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
323154243
label
New Jersey Working Women 9/15/92 [OA 7580]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323154243
contentType
document
title
New Jersey Working Women 9/15/92 [OA 7580]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13833-001
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Backup Chronological Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323154243
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
a9ba309c9db5f287
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Backup Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13833
Folder ID Number:
13833-001
Folder Title:
New Jersey Working Women 9/15/92 [OA 7580]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
23
1
2
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
September 18, 1992
PRESIDENT BUSH'S RECORD ON WOMEN APPOINTEES
FACT SHEET
President Bush has a record of appointing women that is second to
none. No President -- Democrat or Republican -- has appointed as
many women. Moreover, President Bush has appointed a significant
number of women to non-traditional jobs and to posts which they
are the first women ever to hold.
Numbers of Women Appointed
President Bush has appointed a total of 3,329 women to
positions within his Administration.
Approximately 40% of all Bush Administration appointees
are women.
President Bush has appointed a higher percentage of
women to the federal judiciary than any other
President. 18.5% of the Bush Administration's judicial
appointments are women in contrast to 15.5% during the
Carter Administration.
President Bush has appointed more than 75% more women
to senior executive positions than President Carter did
during his presidency.
The number of women in senior level political positions
has increased from 16% in the Carter Administration to
20% in the Reagan Administration to 28% in the Bush
Administration.
President Bush has appointed 43% more women to
positions requiring Senate confirmation than did
President Carter during his presidency.
The number of women in Senate confirmed positions has
increased from 14% in the Carter Administration to 15%
in the Reagan Administration to 20% in the Bush
Administration.
President Bush has appointed 2 1/2 times as many women
to senior executive positions than has the federal
government's own career service.
In the Bush Administration, 28% of the politically appointed
senior executives are women while only 11% of the
career civil service positions are held by women.
Since 1988, 40% more women are serving in political
senior executive positions.
The number of women in senior management positions has
increased 41% since the last administration. Almost
25% of all senior management jobs are held by women in
the Bush Administration while women held 17% of all of
these jobs in the Reagan Administration.
Bush Administration Firsts for Women
Susan Crawford - Judge, U.S. Court of Military Appeals
E. Gail de Planque - Commissioner, Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Sylvia Earle - Chief Scientist, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Department of Commerce
Susan Engeleiter - Administrator, Small Business Administration
Bernadine Healy - Director, National Institutes of Health,
Department of Health and Human Services
Carla Hills - United States Trade Representative
Kay Cole James - Associate Director, Office of National Drug
Control Policy
Joan McEntee - Under Secretary for Export Administration,
Department of Commerce (nominated)
Antonia Novello - Surgeon General, Department of Health and Human
Services
Shirley Peterson - Commissioner, Internal Revenue Service,
Department of the Treasury
Janet Steiger - Chairman, Federal Trade Commission
Mary Sterling - Inspector General, Department of Transportation
Linda Stuntz - Deputy Secretary, Department of Energy
Ann Veneman - Deputy Secretary, Department of Agriculture
Women Appointed to "Non-Traditional" Jobs
Jane Becker - U.S. Representative, Vienna Office of the United
Nations
Barbara Bryant - Director, Census Bureau, Department of Commerce
Elaine Chao - Deputy Secretary, Department of Transportation
Lynne Cheney - Chairman, National Endowment for the Humanities
Susan Crawford - Inspector General, Department of Defense
Nancy Dorn - Assistant Secretary for Civil Works, Department of
the Army
Linda Fisher - Assistant Administrator for Toxic Substances,
Environmental Protection Agency
Anne Foreman - Under Secretary, Department of the Air Force
Joyce Hampers - Assistant Secretary for Economic Development,
Department of Commerce
Jill Kent - Chief Financial Officer, Department of State
Quincy Krosby - Alternate U.S. Executive Director, International
Monetary Fund; Assistant Secretary for Export Enhancement,
Department of Commerce
Susan Livingstone - Assistant Secretary for Installations,
Logistics, and the Environment, Department of the Army
Janice Obuchowski - Assistant Secretary for Communications and
Information, Department of Commerce
Shirley Peterson - Assistant Attorney General, Tax Division,
Department of Justice
Barbara Pope - Assistant Secretary for Manpower and Reserve
Affairs, Department of the Navy
Jacqueline Schafer - Assistant Secretary for Installations,
Department of the Navy
Susan Schwab - Director General for Foreign and Commercial
Service, Department of Commerce
JoAnn Smith - Assistant Secretary for Marketing and Inspection
Services, Department of Agriculture
Shirin Tahir-Kheli - U.S. Representative, Special Political
Affairs Office, United Nations
Elizabeth Tamposi - Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs,
Department of State
Jennifer Wilson - Assistant Secretary, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce
Deborah Wince-Smith - Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy,
Department of Commerce
Barbara Zartman - Deputy Director, Peace Corps
Women Appointed to Cabinet Positions by President Bush
Elizabeth Dole - Secretary of Labor
Barbara Franklin - Secretary of Commerce
Carla Hills - U.S. Trade Representative (with cabinet rank)
Lynn Martin - Secretary of Labor
FAMILY LEAVE TAX CREDIT ACT OF 1992
FACT SHEET
Current Law
No deduction or credit is available to an employer who provides employees with unpaid
leave for childbirth, medical care of children or parents or other serious medical needs.
Compensation paid to employees during leave for these purposes is deductible under general
tax principles.
Reasons for Change
Care for family members with serious mental or physical health problems, including injuries
and sickness necessitating hospital, hospice or substantial and continuous medical treatment,
present substantial hardships on families. Families are further burdened by the requirements
of childbirth and childcare. The increase in the number of two wage-earner families, as well
as single parent families, has resulted in pressures to balance these family needs with
employment requirements. This balancing has resulted in difficult decisions for both
employers and employees.
Employers face significant costs related to extended employee absences. Extended absences
could result in substantial lost production and lost business opportunities if the employee is
not replaced. These costs are particularly high for small and medium-sized businesses.
Economies of scale permit large firms to reduce these costs. Large businesses can train and
maintain floating employees, temporarily shift employees to replace absentees or enter into
regular arrangements with third parties for trained temporary employees. The costs of
extended absences on small and medium size businesses may not be as readily reduced. For
small and medium-sized businesses, it is often not economically reasonable to maintain
floating employees, to shift employees from other duties or to retrain workers for only a
temporary need. Accordingly, small and medium size businesses are more likely to
experience severe economic consequences if they do not quickly replace absent workers.
Regardless of a business' ability to mitigate costs, all businesses must balance the legitimate
family needs of their employees with the costs of extended absences. Since most businesses
cannot economically tolerate unlimited employee absences, employers frequently must place
limits on such absences. As a result of these limitations, employees can be placed in the
situation of choosing between their employment and the serious medical or health needs of
their families.
The proposal's tax incentives encourage small and medium-sized businesses to adopt flexible
leave policies related to childbirth, adoption or serious family health problems. The tax
incentives do not require that any particular form of flexible leave be adopted. Instead, the
proposal allows employers and employees to arrive at a program based on their specific
needs, while also providing an offset to the cost of extended employee absences.
Explanation of Provision
The provision provides a 20% refundable tax credit to small or medium-sized employers that
provide family leave to their employees. "Family leave" is leave in connection with the birth
of a child; the placement of a child with the employee for adoption or foster care; caring for
a child, parent or spouse with a serious physical or mental health condition; or a serious
physical or mental health condition that prevents the employee from performing his or her
job. All employers with fewer than 500 employees are eligible for the family leave tax
credit.
The amount of the credit is 20% of the cash wages that the employer provided to the
employee during the period of family leave, or would have been provided to the employee
during that period had he or she not taken the leave. The cash wages that would have been
provided is based on the average wages for the preceding calendar year (or absent a
sufficient period of employment, the preceding four calendar quarters). The maximum
amount of wages taken into account for this purpose is $100 for each business day. The
maximum period of family leave for which the credit is available shall not exceed 60
business days (12 calendar weeks) in any 12-month period. This results in a maximum
available family leave credit of $1,200 per employee per year.
The proceeds of the family leave credit may be used by an employer for any purpose. For
example, the proceeds may be contributed to a pool of funds provided by the employer and
other employees to defray employee leave costs, paid as partial wage supplements to
employees on leave or used to purchase wage continuation insurance or other insurance to
cover leave related costs or to provide leave related benefits.
The credit is only available with respect to employees (whether part-time or full-time) who
satisfy certain length of service requirements. Under these requirements, the employees must
have been employed by the employer for at least 12 months before beginning the family
leave and must have performed at least 1,000 hours of service for the employer in the
preceding 12 months. Moreover, the credit applies only for the portion of family leave
during which the employer reasonably expects that the employee will return to work for the
employer.
In order to qualify for the credit, employers must provide employment and benefits
protection to employees on family leave. Health benefits must continue during the leave
under the terms and conditions that would have applied had the employees remained at work.
In addition, all family leave must be provided on a nondiscriminatory basis.
102D CONGRESS
2D SESSION
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide tax
incentives for the adoption of flexible family leave
policies by employers.
