve their own God-given potential. So that
the presence of values of society are not enough, either.
There are so many examples of how we have to think
differently and how we have to go beyond not only the traditions of
the past, but unfortunately for many of us, well-held and cherished
views of the past; and how we have to break out of the kind of
gridlock mentality which exists not just in the Congress from time to
time, but exists as well in all of us as we struggle to see the world
differently and cope with the challenges it has given us.
Yet I am very hopeful about where we stand in this last
decade of the 20th century, because for all of the problems that we
see around us, both abroad and at home, there is a growing body of
people who want to deal with them, who want to be part of this
conversation about how we break through old views and deal with new
problems. And we will need millions more of those conversations.
Those conversations need to take place in every family,
every workplace, every political institution in our country. They
need to take place in our schools, where we have to be honest about
what we are and are not able to convey to our children; where we have
to be honest about the conditions with which are confronting so many
of our teachers and our students day in and day out; where we have to
be honest that we do have to set high expectations for all children
and we should not discard any because of who they are or where they
come from. (Laughter.)
And where we need to hold accountable every member of
the educational enterprise -- parents, teachers and students. Each
should be held accountable for the opportunity they have been given
to participate in one of the greatest efforts of humankind, passing
on knowledge to children. And we have to expect more than we are
currently getting. (Applause.)
We also need to take a hard look at other institutions.
As Governor Richards said we are in the midst of an intensive effort
MORE
- 8 -
of trying to determine how we can provide decent, affordable health
care to every American. (Applause.) And in that process we have had
to ask hard questions about every aspect of our health care system.
Why do doctors do what they do? Why are nurses not permitted to do
more than they do? Why are patients put in the position they're in?
(Applause.)
And we have with us today Bill Moyers, who has helped to
enlighten all of us about how what we currently have is a system for
taking care of sickness. We do not have a system for enhancing and
promoting health. (Applause.) And what we need to do is recognize
how each of us, whether we are a care giver or a care receiver -- and
that role may change from time to time as we go through life -- will
have to think differently about health care. And we will have to
come up with a system that promotes wellness, promotes health and
provides care for us when we are sick that we can afford.
But to give you just one example about how this ties in
with what I have said before about how these problems we are
confronting now in many ways are the result of our progress as we
have moved toward being modern men and women: Our ancestors did not
have to think about many of the issues we are now confronted with.
When does life start; when does life end? Who makes those decisions?
How do we dare to impinge upon these areas of such delicate,
difficult questions? And, yet, every day in hospitals and homes and
hospices all over this country, people are struggling with those very
profound issues.
These are not issues that we have guidebooks about.
They are issues that we have to summon up what we believe is morally
and ethically and spiritually correct and do the best we can with
God's guidance. How do we create a system that gets rid of the
micromanagement, the regulation and the bureaucracy, and substitutes
instead human caring, concern and love? And that is our real
challenge in redesigning a health care system. (Applause.)
I want to say a word about another institution and that
is the media, because it is the filter through which we see ourselves
and one another. And in many ways the challenge confronting it is
just as difficult as those confronting any other institution we can
imagine. How does one keep up with the extraordinary pace of
information now available? How do we make sense of that information?
How do we make values about it even if we think we have made sense?
How do we rid ourselves of the lowest common denominator that is the
easiest way of conveying information? How do we have a media that
understands how difficult these issues are and looks at itself
honestly because the role it must play is so critical to our success
in making decisions about how we will proceed as a society?
MORE
- 9 -
I remember in the beginning of the campaign being asked
a question at an editorial meeting in South Carolina that my husband
was at to meet a lot of the editors and reporters from a lot of the
small-town papers. These were not folks who you'll see on a TV
station anywhere; these are people who got up every day and did the
best they could to put out the paper that covered their community or
their region. And one of the men, after hearing my husband speak,
said, "Now, you've talked about how we have to change. How we have
to change government, how we have to change society. But as a
journalist, how do I change to be able to understand and report on
those changes?" My husband said, "You know, I can't answer that.
That's something you have to answer. But I'm really glad you asked
the question, because every institution in our life has to ask those
hard questions about who we are, what contribution we make to dealing
with our problems and to injecting meaning again in the lives of us
all."
So every one of our institutions is under the same kind
of mandate. Change will come whether we want it or not, and what we
have to do is to try to make change our friend, not our enemy. But
probably most profoundly and importantly, the changes that will count
the most are the millions and millions of changes that take place on
the individual level as people reject cynicism, as they are willing
to be hopeful again, as they are willing to take risks to meet the
challenges they see around them, as they truly begin to try to see
other people as they wish to be seen and to treat them as they wish
to be treated, to overcome all of the obstacles we have erected
around ourselves that keep us apart from one another, fearful and
afraid, not willing to build the bridges necessary, to fill that
spiritual vacuum that Lee Atwater talked about.
You know, one of my other favorite quotes is from Albert
Schweitzer. And he talks about how you know the disease in Central
Africa called sleeping sickness; there also exists a sleeping
sickness of the soul. The most dangerous aspect is that one is
unaware of it's coming. That is why we have to be careful. As soon
as you notice the slightest sign of indifference, the moment you
become aware of a loss of character or a serious longing of
enthusiasm, it is best, take it as a warning. You should realize
that your soul suffers if you can't live superficially. Not just
your soul, but your society. Being here on this great campus, with
so many thousands of people who care about learning and are committed
to making a difference. Let us be willing to remold society by
redefining what it means to be a human being in the 20th century,
moving into a new millennium. Let us be willing to help our
institutions to change, to deal with the new challenges that confront
them. Let us try to restore the importance of civil society by
committing ourselves to our children, our families, our friends; and
to reaching out beyond the circle of those of whom we know, to the
MORE
- 10 -
many others on whom we are dependent in this complex society; and
understanding a little more about what their lives are like and doing
what we can to help ease their burdens.
Our greatest opportunities lie ahead, because so many of
the struggles of the Depression and the World War and the other
challenges posed by the Cold War and communism are behind us. The
new ones are equally threatening. But we should have learned a lot
in the last few years that will prepare us to play our part in
remolding a society that we are proud to be a part of.
Thank you all very much. (Applause.)
END
Service means you
ger as well as you
give -
your life IS changed me +
you change
lens 9 0 Thers
this has me fred
meaning in an lines
Budget #s
/
fach Leer
- higher
Ricki- citerview now
\
Hillary
Clinton
Gets Personal
THE FIRST LADY
KNOWS WHAT SHE WANTS,
SAYS WHAT SHE MEANS,
AND DOESN'T WASTE TIME
WORRY-ING ABOUT HER
CRITICS. AND SHE WANTS TO
TEACH HER DAUGHTER
TO GROW UP TO BE JUST
LIKE HER.
by Roxanne Roberts
AFTER ANOTHER JAM-PACKED, SMILE-ON-DEMAND, 18-HOUR DAY, HILLARY
Clinton has dragged herself back to The Governor's Mansion, prepared for yet
another photo shoot and now, after 10 P.M., a long-promised. several-times-
delayed interview. She is surprisingly gracious despite the late hour, the chaos
of an impending move to Washington, D.C., and the arrival of her daughter,
Chelsea, who has come home from ballet practice, eager to talk. But her mother.
even at this hour, is still on the job.
America's most famous working mother takes time out for a quick update:
Chelsea has a ballet performance tomorrow morning, which means, the way this
13-year-old sees it, that she'll either have to skip lunch or skip class. "There's no
way I can make it back for algebra," says Chelsea, cradling the First Cat, Socks. in
her arms. Chelsea has her father's taste for casual clothes: tonight, she's in dark.
baggy sweats. But she has her mother's unstudied femininity: Her hair is swept up
in a ballerina's chignon; her expression is intense.
"Why don't you take a sack lunch to school?" suggests her mother. "I think
that would be good. because I don't want you to miss any more algebra, okay?"
Chelsea balks, just slightly. "I guess I could. I don't know. I can't guarantee it,
though." Her mother holds her ground. "I really think you should. I just don't
want you to miss any more algebra because she was really concerned. you know."