IN THE
, 1992
introduced the following bill; which was
referred to the Committee on
.
A BILL
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide tax
incentives for the adoption of flexible family leave
policies by employers.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
assembled.
SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Family Leave Tax Credit
Act of 1992".
SEC. 2. FAMILY LEAVE CREDIT.
Chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(relating to normal taxes and surtaxes) is amended by adding
a new section 51A to read as follows:
"SEC. 51A. FAMILY LEAVE CREDIT.
" (a) AMOUNT OF CREDIT. --
1
" (1) IN GENERAL. For purposes of section 38, the
amount of the family leave credit for any employer for
any taxable year is 20 percent of the qualified
compensation with respect to an employee who is on
family leave.
" (2) LIMITATIONS ON AVAILABILITY AND AMOUNT OF
CREDIT.
" (A) 500 OR FEWER EMPLOYEES. An employer is
not entitled to a family leave credit for any
taxable year unless--
" (i) in the case of an employer that is
in its first taxable year, the employer had
fewer than 500 employees at the close of that
year, and
"(ii) " in the case of other employers,
the employer averaged fewer than 500
employees for its preceding taxable year. An
employer is considered to average fewer than
500 employees for a taxable year if the sum
of its employees on the last day of each
quarter in that year divided by the number
of quarters is fewer than 500.
" (B) DOLLAR CAP ON QUALIFIED COMPENSATION.-
The amount of qualified compensation that may be
taken into account with respect to an employee may
not exceed $100 per business day.
2
" (c) MAXIMUM PERIOD OF FAMILY LEAVE. No
family leave credit will be available to the
extent that the period of family leave for an
employee exceeds 12 weeks, defined as 60 business
days, in any 12-month period.
" (D) ADDITIONAL LIMITATIONS ON LEAVE FOR
PERSONAL SERIOUS HEALTH CONDITIONS. Leave from an
employer in connection with a qualified purpose
described in subsection (b) (1) (D) will qualify as
family leave only--
(i) if the employee on leave has no
unused sick, disability or similar leave, and
(ii) with respect to a single
uninterrupted period of leave in any 12-month
period.
" (b) FAMILY LEAVE. Except as otherwise provided in
this section, an employee is considered to be on "family
leave" if the employee is on leave from the employer in
connection with any qualified purpose.
" (1) QUALIFIED PURPOSES. The term "qualified
purpose" means--
" (A) the birth of a child,
" (B) the placement of a child with the
employee for adoption or foster care,
" (c) the care of a child, parent or spouse
with a serious health condition, or
3
"(D) the treatment of a serious health
condition which makes the employee unable to
perform the functions of his or her position.
" (2) DEFINITIONS OF CHILD, PARENT AND SERIOUS
HEALTH CONDITION. --
"(A) CHILD.--The term "child" means an
individual who is a son, stepson, daughter,
stepdaughter, eligible foster child as described
in sections 32 (c) (3) (B) (iii) (I) and (II), or legal
ward of the employee or employee's spouse and who
either has not reached the age of 19 by the
commencement of the period of family leave or is
physically or mentally incapable of caring for
himself or herself.
"(B) PARENT. The term "parent" means an
individual with respect to whom the employee would
be considered a "child" within the meaning of
subsection (b) (2) (A) without regard to the age
limitation.
" (c) SERIOUS HEALTH CONDITION. The term
"serious health condition" means an illness,
injury, impairment, or physical or mental
condition that involves inpatient care in a
hospital, hospice or residential health care
facility, or substantial and continuing treatment
by a health care provider.
4
" (c) CREDIT REFUNDABLE. In the case of so much of the
section 38 credit as is attributable to the family leave
credit--
"(1) section 38 (c) will not apply, and
H (2) for purposes of this section, such credit
will be treated as if it were allowed under section 3
of this Act (relating to refundable credits).
M (d) NONDISCRIMINATION REQUIREMENT. The family leave
credit is available to an employer for a taxable year only
if the employer provides family leave to its employees for
that year on a nondiscriminatory basis.
" (e) OTHER DEFINITIONS AND SPECIAL RULES. --
" (1) IN GENERAL. For purposes of this section--
" (A) EMPLOYER. Except as otherwise provided
in this subpart, the term "employer" has the
meaning provided by section 3306 (a) (1) and (3).
" (B) EMPLOYEE. The term "employee" includes
only permanent employees who have been employed by
the employer for at least 12 months and have
provided over 1000 hours of service to the
employer during the 12 months preceding
commencement of the family leave.
" (c) QUALIFIED COMPENSATION. The term
"qualified compensation" means the greater of--
" (i) cash wages paid or incurred by the
employer to or on behalf of the employee as
5
remuneration for services during the period
of family leave, and
H (ii) cash wages that would have been
paid or incurred by the employer to or on
behalf of the employee as remuneration for
services during the period of family leave
had the employee not taken the leave.
" (D) COMPUTATION. For purposes of subsection
(e) (1) (c) (ii), the amount of cash wages that would
have been paid to the employee for any business
day the employee is on family leave is--
"(i) in the case of an employee that was
employed by the employer for the calendar
year preceding the year in which the family
leave begins, the average daily cash wages of
that employee for that year, and
"(ii) in the case of other employees,
the average daily cash wages of that
employee for the four calendar quarters
preceding the commencement of the family
leave.
" (E) AVERAGE DAILY CASH WAGES. For
purposes of the computation described in
subsection (e) (1) (D), an employee's average daily
cash wages is his or her total cash wages for the
period described in such subsection divided by the
6
number of business days in that period.
" (F) BUSINESS DAY. The term "business day"
includes any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or
legal holiday.
" (2) EMPLOYMENT AND BENEFITS PROTECTION. --
Employers that fail to provide employment or benefits
protection to employees while on family leave, or
continued health benefits to employees while on family
leave under the terms that would have applied had the
employees remained at work, will not be eligible for
the family leave credit.
" (3) EXPECTATION THAT EMPLOYEE WILL RETURN TO
WORK. No family leave credit will be available for any
portion of a period of family leave during which the
employer does not reasonably believe that the employee
will return from leave to work for the employer.
"(4) REGULATORY AUTHORITY. The Secretary may
prescribe such regulations or other guidance as may be
necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of
this section, including guidance relating to ensuring
adequate employment and benefits protection and
guidance to prevent abuse of this section.
SEC. 3. COORDINATION WITH REFUND PROVISION.
For purposes of section 1324 (b) (2) of title 31 of the
United States Code, section 51A of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 (as added by this Act) will be considered to be a
7
credit provision of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954
enacted before January 1, 1978.
SEC. 4. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.
(a) Section 38 is amended by deleting the "plus" after
subsection (b) (6) and "." after subsection (b) (7), by
inserting ", plus" after subsection (b) (7), and by adding a
new subsection (b) (8) to read as follows:
"(8) the family leave credit under section 51A.'
(b) The heading and table of contents of Chapter 1,
Subchapter A, Part IV, Subpart F are revised to read:
"Subpart F--Rules for Computing Job-Related Credits"
"Sec. 51. Targeted jobs credit.'
"Sec. 51A. Family leave credit."
"Sec. 52. Special rules."
(c) The heading of section 51 is revised to read as
follows:
"Sec. 51. Targeted jobs credit.' "
(d) Section 52 is revised by substituting "section
51 (a) or 51A(a)' for "section 51 (a) each place it appears.
(e) Section 52 (c) is revised by inserting the phrase
"or family leave credit" after the phrase "targeted jobs
credit".
SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.
The amendments made by this Act shall apply to family
leave that commences after December 31, 1992.
8
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
September 16, 1992
TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES:
I am pleased to transmit for your immediate consideration
and enactment the "Family Leave Tax Credit Act of 1992". This
flexible family leave plan will enable 80 percent of the
workplaces in the country -- the small and mid-sized businesses
that often cannot provide family leave -- to provide family
leave for their employees without costing jobs or stifling
economic growth. The proposal will cover 15 million more
workers, and 20 times as many workplaces, than the proposals
in S. 5.
This legislation will provide a refundable tax credit for
up to 20 percent of total compensation, for up to $100 a week --
to a maximum of $1,200 -- for businesses that provide their
employees with 12 weeks of family leave. An employee would be
eligible to take leave under the following circumstances: the
birth of a child, the placement of a child with the employee
for adoption or foster care, care for a child, parent, or spouse
with a serious health condition, or a serious health condition
that prevents the employee from performing his or her job.
This is not federally mandated leave. It instead gives
employers positive incentives to adopt responsible family leave
policies and gives them the flexibility to target the specific
needs of their employees. To qualify for the credit, businesses
must adopt nondiscriminatory policies that provide protections
for employees' jobs, benefits, and health insurance.
On May 5, 1992, the Administration transmitted the "Health
Benefits for Self Employed Individuals Act of 1992" to the
Congress. This proposal was also intended to help improve
benefits for small businesses, without deterring economic
growth, by expanding the deductibility of health insurance from
25 percent of costs to 100 percent of costs. Packaged with the
Family Leave Tax Credit, we are providing a strong impetus for
small businesses to develop quality benefits programs.