Photograph by Deborah Feingold
87
more negotiation over time and logistics.
mother seems satisfied. "Okev-doke. I'll
me UD and see you as soon as I've rinished."
this unguarded moment. Hillary Clinton sounds
any other mom. But sne isn't. of course. She's the
mirst Ladv. and the whole world wants ner atten-
BY the time the interview IS over. Cheisea has
men asleep. So much for quality time. 30 much for
ang Supermom. Another cav with too much to GO
not enough time to do it.
ion know anv woman who doesn feel guiity
dout something. HAVS Hillary Clinton. That's the
gene. right?"
ILLARY CLINTON DOESN'T LOOK GUILTY SHE
LOKS relaxed and in control. Her great strength-and
treat weakness. pernaps- that sne makes it all look
easy. Involved Mom. Loving Wife. Power Lawver.
edicated Activist. Loval Friend. And then some.
+5. mere are wrinkles around the china-biue
yes. The hair 15 bionder. snorter: the tacket a size
Time with Chelsea helps "recharge my batteries," says her mom.
cent. She nas the ease of a woman who doesn t mind
OKING good but doesn have the patience to russ
luch. The hardest part of the campaign. sne admits,
as trying to maintain a "natural" smile for nours on
ind then news photographers would mevitably
HAD the most unflattering expressions anvwav. It
thered her but not enough to use the beauty-
ageant trick: "I never tried putting Vasenne on my
eeth." she savs. laugning. "That would feel so werrd."
You know she's more concerned about how she
ounds than now sne looks. but sne always sounds
mart. This is a woman who speaks in complete para-
trapns. who can t quite puil off small talk. She looks
ou straight in the eve. and there IS a sense of purpose
no clarity to ner conversation. Bill Clinton strikes
copie as the one with the easy charm and sensitivity
a First Lady: she has the drive and competitiveness
president You may not feel instantiv intimate
her. out there IS a steadiness and intensity about
that lets you know that. over time. she'd make a
best friend. And vet. IV leaves the impression
she's direct. no-nonsense. even tough. Not that
The man behind the woman? "He's been my cheerleader and adviser."
invthing wrong with that. out twenty or peo-
expect the First Lady to be more traditional. more
new pair of shoes. I've got to take her to get school supplies. I
can't forget the school play. That was something that wasn't
mavike
: course. traditional definitions con apply to most
part of their daily concerns."
men anvmore. especially one who's raising a child in a
Chelsea has never known anything but working parents-
gn-powered career family. "No matter now hard you trv.
her father has been governor and her mother a lawyer for as
no matter whether you're a ruli-time nomemaker or a
far back as she can remember. But there nave been trade-offs.
sif-time career woman or trying to balance both. you re
of course. "What we have done. and what I've particularly
mg to tind at times that you teel like you re not giving your
done. is to give up time that I would have spent otherwise
enough. That IS just part 01 the territory of being a
with friends or socializing," she savs. When she had to be
awav for business. she would leave notes and little surprises
other and mavbe always nas been.
for husband. the savs. "as a wonderful father. He's always
for Chelsea to find. When her daughter was kindergarten
sensitive to Cheisea and her needs and very aware of
age, she made tapes of herself that Chelsea could play on the
the was going through. But don't think that most
VCR. and when she is on the road. she checks Chelsea's
whom
admire
fathers.
like
my
nus-
tomework-via fax.
children needs in mind all the time. I think
Savs longtime friend Mary Steenburgen. an actress and
they none V compartmentalize their lives more than
mother or two. "During the campaign, the hardest thing of all
are realiv do think It something that IS part
for her was being away from Chelsea. One night in Chicago,
know
whether
moiogical
or
social.
Steenburgen savs. she watched her friend dive for the first
own experience. I've worked with many. many men
vailable pnone. "I recognized that hungry thing of trying to
different settings. and nearly every one 1 ever worked
cail your child because you're away. I saw. just in the way she
thought. devoted and caring and committed
fialed the phone and the way she was speaking to her. how
wasn something that they carried with them
much she was missing her."
wasn something that was always on their minds.
Like more and more new mothers. Hillary Clinton went
inticipating the got to get her a
back to work while Chelsea was suil an infant. And nothing
The couple in church in 1978: "We've been really blessed."
children, and I know Chelsea would have liked it. but you
know, it just didn't work out for us."
FOR THE CLINTONS. THE STRUGGLE TO GIVE CHELSEA
a happy childhood and home life must surely seem vastiy more
complicated now. In Little Rock. Chelsea was able to stay out
of the glare of public scrutiny. Now she will be trailed by pho-
tographers, and she will be accompanied everwhere by a Secret
Service agent. And the decision about whether to send her to
public or private school turned into a national referendum on
education. In January, the Clintons announced their choice of
Sidwell Friends School, an exclusive private school with a
price tag of more than $10,000 a year, even while insisting
that the decision was not a rejection of D.C.'s public schools.
But her mother doesn't believe that children-even presi-
dents'-sign on for their parents' careers. We want her to have
a chance to be a normal child and to develop into the person she
was meant to be. I think she'll get a great deal out of the experi-
ence, just as she has with her father being governor. But we've
also never put any pressure on her. We've pretty much left the
decision to participate in the political world up to her, and we're
going to do the same thing when we live in the White House."
Hillary Clinton may be sensitive to the needs of her daugh-
ter, but politics is another thing altogether. "One of the rea-
sons I came home so much [during the campaign] was not
only to see how she was but to recharge my batteries, which
she was a big part of doing. We just spent a lot of time togeth-
er, and really it was important for me. I took her to school, I
took her shopping, we watched videos, we both just kind of
refueled our own energy level so that we could both keep
going in it." Part of the need to refuel came from taking a
break from the scrutiny-and the criticism. "I told Chelsea
one day that before it was over they'll attack me, they'll attack
you, they'll attack your cat, they'll attack your goldfish."
Most of the scrutiny, of course, was focused initially on
VORRIED
ame easy when she was a brand-new mom. "I remember
Chelsea's parents. But by December, Saturday Night Live fea-
vnen i was breast-feeding Chelsea when I was still in the hos-
tured a harsh sketch that compared Chelsea's looks unfavor-
vital. I had her head tilted at a funny angie and the milk start-
ably to Vice President Al Gore's daughters. One might have
ed to come out of her nose. I thought I was killing my baby. I
expected her to be angry-but no. "I think it's sad that people
was just in a panic. you know, and I was just really upset. And
don't have anything better to do than be mean to a child. My
this wonderful old nurse came in and said, 'Well, if you hold
attitude is that I'm going to do everything I can to help
her up a little higher, that won't happen.
Chelsea be strong enough not to let what other people say
She learned as she went and had her share of sleepless
about her affect her. In her particular situation it's obviously
nights. She remembers one in particular as a turning point. "It
much bigger, but it happens to children all the time. Unkind
vas one of those nights where you rocked her and you walked
and mean things are said by people who are either insecure or
her and vou sang to her-you did everything and she just kept
going for the laugh or going for the nasty remark-whether
rying. I remember saving to her. 'You know. Chelsea, you've
it's on a playground or on a television set.
never been a babv before and I've never been a mother before.