The Department of the Treasury has estimated the cost of
the Family Leave Tax Credit at approximately $500 million for
FY 1993 and $2.7 billion over 5 years. The combined cost of the
Family Leave Tax Credit and the "Health Benefits for the Self
Employed" is $740 million in 1993 and $7.7 billion over 5 years.
These costs must be offset under the Budget Enforcement Act of
1990. In my 1993 Budget, I identified $68.4 billion of specific
mandatory spending reductions. Any of those offsets would be
acceptable to the Administration. Additionally, when the self
employed tax credit was transmitted to the Congress, over
$9.3 billion of these offsets were specifically suggested to pay
for the proposal -- substantially more than was required. Those
same $9.3 billion in offsets are sufficient to pay for the costs
of both the self employed deduction and the Family Leave Tax
Credit under the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990.
I urge the Congress to take prompt action to generate
constructive family leave policies that are consistent with
economic growth by quickly passing this legislation.
GEORGE BUSH
THE WHITE HOUSE,
September 16, 1992.
# # #
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 17, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
STEVEN PROVOST
SUBJECT:
REMARKS TO EMPLOYEES OF AT&T
Tomorrow afternoon at 2:40 p.m., you will address 400
employees at AT&T in Basking Ridge, New Jersey. Approximately
75% of the audience will be women. Your remarks are 25 minutes
in length and will be on teleprompter.
(Provost/Askew/Aarhus)
September 17, 1992
11:00 P.M.
WOMEN
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
AT&T
BASKING RIDGE, NEW JERSEY
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1992
2:40 P.M.
Thank you, Mary, and good afternoon, everyone. I want to
recognize Secretary Lynn Martin, your great former Governor Tom
Kean and, of course, Chairman Bob Allen; State Senator Donald
(already out)
DiFrancesco, Speaker Chuck Haytaian ((hi-TIE-in)).
I remember standing in the Rose Garden just last year, and
awarding my Environment and Conservation Challenge Award to AT&T
for your world-class work in reducing air pollutants. It's great
to be here and see first-hand the folks who made it happen.
But there's also something sad about being in this neck of
New Jersey today. And I'd like to take a minute or two to
explain why.
You lost one of your most remarkable citizens on Wednesday,
when Congresswoman Millicent Fenwick died, at 82. Millicent
Fenwick was an incredible person -- whose life was spent climbing
over barriers -- pipe in hand.
She was born to a life of privilege. But in the early 30's,
her marriage split up and she moved to New York alone, deep in
debt, with two kids.
She wanted to get a job selling stockings at a department
store, but they turned her away -- she hadn't earned a high
school diploma. She finally landed a job at Harper's Bazaar,
1
then worked her way over to Vogue Magazine, where she wrote the
Vogue Book of Etiquette. It sold a million copies.
Her kids grown up, Millicent came home to New Jersey, and
started to get involved in town politics -- she was the first
woman member of the Bernardsville Borough Council. She ran for
the State Assembly -- and won, and served as State Consumer
Affairs Director.
At 64, when most people are settling down, Millicent was
just starting to make a reputation in Congress. I was honored to
know Congresswoman Fenwick -- she helped run my campaign here in
1980.
No one worked harder for equality. Once, a state legislator
questioned Mrs. Fenwick about her support for the ERA. He said -
- "I've always thought of women as kissable, cuddly and smelling
good.' Mrs. Fenwick replied: "That's the way I feel about men,
too. I only hope for your sake that you haven't been
disappointed -- as often as I have. '//
Now, Millicent Fenwick lived during interesting times. She
saw a world transformed outside our borders -- and she helped
lead that transformation.
But while these remarkable changes took place overseas, here
in America, a quieter and even more profound revolution has been
unfolding -- and she was part of that too.
I'm talking about a move toward human justice at its most
basic level -- the movement toward equality of the sexes. A
2
movement that cuts across social and ideological boundaries --
and touches all our lives.
of course, before we all get carried away with the
congratulations, we have to admit -- we still have a ways to go.
Some of you may know the story of the three business
executives who passed away and went to heaven.
St. Peter greeted them at the Pearly Gates, and informed
them that although they had lived their lives nobly and with
compassion -- there would be one final test before they could
enter.
The first executive -- a man -- came forward. St. Peter
asked him to spell the word: "GOD." He did, and the gates opened
before him.
The second executive -- also a man -- came forward and was
asked to spell the word "HOLY." He did, and the gates opened
again.
Then the third executive came forward -- a woman. Her voice
rising ever so slightly, she said: "All my life I had to work
twice as hard as men to get ahead. Now I get here and find
there's one more test. I can't believe it." And St. Peter said:
"I sympathize with you. Spell "Czechoslovakia."
Now, I did not come here today as just one more man,
lecturing women about how tough the world is.
I'm here as a President whose policies affect your lives.
And I want to explain what we're doing so that you and your
daughters won't have to spell "Czechoslovakia."
3
Last week, I unveiled my Agenda for American Renewal --
answers to the questions Americans are asking around their
kitchen tables. The Agenda is a comprehensive strategy to
guarantee that by the early part of the 21st century -- America
will enjoy the world's first $10 trillion economy.
I have several priorities -- most are well underway. I want
to open new markets -- and new customers -- for the products you
produce. I want to create new schools for a new age. I want to
sharpen businesses' competitive edge -- with relief from
taxation, regulation and litigation. I want to reach out to all
Americans, and I want to dramatically reduce the size and scope
of the federal government.
That's my agenda. But today, I'm here to talk about a
special priority on my agenda -- providing economic security for
American working men and women.
The first order of business, as I said, is to admit that
there is still unfinished business. Women work as hard as men
and still earn two thirds less. That's not acceptable. And most
working women do more than equal work -- on the job, and at home.
That's not acceptable either.
And many women are trying to do it all alone. Divorce
happens. I know it from my own family -- my own daughter. I've
seen what single moms are up against -- the kinds of pressures
from doing 36 hours' work in a 24 hour day.
4
As a nation, we must confront these challenges head-on.
Not talk, not fluff -- you need government policies that help men
and women meet responsibilities at home.
That means child care. It means family leave policies. It
means child support enforcement. It means cheaper health care.
Both candidates in this election are talking about these
issues. But we offer entirely different solutions.
The other side puts their faith in government. On issue
after issue, their solution comes down to giving more power to
government. I put my faith in you, and give you the power to
help yourself.
The other sides ideas sound very enticing. But you have to
ask. Will they work for me? Will they make a difference in my
life?
In thinking about this, I refer you to a story about William
the Second, Emperor of Germany. He saw himself as a "man's man"
-- which I guess means he was the kind of Kaiser who -- when he
got lost -- would refuse to stop and ask anybody for directions.
Well, the Kaiser got it in his head that he could design a
better battleship. So he drew up plans and sent them to the
Naval architect for him to study.
The architect said the Kaiser's battleship would be the
finest on earth. It would be as fast as a speedboat. Its range
and power would overwhelm the enemy. And everybody on board
would feel like they were lounging in their living room.
5
There was only one teeny, tiny problem. If the boat were
built, and actually placed in water -- it would sink.
Well, I'm afraid a lot of policies like that have been
coming out of Capitol Hill the past few years. All are designed
to use government to achieve great things on your behalf. But
look closely, and I suggest that they just might not float in
water.
Let me give you some examples. You decide for yourself.
This week, Congress sent me what's called -- "family leave"
legislation. This bill has the noble goal of allowing a mom or
dad to leave a job -- without pay -- in order to take care of a
new baby, or maybe care for a sick parent. The bill would
require companies to keep the job open for three months, until
the employee could come back to work.
Now, I believe family leave is necessary, and our families
need it. A lot of companies are providing it. AT&T is one --
you should be proud of your leadership.
The bill Congress sent me this week would force every
company with more than 50 employees to provide family leave. If
companies don't foot the bill, they break the law. That's one
approach. I have another. I want to give all businesses
incentives -- in the form of tax credits -- to offer family
leave.
Now, it's an election year, so Congressional leaders have
sent me their mandatory approach -- and dared me not to sign it.
I want to explain why I can't support this approach.
6
First of all, our economy is sluggish -- here in New Jersey
and all across the country. Think of the ad agencies, the
printing companies -- other suppliers you work with everyday.
They are cutting budgets and payrolls to the bone, and I don't
want to load on more federal mandates that will force them to lay
off people.
You might say -- you're protecting the rich. But you know -
- entrepreneurs aren't all rich. In fact, more and more people
are taking their pensions and starting their own small
businesses. By the year 2000, women will run the majority of
these businesses.
Here's another point to consider. You and I know, the best
benefit packages come from the largest employers. You're the
ones who provide the benefits -- small companies are where
parents have to make the tough choice between work and family.
But, the other side's approach exempts the smallest
those
employers. My approach offers incentives to every company and
Hanns
the 40% of American workers, that their plan will not.
it will cover 20 times as many employees -- 20 times as many moms
and dads.
One more thing. Think of the impact of mandated family
leave -- or hiring decisions. I know it's not supposed to
happen, but how many employers will think -- why not hire a man
instead of a woman? He won't leave to have a child. He won't
leave to care for his mom. Mandated fmaily leave could encourage
this kind of discrimination.
7
I don't think you'll hear these kind of details discussed in
the media. But I'm going to take a stand. Because to me, it's
not worth putting politics ahead of social progress.
Let me talk about another job-related issue -- something
called the "glass ceiling".
One reason so many women are turning into entrepreneurs is
because they've bumped up against the "glass ceiling" -- they
stop getting promoted. Companies are promoting some women in
greater numbers, but not fast enough. So a lot of talented women
are going into business for themselves.
This isn't just a corporate problem, we're seeing the same
thing happen in government. I'm proud of our record in promoting
women. But I'm especially proud that we've put talented women in
important economic positions running the Department of Labor or
Commerce, running the Small Business Administration or handling
all our trade negotiations.
The women I work with tell me they don't want any special
opportunity -- they just want the right to succeed or fail -- to
be measured by the same standards as a male.
We want to see the Lynn Martins and Carla Hills of corporate
America succeed, too. That's why Secretary Martin has made
shattering the glass ceiling a top priority. She's making sure
Sean Hooper
that companies who receive your tax dollars -- through federal
contacts -- make career opportunities available to women.
POL
1619-229
Let's talk child care for a moment. You see a difference in
philosophies here.
8
Congress wanted a government-run child care program. I
heard from parents who wanted the right to choose the best child
care for their children. It might be a public school. or it
might be a church or an aunt's house. The point is -- you want
to make the choice, not be told by some county clerk where to
take your kid.
Congress wanted to give the money directly to county
agencies, and limit your alternatives. I fought for giving
vouchers directly to parents, so you can choose the best care,
regardless of who provides it. Our way was better, and we won
for you.
Now we're having a similar debate over health care. Costs
morethan
are rising at about ten percent a year. It's putting pressure on
families, and it's the fastest-growing item in the federal
budget.
Once again, the other side wants the government to solve the
problem -- either by directly taking over our health care system,
or by indirectly getting involved in setting prices and mandating
benefits. The idea sounds appealing, but it will end up meaning
longer lines and less flexibility for you and your families.
I offer an entirely different approach. I want to give
companies incentives to provide coverage and use competition to
drive down costs. I want to get at the root cause of rising
prices, including skyrocketing malpractice insurance. I want to
let small businesses pool their coverage, so they can get the
larger companies.
same price breaks like you do, right here at AT&T. My plan will
(self-insured)
9
pay a carrier
for admisistrative
costs only
lower costs through competition, extend coverage to 30 million
Americans who can't afford it today, and build on the strengths
of our system -- which already provides the highest quality
health care in the world. Again, I believe my approach is right
-- for you. / /
Here's something that really bothers me. Five million women
in America are entitled to child support from ex-husbands. You
know how many of those women get all they are entitled to? About
half. I think it's outrageous that a father in Pennsylvania can
be shopping for a new Corvette, while his ex-wife in New Jersey
is struggling to shop for food. I think it's time that the long
arm of the law tap S every deadbeat dad on the shoulder and say:
Pay up, or else.
There's a lot more. I could read a laundry list of what
we've accomplished. We've made it so you can take a pension from
job to job. We've provided incentives for student aid -- today
one out of two students at a college or university gets a federal
loan or grant. The purpose is the same: protect working men and
women. Make it easier to raise a family.
But the exact details of every program aren't as important
as the philosophy behind them. A philosophy that says that
ultimately -- the only way to make people more secure -- is to
give you more power over the decisions that affect your jobs and
family budgets.
If we're going to use the power of government to move us
forward, we need to use the power of government to help, not
10
hinder. Not to add new barriers to opportunity, but to remove
old ones.
(Brief pause.)
I started by talking about the economic challenge before
America, and I'd like to close the same way.
Because ultimately, that's what this election is about. Who
has the ideas -- that can help America win the global economic
competition.
When you stop to consider all the challenges we face in this
nation, let's not ignore some of the advantages.
Stetj68% of our children higher education
Here in America, we send more young students people to college --
stet
(38%)
than any other nation. More than twice as many as Germany, and
(26%)
more than twice as many as Japan. More than half of them are
women.
Basically, we have twice as many educated people as our
competitors. America is the only nation that really tries to
base opportunity on our character and talent alone.
The changes of the past few decades have improved the lives
of all Americans. But more than that, they've improved our
society. They've made us stronger, as we face the stiff
challenges ahead.
The policies I've outlined today, are designed to build on
our strengths. To help us take advantage of the talents of every
American, to strengthen all our families -- so that we can make
America more safe and secure.
11
I have seven granddaughters. The oldest is fifteen years
old. The world she enters today, will be much different than the
world Barbara and I entered many years ago.
If my grand-daughter wants to go out to Texas and start an
oil company, she can do it. If she wants to write the Vogue Book
of Etiquette -- she can do that too.
And if she wants to run for President, she can do that, too.
((Although she might try fighting forest fires -- it's a little
more relaxing.))
I'm glad my grandkids face their opportunities, but they
will only be able to take advantage of this if America remains
the most dynamic place on this great earth.
I think the path to economic security lies with less
government, less regulation, more freedom and respect for
families and individuals.
So what I offer in this election is simple. A new path to a
Renewed America, based on some tried and true values. That's how
we will build a safer and more secure America -- for all of us -
- and our kids.
May God bless the United States of America.
# # # #
12
September 15, 1992
MEMORANDUM
TO:
KATHY SUPER
JOHN KELLER
STEVE PROVOST
FROM:
GARY FOSTER G7
SUBJECT: SITE SURVEY FOR BASKING RIDGE, NEW JERSEY
Attached is the site survey for the President's trip to Basking
Ridge, New Jersey on Friday, September 18. Once Kathy has the
site "scrubbed", implementation can begin.
approx.
2:40pm
will broadeast
CC: Bob Zoellick
David Bates
Dennis Ross
to allow
Margaret Tutwiler
Janet Mullins
Tim McBride
employees
David Demarest
Karen Groomes
Andrew Carpendale
Speechwriters
Millicent Feauice
on dais
September 14, 1992
MEMORANDUM TO:
GARY FOSTER
FROM:
DOUG DUVALL
SUBJECT:
SURVEY REPORT FOR BASKING RIDGE, NEW JERSEY
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1992
EVENT SCENARIO:
The President will travel from Washington, D.C. to Newark,
New Jersey International Airport. The President will
30 minutes to ATT's corporate headquarters in Basking
Jersey. If the President were to helicopter, ATT has a baseball
field on their property which would be suitable for an open
arrival. The President will give an early afternoon address on
economic issues relating to working women. The audience will be
predominantly female employees of ATT as well as representatives
of women's service organizations from greater Somerset County.
After remarks, the President will attend a brief Victory '92
fundraiser. Note: It is also proposed that the President meet
?
briefly with senior management of ATT.
PROPOSED EVENT SITE:
ATT is New Jersey's largest employer with 52,000 people on
its payroll. Its corporate headquarters has 3,500 employees. In
general, ATT is a global company that provides communications
services and products, as well as network equipment and computer
systems to businesses, consumers, telecommunications service
providers and government agencies. Its roots trace back to
Alexander Graham Bell, and today it operates worldwide in
competitive, high technology markets. With 2.4 million
shareholders, ATT's is the most widely held stock in America.
The President will be speaking in the auditorium at their
corporate headquarters in Basking Ridge, New Jersey.
Unfortunately, the auditorium will only hold a seated crowd of
400-450. Unlike most auditoriums, the floor is not tiered and
the seats are not permanent. There is a raised stage which is 18
feet deep, ample room for additional seating near the podium.
Approximately half the invited crowd will be ATT employees
and the other half controlled by the New Jersey Bush Quayle
operation. ATT will invite a broad range of female employees,
ranging from entry level secretarial positions to union cafeteria
workers to members of ATT's senior management. ATT does feel
they would have to include some male employees, but at least 75%
of their invitees would be women.
As far as the program is concerned, Bob Allen, Chairman of
ATT, and a supporter of the President's, could give welcoming
remarks. Governor Kean could also give brief remarks. Bill
Palatucci, Executive Director of Bush Quayle in New Jersey,
should
suggested that Dr. Mary Stewart, President of the Stewart
intro
Management Group, introduce the President. Dr. Stewart is an
PORIS
African American; she has a Ph. is president of a consulting
firm in Asbury Park; she served on New Jersey's Task Force on the
21st Century; and she was named Minority Vendor Advocate for 1991
by the SBA.
The motorcade can arrive underground in the garage, and the
President can access the auditorium through a side entrance.
There are dressing rooms that run the length of the auditorium
which are suitable for holding rooms. The press platform would
be at a head-on position to the rear of the room with the filing
center located in the upper level lobby area outside the
auditorium.