"We can't control anybody else," she continues. "The only
We are just going to have to get through this together.' And
thing we can do is to try to develop our own values and our
that's kind ot how I have lived it."
own sense of who we are. That's what Bill and I were raised to
The results. sav Steenburgen. have been first-rate. "If any-
believe about ourselves, and that's what we're going to try to
ody has any doubts about what kind of parents they are, it's
do for our daughter. And I think that's the best gift you can
ecause they don't know Chelsea. She's a wonderful person-
give a child. Some internal compass. It's not pleasant when
loving. smart. runny. affectionate. considerate child."
people say or do things that are cruel. but that's more a reflec-
Hillarv-bashers have darkly hinted that having only one
tion on them than on my daughter or me or my husband. And
mid was evidence of her willingness to sacrifice family for
that's what we're trying to help her understand."
imbition. But Chelsea was not an only child by choice. "No,
ve would have loved to have had more children." she says. "I
WHAT HILLARY CLINTON WANTS FOR HER DAUGHTER IS
MIKE
think It would have been fun and wonderful to have more
clear. What Hillary Clinton wants for (continued on page 121)
89
Hillarv Clinton
:nv own ability to reach out and care
could have lost touch with what was
ind grow.
going on. And in [Arkansas] you can't
"He's also genuinely optimistic and
do that. It's too smail. It's just too easy
continued from bage 89)
enthusiastic about life," she continues.
for you to see people who are not like
herseit is. for now. Hillary Clinton's
He is somebody who sees the glass as
vou, who have different kinds of prob-
secret. and she's too smart and disci-
half full. He cares about every day-he
lems than you do."
plined to blurt it out.
wants to jam-pack it with more than the
This is a savvy admission designed
But to even speculate intelligently.
day can hold. It's maddening to trv to
to head off criticism that she is a child
one has to understand the marriage,
keep him on any kind of schedule
of privilege. But the First Lady claims
understand how It 15 the closest thing to
because he wants to listen to everybody.
negative press-any of it-never really
in equal partnership the White House
It's not that he doesn't want to go on to
bothered her. "You have to understand.
has ever seen. A great deal has been
the next event: it's just that he doesn't
those people didn't know me, and I
written about what this wife has given
want to leave where he is until he's had
knew that they didn't know me. I fig-
her husband: Her law-firm salary (she
chance to see everybody there."
ured either they were misguided or
was a partner at Rose Law Firm in Little
He also, she savs, saved her from a
malevolent, so I didn't really pay them
Rock) allowed her husband to pursue his
too-easv life. She freely admits to hav-
much mind. If I worried about every
political ambitions. And her support
ing what she calls a "wonderful, stable"
time anybody said something nasty
during allegations of his infidelity kept
ipbringing, two parents who were
about me during the last year. I would
his bid for president from going up in
tiways there for her, an education at
be incapacitated."
smoke. Ironically. no one dwells on
Vellesiev College and Yale Law
"I don't know what Hillary could do
what this husband gives his wife.
School. "I was really one of the people
to get people off her back," says Betty
What he's really done for me is
in America who could always look back
Bumpers. wife of Arkansas senator Dale
share his heart-which is enormous.
and sav. you know. the meritocracy
Bumpers. who has worked with the
Havs Hillary Clinton. who calls her hus-
really is alive and well. because I was
Clintons over the years on Arkansas-
band her best friend. "He is an in-
given so many opportunities."
based charities and programs. "You
credibly loving and compassionate and
Then she fell in love with Bill
never accomplish anything trying to sat-
caring person. And it has made me a
Clinton and moved to Arkansas. "It
isfy everybody. I don't think she indulges
better person. He has the most extraor-
would have been so easy for me to have
a great deal. nor should she have to."
dinary amount of patience and love for
had a wonderful life and a wonderful
These days, though, nobody has
people of all kinds. and it is almost
career in a much bigger place where I
a bad word to say about Hillary
unfailing. I have watched that ever since
could have only seen the same people
Clinton. Call it a honeymoon period
I first met him and marveled at it. It has
all the time. and they all would have
(her postelection approval ratings have
been a standard by which I have judged
been pretty much like me, and we all
soared), call it (continued on page 122)
IF TOOTHPASTE
IFASHAMPOO
COULD FIGHT
KEPT YOUR
PLAQUE UP TO
HAIR CLEAN UP TO
8 TIMES BETTER,
8 TIMES LONGER
WOULD YOU
WOULD YOU
USE IT?
BUY IT?
1992 Barnes find CSI Clarity is a trademark of Pilkington Visioncare. Inc.
Open for breakfast.
It's better with
Del Monte Fruit. You'll flip for flapjacks with peaches. Or top your waffle
with pears. Quick, easy and delicious year-round.
Del Monte Fruit is the top of the morning.
Del Monte
Quality
Yellow
SLICED
Cling
PEACHES.
In
Monte
The best thing next to fresh™
Hillary Clinton
but they're worrying about her. A New
was Al Gore, and everybody else-
York Times article detected her hand in
whether they're married to him or
some of the Cabinet selections, particu-
not-is acting on his behalf. But in
ontinued from page 121)
ariv Health and Human Services
order to determine policy, he seeks
bilective amnesia, but for the moment.
Secretary Donna Shalala, a close friend.
advice from lots of different quarters. I
the First Lady can do no wrong. Which
The First Lady does not deny it. Instead.
am very involved in what he does and in
a starkly different picture from last
the says, "I have been consulted and
giving him advice. But I take the First
rear. when she could do nothing right.
been answering his requests for advice
Lady functions very seriously, and I
in all of the Cabinet positions. But this
know it's important, and I want to really
HE ARRIVES AT THE WHITE HOUSE
is precisely what makes a lot of people
help the White House be a place that is
the far more controversial half ot the
nervous. Indeed, when informed of her
very open and accessible and welcoming
First Couple. Bill Clinton is. after ail.
latest nickname, "Clinton's Jim Baker,"
to people. And then do whatever else he
the fortv-second president. His wife is
the lets out a delighted hoot.
wants me to do."
much more: the first First Lady with a
"I just have to imagine that they are
The "whatever else" ought to be an
full-time career: the woman who may
oncerned about unseen or hidden
official position, many feel. not just to
trag the role of First Lady kicking and
:orces that might be affecting a presi-
stop partisan bickering about her
creaming into the twenty-first century.
dent," she says. "But I don't think
behind-the-scenes influence but because
learned a long time ago, because mv
there's anything particularly hidden
she is highly qualified and her talents
husband has been in this business for so
bout the role I play in my husband's
should not be wasted. (She was named
ong. that unfair criticism goes with the
life and always have. And I think that
by the National Law Fournal as one of
erritory, she savs. "And for me the
should be viewed as positive. A presi-
the nation's 100 most influential lawyers
mallenge has been to take criticism
ient has the right to seek advice from
in 1989.)
enouslv but not personally. I mean. It
invone whom he thinks can give him
But her personal definition of First
mebody has something legitimate to
good advice. including someone he's
Lady remains to be seen. Before she
JV that is grounded in fact. I'm inter-
elated to. whether it's President
even got to the White House, Hillary
sted in it. If they have their own opin-
Kennedy with his brother, or a presi-
Clinton made a study of other First
in about who I am or what I should be.
lent with his spouse.
Ladies and came to this conclusion:
":n realiv not that interested in It
"I really want to make a contribu-
"I've learned that each one has tried to
ecause that's their opinion. and there's
tion-that's what I've always wanted to
do what she thought was best for her
million of them. And there's just no
10." she continues. "And nobody makes
husband and her family and the coun-
me to spend worrying about people
lirectives or sets policy except the pres-
try as she saw her obligations. And that
no sav mean things about you.
ident. Everybody eise serves at his plea-
almost without exception. every one
the mav not be worrying about them.
-ure. The only person elected with him
was criticized for something by some-
122 REDBOOK MARCH 1993
body. If you lived your life trying to
thing her friend will have to deal with is
tant for them personally to see what life
make sure that nobody ever criticized
"the lack of privacy. She's a very private
is like outside the walls, but it's impor-
you, you would probably never get out
person who values being alone with
tant for the people to see that this per-
of bed-and then you'd be criticized
herself or just her daughter and her
son is still relating to them. We're
for that."
husband. Her priorities are so healthy
going to do the best we can to keep
Savs Linda Bloodworth-Thomason,
and smart, I think it truly puzzies her
some of that up."
longtime friend and TV producer who
that anyone could actually write a col-
Her press secretary does what any
has helped shape the Clintons' image
umn about Chelsea's cat."
good press secretary should do now
during the campaign: "I don't think
The First Lady says she'll try to find
that it's after 11 P.M.: She shoos away
America has any idea yet how much
time to spend with friends going to the
the press so the president and his wife
they're going to fall in love with this
movies, dancing to Motown, or just
can try to be real folks. Hillary Clinton
person. She works so hard. She cares so
carrying on. Mostly, she'll try to be the
has been so relaxed, so composed, dur-
much. She is going to make us feel
same person she's always been. "I want
ing the whole interview that it would
young and full of hope again." Hillary
to do everything I can to try to have
be easy to think nothing scares her.