ATT is having several meetings in their headquarters
building this week. The auditorium is being used Thursday. I
was able to negotiate with them and they have canceled Friday's
meetings. The earliest we can have the room for set up is
Thursday at 12:00 noon.
ATT oftentimes broadcasts major announcements and speeches
via an in-house satellite network. Given enough lead time, they
could do that for the President's remarks. A conservative
estimate of employees that could listen to remarks live would be
20,000.
After the President's speech, he will be escorted to the
Executive Dining Room on the 4th floor to attend a Victory '92
fundraiser. ATT would also like the President to meet briefly
with a handful of senior management. Both these meetings could
be held in the Executive Dining room. It can be partitioned to
allow for one large event or two smaller ones. Bill Palatucci
expects the fundraiser to be approximately 10 individuals.
It should also be noted that ATT has a fairly small
representation of women in senior management positions. There is
only one woman out of 16 on their Board of Directors. Further,
there is one woman out of 13 on their Management Executive
Committee. This is not well advertised, but could certainly pose
as a problem since the President will be stressing female
entrepreneurship.
Mike Del Grande, Government Affairs Director for ATT, feels
ATT has a respectable reputation nationally and especially in New
Jersey. I asked him if they had any recent discrimination cases
brought against them. Apparently, ATT did settle a case in the
mid 1980's involving Western Electric, a subsidiary. The economy
has not affected ATT that much. They have downsized in the past,
but no dramatic layoffs have been made.
In addition, The Newark Star Ledger recently named ATT as
one of the top ten corporations in providing child care services.
ATT has recently been involved in a consortium with other major
businesses like IBM and GE to facilitate child care centers
around the country.
All in all, the President's speech at ATT will give a local
and national message to women. ATT provides a forum for the
President to highlight the Administration's committment to women:
increasing access to jobs; providing economic security;
strengthening the family; and promoting women's health.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MANAGEMENT EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Robert E. Allen
Chairman of the Board and
Chief Executive Officer, AT&T
Robert E. Allen
M. Katbryn Eickboff
Chairman of the Board and
President, Eickhoff Economics Inc.
Chief Executive Officer
Walter Y. Elisha
Richard S. Bodman
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
Senior Vice President
Springs Industries, Inc.
Corporate Strategy and Development
Louis V. Gerstner, Jr.
Harold W. Burlingame
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
Senior Vice President
RJR Nabisco Holdings Corp.
Human Resources
Robert M. Kavner⁺
Philip M. Hawley
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
Group Executive
Carter Hawley Hale Stores, Inc.
Communications Products
Belton K. Johnson
Marilyn Laurie
Senior Vice President
Owner, Chaparrosa Ranch
Public Relations and
Drew Lewis
Employee Information
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
Alex J. Mandl⁺
Union Pacific Corp.
Chief Financial Officer
Donald F. McHenry
and Group Executive
President, IRC Group,
William B. Marx, Jr.+
Educator and former U.S. Ambassador
to the United Nations
Group Executive
Network Systems
Donald S. Perkins
Retired Chairman and
Jobn S. Mayo
Chief Executive Officer,
President
AT&T Bell Laboratories
Jewel Companies, Inc.
Victor A. Pelson+
Henry B. Scbacht
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
Group Executive
Communications Services
Cummins Engine Co., Inc.
Randall L Tobias
Michael I. Sovern
Vice Chairman of the Board
President, Columbia University
Gilbert P. Williamson+
Franklin A. Thomas
Chief Executive Officer
President, The Ford Foundation
NCR Corporation
Randall L Tobias
Sam R. Willcoxon
Vice Chairman, of the Board, AT&T
Group Executive
Joseph D. Williams
International
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
Warner-Lambert Co.
John D. Zeglis
Senior Vice President
Gilbert P. Williamson
General Counsel and
Chief Executive Officer,
Government Affairs
NCR Corporation
Thomas H. Wyman
Chairman, United Biscuits (Holdings)
U.S. Ltd. and former Chairman and
Also a member of the Operations Committee.
Chief Executive Officer, CBS Inc.
(See page 3)
15
16
STEWART MANAGEMENT GROUP. INC.
Expert Trainers in Employee Empowerment and Management Development
Dr. Mary L. Stewart is President of The Stewart Management Group, Inc. (SMG) in Asbury Park. New
Jersey, a consulting firm providing Management Training Programs and Organization Development
Consultation. The firm offers training programs and a variety of consulting services focusing on
increasing productivity of diverse employee populations.
Mary L. Stewart has over filteen years of experience In both line and staff management in academic and
corporate Institutions. She has worked In Organizational Development Affirmative Action. and Public
Relations. In addition. she has extensive professional expertise and experience as a consultant in such
areas as management and organizational development. supervisory training. career planning.
participative management and human resource development.
Dr. Stewart has served as a consultant to The American Council on Education. Office of Women in Higher
Education. She has been Instrumental In delivering a program that focused attention on providing career
opportunities for minority women Interested in higher education administration.
Mary L Slewart has served in administrative and faculty positions at Harvard University, Boston
University and Bates College. She has been a keynote speaker for several educational and business
organizations, including Berkeley & Stanford Universities, AT&T Bell Laboratories, and Port Authority
New York/New Jersey. She has written and published several articles. She serves AS a visiting Professor
in the Urban League's Black Executive Exchange Program.
Dr. Stewart holds a Ph.D. in Administration and Organizational Development from Boston College in
Massachusetts and a M.S. In Adult Education from Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana, Her post-
graduate work Includes participation in the National Training Laboratories Human Development Lab. as
well as related professional training courses with University Associates. She served on the State of New
Jersey Joint assembly TASK FORCE ON THE 1st CENTURY, and is Involved in community activities. Dr.
Slewart was named Minority Vendor Advocate for 1991 by the small Business Administration in
Washington, D.C. and Governor Jim Florio of the State of New Jersey.
Dr. Stewart has consulted for numerous organizations In both the private and non-private sectors.
Partial Clients List :
AT&T Alliance
AI&T Bell Laboratories
AT&T Network Systems
Bell Communications Research
North Carolina School for Science & Math
Port Authority of NY/NJ
The American Council on Education
The Carter G. Woodson Foundation
The National Technical Association
The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
The U.S. Government Intergovernmental Training Program
University of San Francisco
104 Grand Avenue
Asbury Park. New Jersey 07712
908-776-9445
908-776-5628 FAX
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
01. List
Contact list, re: POTUS visit to AT&T, Basking Ridge, New
09/18/92
P-6, (b)(6),
Jersey. (1 pp.)
(b)(7)(e), (b)(7)(f)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File, Backup
Subseries:
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
New Jersey Working Women 9/15/92
Date Closed:
12/9/2004
OA/ID Number:
07580
FOIA/SYS Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2004-2265-S
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
MR Case #:
Appeal Case #:
MR Disposition:
Appeal Disposition:
Disposition Date:
Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advise between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
To
Cord
Date
9/17
Time 11:20
WHILE YOU Shawn WERE OUT
M
MS. HepaR
of
Glass ceiling
Phone
5236191
Area Code
Number
Extension
TELEPHONED
PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU
WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU
URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
Message
gloss Caily
re: 1 tr.
don't use her name
Operator CAH
AMPAD
23-021 - 200 SETS
EFFICIENCY@
23-421 - 400 SETS
CARBONLESS
[top of 8]
And let's look at who would be helped by whose plan. You
and I know the best benefit packages comes from the largest
firms. An example -- 45 percent of employers who employ 5000
or more workers offer some form of child care benefit, but only
11 percent of employers with 100 employees or fewer.
So commonsense would say, if you want to help employers
offer benefits, help small employers. And what does the bill
the Congress do? It exempts small employers. Almost forty
percent of all workers would not be covered by the bill I
vetoed. That isn't commonsense.
My approach follows commonsense. It targets smaller
employers -- its for all employers with 500 employees or fewer,
those who are least likely to offer benefits, and most likely
to need the help I'm proposing to offer benefits to their
employees.
Insert M
from Hans
(99% of workplaces)
500 or fewer
FACT-CHECK FACT- CHECK
CHANGES
(Askew/Provost/Aarhus)
September 16, 1992
2:00 P.M.
WOMEN
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
AT&T WOMEN'S GATHERING
BASKING RIDGE, NEW JERSEY
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1992
2:40 P.M.
Thank you, Dr. (Mary) Stewart, and good afternoon, everyone.
Secretary Lynn Martin, Ambassador Carla Hills, Director
Chao, Congressman Zimmer, Governor Tom Kean, Kean and Chairman Bob
Allen, thanks for the invitation State Senator Donald Francesco, Speaker Chuck
Haytaian 11 hT - - TIE-in))
I remember standing in the White House Rose Garden just last
year, and awarding a Presidential Citation to AT&T on behalf of
my Environment & Conservation Challenge Award
insert person), honoring all of you for your world-class work in
reducing CFC air pollutants. So it's good to be here and see
first-hand the folks who made it happen.
But there's also something a little sad about being in this
neck of New Jersey today.
You lost one of your most remarkable citizens just before
dawn Wednesday, when Congresswoman Millicent Fenwick died, at 82.