Clinton's mother, Dorothy Rodham,
moments during my day and week-
What's her biggest fear over the next
calls her a combination "of Elea-
certainly I can't do it every day-when
four years? "Oh, I suppose that our
nor Roosevelt and Jackie Kennedy."
I have the kind of functions and duties
country will not summon the will to
("Aren't mothers wonderful?" laughs
that working mothers all over the
change the way we need to change."
her daughter.) Eleanor Roosevelt, in
country have. I'm not delegating those
But what about personally? "Personally?
fact, happens to be a special heroine.
responsibilities completely. If you don't
I don't think like that. I don't have any
"Her strength of character and persis-
stay in touch with the daily routine that
fears. I'm just anxious and excited
tence and intelligence and compassion
most lives are made up of, it's really
about the future."
were just remarkable. She was just out-
easy to forget what the texture of life
She sounds fearless. Is she? "Oh, no,
standing in her willingness to look
truly is, what it's like for other people.
no, you know, I don't like creepy-crawly
issues squarely in the face and take
And that's something I worry about a
things. And one of the Secret Service
them on, and she withstood withering
lot in the White House. I think that it's
persons told me the other day that there
criticism from all kinds of people."
been a great loss to our country that we
were rats at the White House. But
have so isolated our presidents and
Socks'll make short order of them."
BUT HILLARY CLINTON'S BIGGEST
their families.
It's such a Hillary Clinton thing
concern is not withering criticism. It's
"You know, Harry Truman used to
to say.
being trapped in the fishbowl that
be able to walk down the street," she
is Washington, D.C. Bloodworth-
says. "My husband can go jogging
Roxanne Roberts is a staff writer for the
Thomason thinks the most difficult
in Little Rock. That's not only impor-
Style section of The Washington Post.
PRESENTING
CSI CLARITY
THAT WAS UP
A SHARP
8 TIMES CLEA
IMPROVEMENT
WOULD
YO
OVER THE
WEARIT
LEADING LENS
CSI Clarity
CSI Clarity lenses are up to 8 times more deposit
resistant than other lenses (data on file). For crisper,
clearer vision. Ask your eye care professional about
them. Or call 1-800-582-VIEW.
PILKINGTON BARNES HIND
CSI
Clarity™
but at least Mrs. Clinton talks sense
H
illary Rodham Clinton is not noted for buck-
Humanities, the sister agency of the National Endow-
ing politically correct trends. so it took a
ment for the Arts, which was the focus of controversy
good deal of courage and integrity for the
throughout the Bush administration for its taxpayer
first lady to show up at the commencement
subsidies for less-than-edifying artwork. Since Mr.
exercises of the University of Pennsylvania this week
Hackney has not exactly taken a firm stand in defense
and slam-dunk Political Correctness.
of free speech at his university — his statement about
Mrs. Clinton's words deserve a special hearing, not
the newspaper theft was merely that the values of
only because she happens to be the president's wife
diversity and free speech are often in conflict - his
and a committed liberal but also because Penn itself
nomination ought to jingle a few alarm bells in Con-
has recently enjoyed the visitation of repression in its
gress before he is confirmed.
ugliest form.
Thus, Mrs. Clinton's strong support for freedom of
Two incidents in particular stand out at Penn. One
expression at Penn this week was highly appropriate,
is the case of student conservative Gregory Pavlik,
not only for the campus but also for Mr. Hackney's
who was threatened with 34 charges of "racial harass-
future.
ment" because of some outspoken columns he had
The first lady proclaimed an unqualified support
written for the student newspaper. The other is the
for free expression, saying, "We must always uphold
case of student Eden Jacobowitz, who faces similar
the idea of our colleges as incubators of ideas and
charges for calling some black women "water buf-
havens for free speech and free thought." The implica-
faloes."
tion, presumably, is that you shouldn't steal newspa-
In the Pavlik case, the charges were dropped after
pers if they print things you don't agree with and you
a sympathetic history professor intervened with Penn
shouldn't punish people because they tell others who
President Sheldon Hackney. The charges were im-
are bothering them to shut up.
proper anyway because the university speech code
Mrs. Clinton also intoned, "I know that you share the
protects student writers in the newspaper from being
general distress at any acts of hate - hateful acts,
prosecuted for what they write there. But even after
hateful words, hateful incidents — that occur too fre-
the charges were dropped, black students stole the
quently these days in our communities and even on our
entire press run of the paper on the day when Mr.
college campuses.
But we should listen as well as
Pavlik's last column was due to appear - a clear at-
lecture; confront problems, not people; and find ways
tempt to silence the expression of views that the silenc-
to work together to promote the common good."
ers didn't like.
In the abstract, this too is good advice, but we have
In the other case, Mr. Jacobowitz is a student who
to wonder if she was implying that the columns of Mr.
was disturbed in his studies by a crowd of less than
Pavlik and the words of Mr. Jacobowitz were "hateful
sober ladies from a black sorority who were cavorting
acts." They weren't, and if they had been, they shouldn't
outside his dormitory window. He yelled out at them,
be defended. The only hate practiced at Penn so far
"Shut up, you water buffalo." He says he intended no
seems to have come from the students who swiped the
racial slur by this rather strange appellation, and in-
papers and tried to punish Mr. Pavlik and Mr.
deed it seems to be unknown to the racist vocabulary.
Jacobowitz for expressing themselves.
It does have a usage in Hebrew (like that of "jackass"
Yet whatever the nuances of Mrs. Clinton's address,
in English), though not a racial one, and Mr.
it was exactly the right thing to say in exactly the right
Jacobowitz. who is Jewish, says that's what he meant.
place. Had other liberals shown her guts and common
All of this might seem trivial were it not for the fact
sense long ago, the whole sordid melodrama of Politi-
that Mr. Hackney is the Clinton administration's desig-
cal Correctness need never have waddled across the
nated chairman of the National Endowment for the
academic stage.
FRIDAY, MAY 21, 1993 * The Washington Times
06.
Pruden on
In fact. until this week and the reassurance pro-
vided by the Hubbell contretemps that the slickster
Politics
is alive and well, a lot of Mr. Clinton's home folks
had begun to wonder whatever happened to the man
they sent to Washington.
By Wesley Pruden
They're not so puzzled by
the president's emergence
as a high-taxing liberal, or
Newfangled Clintons
by his promising one thing
and doing the opposite (he
was the governor for 12
get laughs back home
years. after all), but as by
the portrait of strangers
painted in the newspapers
LITTLE ROCK, Ark.
and on the television
Gosh. Willie. we hardly know ye.
screens.
There's still considerable pride in Bill Clinton's
The Bill-and-Hillary
ascent to power here in Little Rock, especially
philosophical talk-talk
among the lawyers who hope to do business with
Skinned
about life, its meaning and
Hillary in the way some of them did business with
the moral decay in Amer-
the dynamic duo when they were running Arkansas
ica draws mostly the laughter of disbelief. Hillary
for the Rose Law Firm.
started it with her speech at the University of
Not only that, the home folks can hardly believe
Texas, discussing what Albert Schweitzer called the
the number of Arkansawyers who are getting jobs
"sleeping sickness of the soul." She bloviated group-
in Washington. "The old admonition to 'write if you
therapy stuff about "integrating personal responsi-
find work' has taken on a whole new meaning," says
bility and service to community" and "defining
a businessman in Conway. "I remember how
yourself in your moment."
Lyndon Johnson made everybody throw up when
She prescribed exchanging an "ethos of selfish-
someone said 'Texas.' I hope that doesn't happen to
us."
ness and greed" for a "new ethos of individual re-
sponsibility, caring. We need a new politics of mean-
This week even the Arkansawyers who are fed up
ing. It is not going to be easy to redefine who we
with Bill and Hillary, whose numbers are said to be
are as human beings in this post-modern age."
growing faster than a crawdad can scoot backwards
The other president reprised her theme with
across Scott Bayou, seemed pleased by the way
some Jimmy Carter malaise talk of his own at the
Webster Hubbell skinned Joe Biden and Howard
Cooper Union in New York: "We also have in this
Metzenbaum and the Republicans on the Senate Ju-
country a crisis of belief and hope. This is a strange
diciary Committee on his way to confirmation as
and, in a way, wondrous moment in our history,
the associate attorney general. This confirms the
when citizens everywhere desperately want things
widely held belief that a yankee is worth more than
to change but still are wary of it and reluctant to
a bale of cotton because he's twice as easy to pick.
place their faith in anyone's prescription.
"Hubbell slicked 'em on that one," says a dues-
"The human condition in the end changes by
paying member of the Country Club of Little Rock.
faith. And faith cannot be held in your hand. The
"When we finally had to take in a black member he
Scripture that I carry to my place of worship every
was smart enough to find one that Willie was going
Sunday says, 'Faith is the assurance of things hoped
to take to Washington. anyway."
for, the conviction of things unseen.'"
This is regarded here as the essence of slick-
This kind of talk from someone with Mr. Clinton's
willieism. which is in this context not an epithet,
considerable reputation as a bounder makes a lot of
but high praise - regarded as nothing necessarily
people itch down here where everybody can quote
against the new black member, but praise for any-
Scripture. It's not the bounding that offends people,
one who can string up a yankee senator on a rope of
but the preaching afterward.
his own, to swing in the wind from a standard of
"We had an old boy like that down home," says a
high hypocrisy.
man from the piney woods, hard by the Louisiana
line. "He got saved every July, and let everybody
know about all through every August. In between
revivals, he kind of leaked, I guess."
FRIDAY, MAY 21, 1993 *
The Washington Times
104
A realistic policy on gays
Most Americans have assumed that if gay
to this point, Sen. Sam Nunn would agree.
soldiers and sailors keep quiet about their pri-
But Mr. Frank goes a little further than Mr.
vate lives, they are left alone by the brass. That
Nunn, who apparently wants gays to be celi-
has not been the case.
bate. Under the Frank plan, gays would be
Gay enlistees have been harassed and inves-
allowed to engage in homosexual conduct in
Egated by superiors intent on "outing" them
private in their off-duty hours. In other words,
Military police conduct bed
if a soldier on leave decided
searches. follow people in
to visit a gay bar, he wouldn't
their off-duty hours and
risk being discharged as
demand that "suspects" turn
long as he didn't discuss his
in friends.
visit when he returned to
Careers have been ruined
duty.
over rumors. women -
Of course, this compromise
lesbian and straight - say
could be viewed as silly. Pen-
they sometimes gave in to
tagon officials know perfectly
demands for sex from
well that many gays are serv-
straight men to try to prove
ing admirably. The "don't ask,
they weren't homosexual.
don't tell" policy suggests that
The policy of ferreting out
the military can't handle real-
gays was an abuse of power
ity and must cling to the
the Pentagon.
notion that gays are fine as
When President Clinton
long as they are invisible.
announced he would lift the
Nevertheless, this is a com-
ban' on gays by executive
promise that makes political
order, Congress responded
sense. Congress simply is not
by Sholding hearings. Those
going to end the ban entirely.
sessions provided Americans
If Mr. Clinton tries to do it
with an education: Many
with an executive order, the
were shocked to realize how
backlash could make matters
far the government would go
worse. Congress could set into
to "out" people.
law a policy sanctioning
The hearings also
Rep. Barney Frank
vicious witch hunts.
revealed, however, that most
Yes, the proposed policy is
Americans still oppose lifting the ban entirely.
flawed. But it does provide the vast majority of
They believe recognition of gays in uniform
gays in the military what they want most: pri-
would go beyond tolerance - it would give
vacy in their cff-duty hours. And it should be
tacit approval to a "lifestyle" many people
acceptable to Congress because it merely
dislike.
makes explicit what most Americans assumed
After months of wrangling, Rep. Barney
was the policy that personal matters are kept
Frank (D-Mass.), who is openly gay, says it's
private.
time to compromise. He's right Under Mr.
Mr. Nunn and Mr. Clinton should turn a deaf
Frank's proposal, recruiters would not ask
ear to radicals on the right and left who oppose
whether enlistees are homosexual and gays
compromise. It's time to shake hands on this
would not declare their sexual orientation. Up
deal and move on
For
124
The first lady's stand on free speech
First lady Hillary Rodham Clinton's new
In another case, a white student was accused
hairdo got a lot of attention in coverage of her
of violating the university's code against
commencement address at the University of
racially insulting speech after he yelled, "Shut
Pennsylvania. Too bad. Everyone should have
up, you water buffalo" at a group of black
been focusing on her eloquent and timely
women students who were noisily celebrating
restatement of an old idea.
outside his dorm as he tried
Mrs. Clinton gave a ringing
to study.
THE ATLANTA CONSTITUTION
endorsement of the right to
Rather than paying
The women considered the
free- speech, and she
remark racially motivated,
reminded us that there is no
so much attention
even though "water. buffalo"
place where it is move vital
isn't generally used as a
than on the nation's college
to Hillary
racial epithet and the white
campuses.
She was preaching the
Clinton's new
student said he didn't intend
it as such. Still, the matter
right sermon to the right con-
hairdo, everyone
has been brought before a
gregation at Penn. The school
should have been
university judicial panel
recently has been wracked by
Mrs. Clinton didn't cite
conflicts between its efforts
focusing on her
those cases, but she certainly
to promote diversity and its
could have had them in mind
obligation to protect free
speech.
eloquent
when she told the commence-
In one case, black students
restatement of an
ment audience, "We must be
careful not to cross the line
confiscated and destroyed all
old idea.
between censuring behavior
copies of the student newspa-
we consider unacceptable
per because they didn't like a
and censoring."
conservative columnist's stands against affir-
She added, "What we have to do here at this
mative action and civil rights. Sheldon Hack-
university and in this country is to find a way
ney, Penn's president and Bill Clinton's nomi-
to celebrate our diversity and debate our dif-
nee to head the National Endowment for the
Humanities, took no action against those
ferences without fracturing our community."
Amen. Universities that enforce speech codes
involved in that blatant act of censorship.
haven't found the way.
143
MAY
P03
Helium
program
defended
By Beth Silver
Washington Bureau of The Dallas Morning News
WASHINGTON - The acting di-
rector of the U.S. Bureau of Mines de-
fended the federal helium program's
$1.3 billion debt Thursday as Repub-
licans questioned the project's
WHITE
worth.
The Texas-based helium reserve
- an obscure but frequent target of
House
budget watchdogs - was the subject
of a hearing before the House En-
ergy and Mineral Resources Subcom.
mittee.
"It is the worst kind of govern-
mental anachronism: a program
without a clearly identifiable mis-
sion, a program that private industry
could do more effectively, a program
that is $1.4 billion in debt," said Rep.
Christopher Cox, R-Calif.
Dr. Hermann Enzer, the Bureau
of Mines' acting director, said the
federal government could erase the
program's debt because the U.S.
Treasury lent the money in the first
place. Officials from the General Ac-
counting Office said doing that
would not affect the national debt
because it is money the government
lent to itself.
"I think the GAO is right," said
Rep. Richard Lehman, D-Calif., the
subcommittee chairman. "We're just
moving the peanut shells around."
The federal government estab-
lished the helium reserve in 1960 out
of concerns that supplies of the gas
were rapidly being depleted. The
program was given a $252 million
loan from the U.S. Treasury to be
paid back in 25 years. The total inter-
est alone is about $1 billion
The reserve now contains nearly
a 100-year supply of belium. Once
used to float military blimps, the gas
currently is used in weapons systems
and space research, and it could be
used in the Superconducting Super
Collider under construction south of
Dallas
During Thursday's hearing, Rep.
Craig Thomas, R-Wyo., questioned
Dr. Enzer, saying he believed that
eliminating the helium debt would
only "manipulate" the numbers to
justify the program.
"There's no discipline in the fed-
eral government to stop anything."
the congressman said. "I am critical
of this kind of operation that just
seems to go on when things change."