Millicent Fenwick was an incredible person -- whose life was
spent climbing over barriers, pipe in hand.
She was born to a life of privilege. But in 1938, her
marriage split up and she moved to New York alone, with two kids,
cut off from her family.
1
for
She got a job as a model at Harper's Bazaar, then an Art
Editor at Vogue for 14 years -- because those were about the only
jobs women could excel at in those days
this is insulting!
Her kids grown up, she came home to New Jersey, and started
to get involved in town politics. She ran for the state Assembly
111
-- and won, and later served as State Consumer Affairs Director.
At 64, # an age when most people are settling down to enjoy
life's rewards, Mrs. Fenwick ran for Congress -- and won. She
became known as the champion of the underdog -- from migrant
workers in South Jersey to oppressed people all around the world.
I'm grateful to Congresswoman Fenwick because she helped run
my campaign in New Jersey in 1980 -- but more than that, she gave
selflessly to the public interest. One example. She always took
Amtrak back home to New Jersey every weekend -- because she
didn't want to waste taxpayer's money by flying. (My guess is
she probably also got a lot of work done -- she didn't have to
worry about running into too many Congressmen on the train.)
You don't always think of Millicent Fenwick as a feminist,
but no one worked harder for equality. Once, a state legislator
in New Jersey
here questioned Mrs. Fenwick about her support for the Equal
Rights Amendment. He said -- "I've always thought of women as
kissable, cuddly and smelling good." Mrs. Fenwick replied:
"That's the way I feel about men, too. I only hope for your sake
that you haven't been disappointed as often as I have."
2
Now, Millicent Fenwick lived and led during interesting
times. She saw a world transformed outside our borders -- and
she helped influence that transformation.
But while these remarkable changes took place overseas, here
in America, a quieter and even more profound revolution has been
unfolding -- and she was part of that too.
I'm talking about a move toward human justice at its most
basic level -- the movement toward equality of the sexes. A
movement that cuts across social, ideological, and national
boundaries -- that touches all of our lives.
of course, before we all get carried away with the high
fives, and proclaim that the Berlin Wall between men and women
has fallen -- we need to admit that we still have a ways to go.
Some of you may know the story of the three business
executives -- maybe they were from AT&T -- who passed away and
went to heaven.
St. Peter greeted them at the Pearly Gates, and informed
them that although they had lived their lives nobly and with
compassion -- there would be one final test before they would be
allowed to enter.
The first executive -- a man -- came forward and St. Peter
asked him to spell the word: "GOD." He did, and the gates opened
before him.
The second executive -- also a man -- came forward and was
asked to spell the word "HOLY." He did, and the gates opened
again.
3
Then the third executive came forward -- a woman. Her voice
rising ever so slightly, she said: "All my life I had to work
twice as hard as men to get ahead, and now I get here and find
there's one more test. I can't believe it.' And St. Peter said:
"I sympathize with you. Spell "Czechoslovakia."
Now, I did not come here today as just one more man,
lecturing women about how tough it is to be you. You can get
enough of that on Donahue.
I'm here as a President whose policies affect the quality of
your life. And I want to explain what we're doing so that you
American
and your daughters won't have to spell "Czechoslovakia" -- so we
women can hold their Hght
can lift American women up to your rightful place as economic,
social and legal equals.
Last week, I unveiled my Agenda for American Renewal, a
comprehensive set of answers to the economic questions facing
America today. It is a plan to guarantee that by the early part
of the 21st century -- America will have the world's first $10
trillion economy.
I have several priorities -- many are well underway. I want
to promote free trade, revolutionize our schools, sharpen our
businesses' competitive edge, reach out to all Americans, and
dramatically reduce the size and scope of the federal government.
But today, I'm here to talk about another priority --
providing economic security for American working men and women.
The first order of business, as I said, is to admit that
there is still unfinished business. Not only is equal pay still
4
just a lofty goal -- the 'equal work' part of the equation isn't
true yet, either.
Taking care of home and kids is a full-time job in itself,
and I know a lot of you are doing it on top of working here full-
time.
And you may be trying to do it all alone. Divorce happens.
Single mothers do struggle. You drive your minivans to Safeway, ShapRite
pick up the kids at school, take them to church, the doctor,
soccer practice -- cook and clean and coach and coddle -- and by
the end of the day, you're so tired, that you can't even stay
eleven
awake for the ten 'clock news.
The 'silent majority' of America in the 1990s -- may well be
that great, quiet backbone of dedicated, uncomplaining women --
who juggle career, school, kids and home -- and somehow manage to
get it all done with little or no help.
We as a nation need to face this challenge square in the
S
eye: Working American women today need workplace policies
flexible enough to stretch and fit extraordinary conditions at
home.
Now, how do we do this? That's a big question in this
election.
One approach is to weigh in with big government. Set up
agencies, pass heavy-handed laws, wind up the bureaucrats, and
try to legislate our way to a perfect world. It sounds great.
But you have to ask -- will it work?
5
William
Emperor
I refer you to a story about Kaiser Wilhem the Second of
Germany. He was sort of a 'man's man' -- which I guess means he
was the kind of Kaiser who -- when he got lost -- would refuse to
stop and ask anybody for directions.
Well, the Kaiser got it in his head that he could design a
better battleship. So he drew up the plans and sent them to the
architect
him
Naval shipyard for the experts to study.
the architect
his
And when they sent back their report, it said the Kaiser's
battleship design was indeed the finest on earth. It would be
faster and quicker than anything in the water. Its range and
power would overwhelm the enemy. And everybody on board, from
the lowest deckhand to the Admiral, would enjoy a comfort far
above the standards at the time.
naralarehitect naral
According to the shipyard, there was only one teeny, tiny
problem. If the boat were built and placed in water
it
would sink like lead.
Well, I'm afraid a lot of policies like that have been
coming out of Capitol Hill the past few years. Policies with
and Medical Leave of 1992
wonderful titles -- like the (Family Support and Working Women
Act) -- all designed to achieve great things on behalf of working
men and women. But look closely, and you see that they just
might not float in water.
Consider what's called the family-leave bill that was sent
to me this week. It's well-meaning, and has the noble goal of
allowing a parent to leave a job -- without pay -- in order to
health care
take care of a new baby, or other pressing family need. The bill
6
12 weeks
would require companies to keep that job open for up to a year,
so the employee could come back to work.
kind of
A lot of progressive companies already offer this family
leave plan and AT&T is one of them. Your family-leave policy, in
fact, should serve as a model for others companies; it's one of
the most-enlightened I've ever seen.
AT&T started this program voluntarily. But what about the
woman down the street, running her ad agency on a tight budget,
with 50 or so employees? What if the Federal government walked
in and said to her, all right, this is law. You've got to offer
family leave.
Think about what might happen the next time a job opened up.
Let's say there are two qualified candidates. One, a man. The
other, a woman of childbearing age. Equally qualified -- who do
you think is going to get the job? Who's the small business
going to count on to stick around -- and not leave for a year to
have a baby?
businesses drown.
Well, folks -- this is where the ship sinks -- and the
people on board get hurt.
May not be
((An
And that's why I vetoed Congress' family-leave bill this
vetoed on
*tweek.
))
I think it's well-meaning -- but not well-thought-out.
Fri. hasn
Ketoer
Sort of like the Kaiser's battleship.
And two days ago, I sent back to Congress an alternative
plan that not only looks good on paper, but also will float.
My proposal doesn't force business men and women to comply.
Instead, it gives them incentives -- in the form of tax credits -
7
- to offer family leave. It's flexible, and it'll help 80% of
workers
who are in
the workplaces in this country -- 1the stet small and mid-sized
businesses that otherwise couldn't afford a family-leave program.
Now they can provide a program without having to lay off people
to pay for it.
Understand, this isn't an attempt to let wealthy business
owners off the hook from doing what is right for society. It's
simply recognizing the fact that more and more, women
entrepreneurs are starting small businesses. These businesses
provide two out of three new jobs in the country -- and the Labor
and Small Business Administration
Department ^ says that by the year 2000, half of them will be owned
by women.
One reason so many women are turning into entrepreneurs is
because they've bumped up against the glass ceiling that blocks
their progress in so many companies. (need to humanize this --
example) Big companies are promoting women to higher positions
than they used to, but not fast enough. So a lot of talented
women are leaving and going into business for themselves.
That's why Secretary Martin has been working with Small
Business Administrator Pat Saiki -- to shatter that ceiling.
They're
She's making a special effort with small business, because like I
said, that's where two out of three new jobs are created. (this
is weak, need more)
We have a whole network of policies we've developed during
my administration, some that directly help working families women with
8
pressing needs and some that help them indirectly, by
strengthening the marketplace.
Child care, for example, was a big issue in the 1988
campaign. But you don't hear much about it this year, because
it's not an issue anymore. My Child-Care Act became law in 1990
-- and I'm proud of how it happened.
You know how difficult it can be choosing proper care for
your children. You can't tell about a facility from one
interview. You go on friends' recommendations, but they aren't
always accurate. Then you see those awful shows on television,
that expose the abuses that can happen.