But Rep. Bill Sarpalius, D-Amar-
illo, whose district includes the hel-
ium reserve, renewed his support for
the program at the hearing, saying
that it generates as much as $12 mil-
lion a year and employs about 250
people. He has introduced legislation
to forgive the interest on the pro-
gram's debt.
Should the government ever sell
its helium supply. it would have to
be done over a long period of time,
Dr. Enzer said. Selling it all at once
would generate 5 to 10 cents on the
dollar and could devastate the pri-
vate helium market, he said.
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
April 7, 1993
REMARKS OF THE FIRST LADY
AT LIZ CARPENTER'S LECTURESHIP SERIES
University of Texas
Austin, Texas
3:00 P.M. CDT
MRS. CLINTON: Thank you so much. I am reminded, in
following Anne Richards, of that old story of the fellow who died in
one of the early Arkansas floods and makes his way to heaven and is
met at the gates. And St. Peter says, "Well, you're just in time for
our monthly seminar. what do you want to talk about?" The man said,
"I want to talk about the most important experience that I have ever
encountered. I want to talk about what it is like to be in a flood.
I feel like I can make a real contribution to that dialogue." St.
Peter says, "Fine. You'll go on after Noah." (Laughter.) So, here
we are after Noah. (Applause.)
You know, it is not a common experience for me to be in
any Texas athletic facility and feel good about it -- (applause) --
but I must say that now that we're no longer in the same conferences,
my state and yours, that I am honored to be -- (laughter) -- in the
arena where the Lady Longhorns play. (Applause.) And I also have to
say -- and I hope that you feel the same way I did -- I was mighty
proud of Texas Tech, too. I thought that was a great victory.
(Applause.)
You know, when Liz Carpenter asked me to come speak at
her little seminar -- (laughter) -- it was one of those conversations
that you have with Liz -- those of us who are lucky enough to know
her and call her a friend -- where her enthusiasm just kind of takes
over. She said, I'm going to have some of my friends in, we're going
to do this lecture. You know, it will be fun. I'll get Anne to come
over and Mrs. Johnson will come over, and we'll just have a good old
time.
And I had this sort of mental image of being over in one
of the small rooms at the LBJ School and sitting with a bunch of my
friends, maybe with some students around a table. And then I just
MORE
- 2 -
put it out of my mind. And over the last two weeks, as Liz knows,
it's been kind of touch-and-go for me whether I thought I could be
here, and I told Liz that I would certainly try. And when it became
clearer that I could, I renewed contact with the people who were
helping her put this on and was then told that there were going to be
thousands, maybe 14,000 people at this event.
And my first response was no, no, no, you must have read
it wrong, there's an extra zero in there somewhere. But my second
was why would I doubt Liz Carpenter on anything? If she's going to
put on a lectureship that's like Anne says, it's going to be a big
one and besides it's in Texas. So what do we expect? And I'm just
pleased to be part of it. (Applause.)
I also want to say a special word of appreciation to
Mrs. Johnson. You know, there is that wonderful old saying about how
you never quite know what it's like until you've walked in another
person's moccasins. Well, I don't know if you've ever worn
moccasins, Mrs. Johnson, but I'm getting a sense of what it is like
to try to walk in the footsteps of you and the other women who have
been in the position that I now find myself in. And every day that
goes by, I am more impressed by the kind of qualities that you and
other women in this position have brought to taking care of your
personal business on behalf of your family and your husband, and also
trying to make your contribution to the country. And all of us in
this arena are grateful for the grace and beauty by which you carried
out both of those functions and as a wonderful example, not just for
me, but for all of us. And I very much wanted to say that to you
publicly. (Applause.)
You know, after you hear what I have to say, you'll
think that Governor Richards and I not only coordinated outfits but
coordinated comments. And I suppose the only thing left for me is to
get a hair-do like that. (Laughter.) You know, I'm actually due for
a new one and I figure that if we ever want to get Bosnia off the
front page, all I have to do is either put on a headband or change my
hair and we'll be occupied with something else. (Laughter and
applause.)
But what Anne Richards talked about is what I want to
expand on in my remarks leading into the panel discussion with all of
these distinguished panelists and with questions from many of you
that I understand were submitted. Because the problems that she
alluded to are not just American problems, they are not just
governmental problems. We are at a stage in history, I would
suggest, in which remolding society certainly in the West is one of
the great challenges facing all of us as individuals and as citizens.
MORE
- 3 -
And we have to begin realistically to take stock of
where we are, stripping perhaps away the romanticism that Governor
Richards referred to, to be able to understand where we are in
history at this point and what our real challenges happen to be.
And I say that it is not just an American problem
because if one looks around the Western world, if one looks at
Europe, if one looks at the emerging democracies, at Asia, if one
looks certainly here in North America, you can see the rumblings of
discontent, almost regardless of political systems, as we come face
to face with the problems that the modern age has dealt us.
And if we take a step back and ask ourselves, why is it
in a country as economically wealthy as we are despite our economic
problems, in a country that is the longest surviving democracy, there
is this undercurrent of discontent -- this sense that somehow
economic growth and prosperity, political democracy and freedom are
not enough -- that we lack at some core level meaning in our
individual lives and meaning collectively -- that sense that our
lives are part of some greater effort, that we are connected to one
another, that community means that we have a place where we belong no
matter who we are. And it isn't very far below the surface because
we can see popping through the surface the signs of alienation and
despair and hopelessness that are all too common and cannot be
ignored. They're in our living rooms at night on the news. They're
on the front pages; they are in all of our neighborhoods.
On the plane coming down I read a phrase in an article
in the newspaper this morning talking about how desperate conditions
are in so many of our cities that are filled with hopeless girls with
babies and angry boys with guns. And yet, it is not just the most
violent and the most alienated that we can look to. The discontent
of which I speak is broader than that, deeper than that. We are, I
think, in a crisis of meaning. What do our governmental institutions
mean? What do our lives in today's world mean? What does this
economic global event that Governor Richards spoke of mean? What do
all of our institutions mean? What does it mean to be educated?
What does it mean to be a journalist? What does it mean in today's
world to pursue not only vocations, to be part of institutions, but
to be human?
And, certainly, coming off the last year when the ethos
of selfishness and greed were given places of honor never before
accorded, it is certainly timely to ask ourselves these questions.
(Applause.)
One of the clearest and most poignant posings of this
question that I have run across was the one provided by Lee Atwater
as he lay dying. For those of you who may not know, Lee Atwater was
MORE
- 4 -
credited with being the architect of the Republican victories of the
'70s and the '80s. The vaunted campaign manager of Reagan and Bush.
The man who knew how to fight bare-knuckled in the political arena,
who was willing to engage in any tactics so long as it worked and he
wasn't caught at it.
And yet, when Lee Atwater was struck down with cancer,
he said something which was reprinted in Life Magazine, which I cut
out and carry with me in a little book I have of sayings and
Scriptures that I find important and that replenish me from time to
time that I want to share with you.
He said the following: "Long before I was struck with
cancer, I felt something stirring in American society. It was a
sense among the people of the country, Republicans and Democrats
alike, that something was missing from their lives, something
crucial. I was trying to position the Republican Party to take
advantage of it. But I wasn't exactly sure what it was. My illness
helped me to see that what was missing in society is what was missing
in me. A little heart, a lot of brotherhood.
The '80s were about acquiring -- acquiring wealth, power
prestige. I know. I acquired more wealth, power, and prestige than
most. But you can acquire all you want and still feel empty. What
power wouldn't I trade for a little more time with my family? What
price wouldn't I pay for an evening with friends? It took a deadly
illness to put me eye-to-eye with that true, but it is a truth that
the country, caught up in its ruthless ambitions and moral decay, can
learn on my dime.
I don't know who will lead us through the '90s, but they
must be made to speak to this spiritual vacuum at the heart of
American society, this tumor of the soul."
That to me will be Lee Atwater's real lasting legacy,
not the elections that he helped to win. (Applause.)