More than anything else, the parents I talk to want to be
free to explore different options in child care. Maybe it's a
program run by a local school. Or maybe it's a church program,
or having your son or daughter stay with a relative down the
street.
Before my ^ bill was passed,
Everyone in Washington wanted to help low-and middle-income
parents with child care support. But my opponents wanted to give
the money directly to public agencies, and limit your
alternatives. I fought for giving vouchers directly to parents,
who could use them to choose the best care, regardless of who
provided it. Our way was better, and we won.
Now we're fighting a similar battle over health care. Once
again, the other side wants the government to solve the problem,
either by directly taking over our health care system, or
indirectly, by getting involved in setting prices. It sounds
9
appealing, but it will end up meaning longer lines and less
flexibility for you and your families.
I offer an entirely different approach. Give companies
incentives to provide coverage on their own. Allow small
businesses to pool coverage, so that they can get the same kind
like you do right here at AT&T.
of breaks on costs as the AT&Ts of the world. My system protects
your freedom to choose your doctor and build on America's
health
strength -- for providing the best care in the world.
We have other priorities -- like child-support enforcement.
We're working on legislation that would crack down on 'deadbeat
dads' who don't support their kids. We want State governments to
cooperate so these deadbeats can't hide across State lines. We
want to track these guys down and make them pay.
needs
transition
What happens when you see opportunity across the street -- a
better job, with more pay? But you'll lose all your pension
benefits if you change companies. What do you do? Well, just
this summer, we signed a law that will let you take your pension
from job to job.
There's a lot more. I could read a laundry list of what
we've done and want to do, in job training and discrimination
protection, and on and on.
But what's important here isn't details. It's the big
picture that's emerging, and it's very complex.
We're talking about altering our society's very fabric. As
women's roles evolve, economic issues that seemed unrelated
10
before, start to weave together -- into the broader fabric of
family issues.
And if we're going to use the power of government to move us
forward, we need to use the power of government to help, not
hinder. Not to add new barriers to opportunity, but to remove
old ones. Business barriers that burden new and small
enterprises, and social and cultural and legal barriers that
prevent working women from becoming true first-class citizens
insulting
(Brief pause.)
You know, I didn't come here today to make a political
allow tomake
speech, but I hope you'll excuse me^ one political comment.
Some
The polls show me behind today, but I have a quiet
confidence that come November 3rd -- I will win.
I don't say this because of any great confidence in my
ability to campaign eloquently. Frankly, while I think I've been
a good President -- I'm a lousy politician. I say I'm going to
win because I really believe my ideas are right for America.
I also have a feeling that I will be the last President
to come from the World War II generation -- whose experiences and
views were shaped by that great central event.
I happen to believe the values of that generation -- things
like the primacy importance of family and the individual -- are worth
passing forward. That's why my policies reflect those values.
But I believe something else. I believe that in many ways,
the world has become a better place, and many of those ways
relate to women.
11
Noelle, who
I have (7) granddaughters. The oldest is (15)15 It's
interesting for me to compare the world she enters today, with
the world Barbara entered many years ago.
If my they grand want -daughters to go out to Texas and start a business, my they
granddaughters will be able to do it on their own, not just by
tagging along beside a husband. If they want to edit Vogue
magazine, well, they can do that.
oralawyer or a research
scientist
But if they want to be a surgeon,A they can do that too. Our
society is so much richer because now, women can have contribute in
any way they want.
so many positive ways.
But the old values still matter, to women and men.
As I travel this great nation, I hear the anxiety. But I
still believe that Americans put their faith first in family and
-
friends -- just like in my day. I don't sense any groundswell to
have government solve all our problems -- because common sense
tells us it won't work.
So what I offer in this election is a new path to
opportunity, based on some fundamentally old values. Some values
that I think can build a safer and more secure America -- for all
of us -- and our kids.
Thanks for listening. God bless you. And God bless the
United States of America.
12
(Askew/Provost/Aarhus)
September 16, 1992
2:00 P.M.
WOMEN
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
AT&T WOMEN'S GATHERING
BASKING RIDGE, NEW JERSEY
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1992
2:40 P.M.
Thank you, Dr. (Mary) Stewart, and good afternoon, everyone.
May I say that it's good to see half my cabinet up here in
New Jersey -- maybe we can get some work done.
I want to recognize Secretary Lynn Martin, Ambassador Carla
Hills, Director (
)
Chao, Congressman Dick Zimmer, your great
former Governor Tom Kean and, of course, Chairman Bob Allen.
Thanks allowing me to visit this impressive facility.
I remember standing in the Rose Garden just last year, and
AT&T
awarding a Presidential Citation- to (Bob Allen), / honoring all of
you for your world-class work in reducing CFC air pollutants.
It's good to be here and see first-hand the folks who made it
happen.
But there's also something a little sad about being in this
neck of New Jersey today.
You lost one of your most remarkable citizens just before
Q
dawn Wednesday, when Congresswoman Millicent Fenwick died, at 82.
Millicent Fenwick was an incredible person -- whose life was
spent climbing over barriers --- pipe in hand.
1
She was born to a life of privilege. But in the early 30's,
her marriage split up and she moved to New York alone, deep in
debt, with two kids, and no education.
She wanted to get a job selling stockings at a department
store, but they turned her away -- she hadn't earned a high
school diploma. She finally landed a job modeling at Harper's
Bazaar, then worked her way over to Vogue Magazine, where she
Book
ended up writing the Vogue of Etiquette. It only sold a million
copies.
Her kids grown up, she came home to New Jersey, and started got
all
to get involved in town politics -- as the first woman member of
the Bernardsville Borough Council. She ran for the state
Assembly -- and won, and later served as State Consumer Affairs
Director.
At 64, at an age when most people are settling down to enjoy
life's rewards, Mrs. Fenwick was elected to Congress. She became
known as the champion of the underdog -- for everyone from
migrant workers in South Jersey to oppressed people all around
the world.
I was privileged to know Congresswoman Fenwick -- she helped
run my campaign here in 1980. I never knew anyone who was as
dedicated to public service.
You may not immediately think of Millicent Fenwick as a
feminist, but no one worked harder for equality. Once, a state
legislator questioned Mrs. Fenwick about her support for the ERA.
He said -- "I've always thought of women as kissable, cuddly and
2
smelling good. Mrs. Fenwick replied: "That's the way I feel
about men, too. I only hope for your sake that you haven't been
disappointed as often as I have."//
Now, Millicent Fenwick lived during interesting times. She
saw a world transformed outside our borders -- and she helped
lead that transformation.
But while these remarkable changes took place overseas, here
in America, a quieter and even more profound revolution has been
unfolding -- and she was part of that too.
I'm talking about a move toward human justice at its most
basic level -- the movement toward equality of the sexes. A
movement that cuts across social and ideological boundaries --
and touches all of our lives.
Of course, before we all get carried away with the
congratulations, we have to admit -- there's we still have as a long ways to go.
Some of you may know the story of the three business
executives -- maybe they were from AT&T -- who passed away and
went to heaven.
St. Peter greeted them at the Pearly Gates, and informed
them that although they had lived their lives nobly and with
compassion -- there would be one final test before they would be
allowed to enter.
The first executive -- a man -- came forward and St. Peter
asked him to spell the word: "GOD." He did, and the gates opened
before him.
3
The second executive -- also a man -- came forward and was
asked to spell the word "HOLY." He did, and the gates opened
again.
Then the third executive came forward -- a woman. Her voice
rising ever so slightly, she said: "All my life I had to work
twice as hard as men to get ahead, and now I get here and find
there's one more test. I can't believe it." And St. Peter said:
"I sympathize with you. Spell "Czechoslovakia."
Now, I did not come here today as just one more man,
lecturing women about how tough it is.
I'm here as a President whose policies affect your lives.
And I want to explain what we're doing so that you and your
daughters won't have to spell "Czechoslovakia."
Last week, I unveiled my Agenda for American Renewal --
answers to the questions American men and women are asking around
their Kitchen
your dining tables. The Agenda is a comprehensive strategy to
guarantee that by the early part of the 21st century -- America
will have the world's first $10 trillion economy.
I have several priorities -- most are well underway. I want
to open new markets for the products who produce. I want to
create new schools for a new age. I want sharpen businesses'
competitive edge -- by providing relief from taxation, regulation
and litigation. I want reach out to all Americans, and
dramatically reduce the size and scope of the federal government.
These is my agenda. But today, I'm here to talk about a
4
special priority on my agenda -- providing economic security for
American working men and women.
The first order of business, as I said, is to admit that
there is still unfinished business. Equal pay for equal work is
still an unattained goal It's unacceptable that women earn only
2/3rd's of every dollar men earn. And most working women do more
than equal work -- both on the job, and at home. That's not
acceptable either.
Taking care of home and kids is a full-time job, and I know
a lot of you are doing it on top of working here full-time.
And many women are trying to do it all alone. Divorce
happens. I know it from my own family -- my own daughter. I've
seen what single moms are up against doing 24 hours work in a 16 24
36
hour day.