But I think the answer to his question -- "who will lead
us out of this spiritual vacuum" -- the answer is all of us. Because
remolding society does not depend on just changing government, on
just reinventing our institutions to be more in tune with present
realities. It requires each of us to play our part in redefining
what our lives are and what they should be.
We are caught between two great political forces. On
the one hand we have our economy -- the market economy -- which knows
the price of everything, but the value of nothing. That is not its
job. And then the state or government which attempts to use its
means of acquiring tax money, of making decisions to assist us in
MORE
- 5 -
becoming a better, more equitable society as it defines it. That is
what all societies are currently caught between -- forces that are
more complex and bigger than any of us can understand. And missing
in that equation, as we have political and ideological struggles
between those who think market economics are the answer to
everything, those who think government programs are the answer to
everything, is the recognition among all of us that neither of those
is an adequate explanation for the challenges confronting us.
And what we each must do is to break through the old
thinking that has for too long captured us politically and
institutionally, so that we can begin to devise new ways of thinking
about not only what it means to have governments that work again, not
only what it means to have economies that don't discard people like
they were excess baggage that we no longer need, but to define our
institutional and personal responsibilities in ways that answer this
lack of meaning.
We need a new politics of meaning. We need a new ethos
of individual responsibility and caring. We need a new definition of
civil society which answers the unanswerable questions posed by both
the market forces and the governmental ones, as to how we can have a
society that fills us up again and makes us feel that we are part of
something bigger than ourselves.
Now, will it be easy to do that? Of course not.
Because we are breaking new ground. This is a trend that has been
developing over hundreds of years. It is not something that just
happened to us in the last decade or two. And so it is not going to
be easy to redefine who we are as human beings in this post-modern
age. Nor will it be easy to figure out how to make our institutions
more responsive to the kind of human beings we wish to be.
But part of the great challenge of living is defining
yourself in your moment, of seizing the opportunities that you are
given, and of making the very best choices you can. That is what
this administration, this President, and those of us who are hoping
for these changes are attempting to do.
I used to wonder during the election when my husband
would attempt to explain how so many of the problems that we were
confronting were not easy Democratic-Republican-liberal-conservative
problems. They were problems that shared different characteristics,
that we had to not only define clearly, but search for new ways of
confronting.
Then someone would say, well, you know, he can't make up
his mind, or he doesn't know what he wants to say about that. When
instead what I was hearing and what we had been struggling with for
MORE
- 6 -
years is how does one define these new issues. How do we begin to
inject some meaning? How do we take old values and apply them to
these new -- for many of us -- undreamed of problems that we now
confront? And that is what all of us must be engaged in in our own
lives, at every level, in every institution with which we interact.
Let me just give you some examples. If we believe that
the reconstruction of civil society with its institutions of family,
friendship networks, communities, voluntary organizations, are really
the glue of what holds us together; if we go back and read de
Toqueville and notice how he talked over and over again about the
unique characteristics that he found among Americans and rooted so
many of those in that kind of intermediary institution of civil
society that I just mentioned, then we know we have to better
understand what we can do to strengthen those institutions, to
understand how they have changed over time, and to try to find
meaning in them as they currently are.
That's why the debate over family values over the last
year, which was devised for political purposes, seemed so off-point.
There is no -- or should be no debates that our family structure is
in trouble. There should be no debate that children need the
stability, the predictability of a family. But there should be
debate over how we best make sure that children and families
flourish. And once that debate is carried out on honest terms, then
we have to recognize that either the old idea that only parental
influence and parental values matters, or the nearly as old idea that
only state programmatic intervention matters are both equally
fallacious.
Instead we ought to recognize what should be a common-
sense truth -- that children are the result of both the values of
their parents and the values of the society in which they live. And
that you can have an important debate over how best to make sure
parental values are the ones that will help children grow and be
strengthened, and how social values equally must be recognized for
the role they play in how children feel about themselves and act in
the world. And then we can begin to have what should be a sensible
conversation about how to strengthen both. That's the kind of
approach that has to get beyond the dogma of right or left,
conservative or liberal. Those views are inadequate to the problems
we see.
Any of you who have ever been in an inner city, working
with young people as I have over the years, will know as I do the
heroic stories of parents and grandparents who, against overwhelming
odds, fight to keep their children safe -- just physically safe; and
who hold high expectations for those children; whose values I would
put up against any other person in the country, but who has no
MORE
- 7 -
control over the day-to-day violence and influence that comes
flooding in the doors of that housing project apartment; and who need
a society that is more supportive of their value than the one they
currently have. (Applause.)
Equally, all of us know the contrary story of families
with enough economic means, affluent enough to live in neighborhoods
that are as safe as they can be in our country today, so they have
the social value structure of what we would hope that each child in
America could have in terms of just basic kinds of fundamental safety
and physical well-being, but whose parental values are not ones to
promote a childhood that is a positive one, giving children the
chance to grow up to achieve their own God-given potential. So that
the presence of values of society are not enough, either.
There are so many examples of how we have to think
differently and how we have to go beyond not only the traditions of
the past, but unfortunately for many of us, well-held and cherished
views of the past; and how we have to break out of the kind of
gridlock mentality which exists not just in the Congress from time to
time, but exists as well in all of us as we struggle to see the world
differently and cope with the challenges it has given us.
Yet I am very hopeful about where we stand in this last
decade of the 20th century, because for all of the problems that we
see around us, both abroad and at home, there is a growing body of
people who want to deal with them, who want to be part of this
conversation about how we break through old views and deal with new
problems. And we will need millions more of those conversations.
Those conversations need to take place in every family,
every workplace, every political institution in our country. They
need to take place in our schools, where we have to be honest about
what we are and are not able to convey to our children; where we have
to be honest about the conditions with which are confronting so many
of our teachers and our students day in and day out; where we have to
be honest that we do have to set high expectations for all children
and we should not discard any because of who they are or where they
come from. (Laughter.)
And where we need to hold accountable every member of
the educational enterprise -- parents, teachers and students. Each
should be held accountable for the opportunity they have been given
to participate in one of the greatest efforts of humankind, passing
on knowledge to children. And we have to expect more than we are
currently getting. (Applause.)
We also need to take a hard look at other institutions.
As Governor Richards said we are in the midst of an intensive effort
MORE
- 8 -
of trying to determine how we can provide decent, affordable health
care to every American. (Applause.) And in that process we have had
to ask hard questions about every aspect of our health care system.
Why do doctors do what they do? why are nurses not permitted to do
more than they do? Why are patients put in the position they're in?
(Applause.)
And we have with us today Bill Moyers, who has helped to
enlighten all of us about how what we currently have is a system for
taking care of sickness. We do not have a system for enhancing and
promoting health. (Applause.) And what we need to do is recognize
how each of us, whether we are a care giver or a care receiver -- and
that role may change from time to time as we go through life -- will
have to think differently about health care. And we will have to
come up with a system that promotes wellness, promotes health and
provides care for us when we are sick that we can afford.
But to give you just one example about how this ties in
with what I have said before about how these problems we are
confronting now in many ways are the result of our progress as we
have moved toward being modern men and women: Our ancestors did not
have to think about many of the issues we are now confronted with.
When does life start; when does life end? Who makes those decisions?
How do we dare to impinge upon these areas of such delicate,
difficult questions? And, yet, every day in hospitals and homes and
hospices all over this country, people are struggling with those very
profound issues.
These are not issues that we have guidebooks about.
They are issues that we have to summon up what we believe is morally
and ethically and spiritually correct and do the best we can with
God's guidance. How do we create a system that gets rid of the
micromanagement, the regulation and the bureaucracy, and substitutes
instead human caring, concern and love? And that is our real
challenge in redesigning a health care system. (Applause.)
I want to say a word about another institution and that
is the media, because it is the filter through which we see ourselves
and one another. And in many ways the challenge confronting it is
just as difficult as those confronting any other institution we can
imagine. How does one keep up with the extraordinary pace of
information now available? How do we make sense of that information?
How do we make values about it even if we think we have made sense?
How do we rid ourselves of the lowest common denominator that is the
easiest way of conveying information? How do we have a media that
understands how difficult these issues are and looks at itself
honestly because the role it must play is so critical to our success
in making decisions about how we will proceed as a society?
MORE
- 9 -
I remember in the beginning of the campaign being asked
a question at an editorial meeting in South Carolina that my husband
was at to meet a lot of the editors and reporters from a lot of the
small-town papers. These were not folks who you'll see on a TV
station anywhere; these are people who got up every day and did the
best they could to put out the paper that covered their community or
their region. And one of the men, after hearing my husband speak,
said, "Now, you've talked about how we have to change. How we have
to change government, how we have to change society. But as a
journalist, how do I change to be able to understand and report on
those changes?" My husband said, "You know, I can't answer that.
That's something you have to answer. But I'm really glad you asked
the question, because every institution in our life has to ask those
hard questions about who we are, what contribution we make to dealing
with our problems and to injecting meaning again in the lives of us
all."
So every one of our institutions is under the same kind
of mandate. Change will come whether we want it or not, and what we
have to do is to try to make change our friend, not our enemy. But
probably most profoundly and importantly, the changes that will count
the most are the millions and millions of changes that take place on
the individual level as people reject cynicism, as they are willing
to be hopeful again, as they are willing to take risks to meet the
challenges they see around them, as they truly begin to try to see
other people as they wish to be seen and to treat them as they wish
to be treated, to overcome all of the obstacles we have erected
around ourselves that keep us apart from one another, fearful and
afraid, not willing to build the bridges necessary, to fill that
spiritual vacuum that Lee Atwater talked about.
You know, one of my other favorite quotes is from Albert
Schweitzer. And he talks about how you know the disease in Central
Africa called sleeping sickness; there also exists a sleeping
sickness of the soul. The most dangerous aspect is that one is
unaware of it's coming. That is why we have to be careful. As soon
as you notice the slightest sign of indifference, the moment you
become aware of a loss of character or a serious longing of
enthusiasm, it is best, take it as a warning. You should realize
that your soul suffers if you can't live superficially. Not just
your soul, but your society. Being here on this great campus, with
so many thousands of people who care about learning and are committed
to making a difference. Let us be willing to remold society by
redefining what it means to be a human being in the 20th century,
moving into a new millennium. Let us be willing to help our
institutions to change, to deal with the new challenges that confront
them. Let us try to restore the importance of civil society by
committing ourselves to our children, our families, our friends; and
to reaching out beyond the circle of those of whom we know, to the
MORE
- 10 -
many others on whom we are dependent in this complex society; and
understanding a little more about what their lives are like and doing
what we can to help ease their burdens.
Our greatest opportunities lie ahead, because so many of
the struggles of the Depression and the World War and the other
challenges posed by the Cold War and communism are behind us. The
new ones are equally threatening. But we should have learned a lot
in the last few years that will prepare us to play our part in
remolding a society that we are proud to be a part of.
Thank you all very much. (Applause.)
END
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
Internal Transcript
April 17, 1993
REMARKS BY THE FIRST LADY
AT HEALTH CARE BRIEFING
Great Falls, Montana
MRS. CLINTON: Thank you very much. I am so pleased to
be here. I had other opportunities to come to Montana and visit. My
husband and daughter and I had a wonderful night a few years ago in
your Governor's residence, with then-Governor Schwendon*. And I am
just so pleased to be back. And I've told anyone who will listen, I
will take just about any excuse to return. So I hope you will give
me that opportunity.
I am very grateful also for the invitation that I
received from Senator Baucus to come to Montana. And yesterday
Senator Baucus and Senator Burns and I were, at the invitation of
Congressman Williams, in Billings. And I had an opportunity there to
meet with citizens of Montana to talk about health care and came away
impressed at the commitment and thoughtfulness that people are
bringing to this very difficult issue.
And I'm particularly looking forward to hearing from
those who will be making formal presentations and those who will be
asking questions here this morning, because what I have found in my
travels around the country is exactly what you have already heard
from both of your senators and your congressmen, from your governor
and your state senator and the chairman of Health Montana -- there is
a great, deep yearning on the part of Americans to come together to
reach a consensus to try to solve this particular set of problems
that affects every individual, every household, every business, and
every level of government. The whole dilemma that we are confronted
with now with respect to health care is one that affects every single
American.
I did not know until Congressman Williams told us this
morning that people in Montana actually pay more for health insurance
than people in any other country anywhere in the world. That is a
fact that I wrote down and I will take with me. It is emblematic of
the extraordinary problem that we are facing. The dimensions of that
problem are one you in this state (gap in tape)
MORE
- 2 -
(gap in tape) -- figures approximately $940 billion. That is all of
us -- individuals, households, businesses, all levels of government.
That $940 billion is a lousy investment, because we don't even cover
every American. When we compare ourselves with other countries that
have tackled these problems ahead of us, they not only cover all of
their citizens, but they do it at less of a cost. What we want is to
come up with an American solution that leaves room for a Montana
solution so that all Americans will feel they are part of solving
this health care crisis. (Applause.)
We also want to being to re-instill individual
responsibility into the system. We want people to be more
responsible for themselves, for their families, for their own health
care. (Applause.)
The President is looking at a system that will be a
national framework with certain national guarantees that all
Americans will be able to rely on, but with the kind of state
flexibility that states like Montana need to have.
And I want to say a special word about rural health
care. In Billings yesterday when we were listening to some of the
people there talking about the difficult they face with the distances
and the other problems of access here in this state, I said that we
needed to coin a new phrase, that rural is something I'm familiar
with in Arkansas, but we're talking hyper-rural or mega-rural here in
Montana. (Laughter.) So we probably need to come up with yet
another way of discussing the problems that you particularly
confront.
But one thing I can guarantee you is that my husband
believes very strongly in making sure that rural America is
adequately cared for, that its need are taken into account. That's
what he has grown up with in believing; the kind of problem that he
has lived with, he's understands and he feels. And we are going to
do all that we can to put in to place a system that rural America
will not only be able to take advantage of, but be participants in
helping to shape.
Because no matter what the proposals that the President
sends to Congress are, we know we have no magic bullet. There is not
an easy answer to this problem, which has grown up over decades. We
will need the continuing consultation and help from citizens all over
America through their local governments, through their state
governments, to be able to make sure that what we see as a vision of
quality, affordable health care for every American becomes a reality.
So I view this as the first of many conversations I
would like to take part in on behalf of my husband and others who are
MORE
- 3 -
working to make sure that we achieve these goals. Because once we
come with a plan we will all have a lot of hard work ahead of us to
make sure that plan works.
And I'm really counting on a new spirit of cooperation
and commitment in our country. I want again to feel that I'm living
in the country that I took for granted and was raised in. I know
that for some people, that sounds nostalgic and maybe unrealistic.
But I remember very well, even though I grew up in a suburb and not a
rural community, that everybody looked out for each other, that
neighbors really cared about each other, doctors made house calls --
those kinds of things that seem like part of distance past. But you
know, there was a connection among us then that I would like to see
re-instilled in America.
Health care touches us at our most basic human
experience level. There's nothing like the birth of a baby, or the
death of a loved one. There's nothing like walking those long
hospital corridors or going out and seeing the joy on a person's face
when you tell them that everything is going to be all right.
That's how we really, at the very most basic level,
understand what it means to be a human being; understand what it is
about life that connects us from generation to generation; makes us
reliant in a most fundamental way upon each other. We've gotten away
from that. We've watched bureaucracies and paperwork and red tape
and distance between people replace that human caring that needs to
be at the root of any health care system. And we can't wave a magic
wand and reverse time.
But we can try -- as you work here on Health Montana and
as we work on trying to take this system and make it human again --
to remember what is really important in our lives and those moments
when we are so dependant upon each other. That's what I hope: that
in a few years we will not only have a streamlined system; will not
only have a better distribution of health care professionals, and
have more primary and preventative health care physicians, and nurse
practitioners, and physician assistants; will not only have better
access, but we'll feel better about ourselves. Not just because
we're healthier, but because we're part of a community of caring
again. And health care can be the start of that if we do it right.
Thank you very much. (Applause.)
END
MORE
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
Austin