The 'quiet majority' of America in the 90's -- may well be
those hardworking single moms -- who juggle career, school, kids
and home -- and somehow manage to get it all done, and done well.
As a nation, we must confront these challenges squarely.
menstoo?
Working American women today need government policies flexible
enough to help them meet their responsibilities at home.
M
That means child care. It means family-leave policies. It
means child support enforcement. It means cheaper health care.
Both candidates in this election are talking about these
problems. But we offer entirely different solutions.
The other side puts the faith in government. On issue after
issue, the solution comes down to giving more power to government
5
-- so that government can help you. I put my faith you, and
giving you the tools to help you in your life.
The other sides ideas sound very enticing. But you have to
ask. Will they work for me? Will they make a difference in my
life?
I refer you to a story about Kaiser Wilhem the Second of
Germany. He was sort of a 'man's man' -- which I guess means he
was the kind of Kaiser who -- when he got lost -- would refuse to
stop and ask anybody for directions.
Well, the Kaiser got it in his head that he could design a
better battleship. So he drew up the plans and sent them to the
Naval shipyard for the experts to study.
The experts said the Kaiser's battleship-desigr was indeed
the finest on earth. It would be as fast as a speedboat. Its
range and power would overwhelm the enemy. And everybody on
board would feel like they were sitt lounging in a living room.
There was only one teeny, tiny problem. If the boat were
built, and actually placed in water -- it would sink.
Well, I'm afraid a lot of policies like that have been
coming out of Capitol Hill the past few years. Policies with
wonderful sounding titles -- (like ---- ) all designed to use
government to achieve great things on behalf of working men and
women. But look closely, and I suggest that they just might not
float in water.
Let me give you some examples, you can decide for yourself.
6
This week, Congress sent me what's called -- "family leave
legislation. This bill has the noble goal of allowing a mom or
dad to leave a job -- without pay -- in order to take care of a
new baby, or maybe care for a sick parent. The bill would
require companies to keep the job open for three months, until
came
the employee could come back to work.
I believe family leave is necessary, and important.
A lot of progressive companies already offering it on their
own. Recently, 11 of the nation's largest corporations, combined
with over 100 small businesses -- to voluntarily put in place
programs that can help employees care for children and other
dependents. AT&T is at the forefront of this effort. Your
family-leave policy, in fact, should serve as a model for others
companies.
The bill I was sent this week would mandate that all
companies with more than 50 employees provide family leave. I
also
have an alternative, it would give all businesses incentives --
in the form of tax credits -- to offer family leave.
It's an election year, so Congressional leaders have sent me
their mandatory approach -- and dared me not to sign it. I want
en bills
to explain why I can't support this approach
First of all, our economy is sluggish. Think of the small
ad agency the other companies suppliers many of you work with. They are
cutting budgets and payrolls to the bone, and I don't want to
give them any more federal mandates, that will force them to lay
off people.
7
You might say -- you're protecting the rich. But you know
that entrepreneurs aren't all rich (( In fact, more and more women
are starting their own small businesses. By the year 2,000, arenticks Women
women will run the majority of small businesses.
))
Here's another point to consider. You and I know, the best
benefit packages come from the largest employers. To give you an
Clinton
example, 45 percent of companies with over 5,000 workers already
offer some form of child care benefit, just 11 percent of
facture BORING!
companies with 100 or fewer employers.
The other approach exempts the smallest employers, so almost
40 percent of all workers wouldn't get family leave. My approach
offers incentives to every company, and it will cover 20 times as
many employees -- 20 times as many moms and dads.
I don't think you'll hear these kind of details discussed in
the media. But I'm going to take a stand. Because to me, it's
not worth putting politics ahead or social progress.
Let me talk about another job-related issue -- something
called the class ceiling.
One reason so many women are turning into entrepreneurs is
because they've bumped up against a glass ceiling. Companies are
promoting women to top positions in greater numbers, but not fast
enough. So a lot of talented women going into business for
themselves.
8
This isn't just a corporate problem, we're seeing the same
thing happen in government. Dr. Stewart talked about our record
in of promoting women -- and I'm proud of it But I'm especially
proud -- that we've put talented women in positions where don't
you ordinarily
expect to see them.
Like Lynn Martin at the Labor Department. Lynn doesn't want
any special opportunity that a man won't get she wants to
right to fail -- by the same standards as any male Labor
Secretary. ????
I'm also proud of Carla Hills. There's an old saying -- 3333
anyone who can figure out who can get the jelly beans -- the six-
year-old or the three-year-old -- can negotiate any treaty to
mankind.
not coming
Carla Hills raised a family. And I don't know if that's
where she learned her negotiating skills. But as American
???
workers, I wouldn't rather have anyone else on our side of the
negotiating table.
We want to see the Lynn Martin's and Carla Hills of
corporate America also succeed. That's why Secretary Martin and
a
Pat Saiki have made shattering the glass ceiling top priority.
They're She's helping hundreds of business large and small -- confront
this issue. She has made sure that companies receive your tax
dollars -- with federal contacts -- career opportunities must be
equally available to women and minorities.
(need line)
?
9
We have a whole series of policies we've developed, some
that directly help working women with pressing needs and some
that help them indirectly, by strengthening the marketplace.
Child care, for example, was a big issue in the 1988
campaign. We've made big progress on it.
Congress wanted a government-run child care program, with
dozens of mandated policies. But I pushed them to go in a
different direction. I heard from parents who wanted the right
to choose the best child care for their children. It might be a
public school, or it might be a church or an aunt's house. The
point is -- you want to make the choice, not to told where to
take your kid by some county clerk
Congress wanted to give the money directly to public
agencies, and limit your alternatives. I fought for giving
vouchers directly to parents, who could use them to choose the
best care, regardless of who provided it. Our way was better,
and we won.
Now we're fighting a similar battle over health care. Once
again, the other side wants the government to solve the problem,
either by directly taking over our health care system, or
indirectly, by getting involved in setting prices. It sounds
appealing, but it will end up meaning longer lines and less
flexibility for you and your families.
I offer an entirely different approach. Give companies
incentives to provide coverage and use competition to drive down
costs. I want to get at the root cause of rising prices,
10
including skyrocketing malpractice insurance. I want to let
small businesses pool their coverage, so they can get the same
kind of efficiencies as the AT&T's of the world. My plan will
control costs, extend coverage to 30 million Americans who can't
afford it today, and build on our system -- which already
provides the highest quality care in the world. Again, I believe
my approach is right.
We have other priorities. Here's something that really
bothers me. 5 million women in America are entitled to child
support from ex-husbands. Know how many get all they are
a
entitled to? Just about half. I think it's crazy that fathers
a
his
in Pennsylvania may be shopping for new cars while their ex-
wife in New Jersey is struggling to shop for food. I want to use
the law to get to every deadbeat dad and say -- fulfill you
duty./ /
There's a lot more. I could read a laundry list of we've
accomplished and want to get done for working men and women.
even
We've made it so you can take a pension from job to job.
But the exact details of every program aren't as important
as the philosophy behind them. A philosophy that says that
ultimately -- the only way to make people more secure -- is to
give them more power over the decisions that affect their jobs
and family budgets not the government
If we're going to use the power of government to move us
forward, we need to use the power of government to help, not
hinder. Not to add new barriers to opportunity, but to remove
11
old ones. Business barriers that burden new and small
enterprises, and social and cultural and legal barriers that make
working women's lives tougher.
(Brief pause.)
I started by talking about the economic challenge before
America, and I'd like to close the same way.
Because ultimately, that's this election is about. Who has
the ideas -- that can help America win the global economic
competition.
When you stop to consider all the challenges we face in this
nation, don't ignore some of the advantages.
Let me give you just one statistic. Here in America, we
send more young people to college -- than any other nation. More
than twice as many as Germany, and more than twice as many as
Japan.
Basically, we have twice as many educated people than our
competitors, because American now have an equal chance.
The changes of the past few decades have improved the lives
of women. But more than that, they have improved our society.
They have made us far stronger, as we face the economic
challenges ahead.
The policies I've outlined today, are designed to build on
those strengths. To let us take advantage of the talents of
every American, by making their work and home more safe and
secure.
12
I have 7 granddaughters. The oldest is Noelle, (who ( It's 15.
interesting for me to compare the world she enters today, with
the world Barbara entered many years ago.
If they want to go out to Texas and start an oil company,
like I did, my granddaughters can do it. If they want to write
the Vogue Book of Etiquette -- they can do that to. And at the
same time, they can raise children of their own.
I'm delighted with the opportunity my granddaughters are
facing, but they and my grandsons will only be able to take
advantage of this opportunity, if America remains the most
dynamic, free place on this great earth.
I think the path to economic security is with less
government, less regulation, more freedom and respect for
families and individuals -- like the policies I've outlined
today.
So what I offer in this election is pretty simple. A new
path to a Renewed America, based on some fundamentally old
values. Some values that I think can build a safer and more
secure America -- for all of us -- and our kids.
Thanks for listening. And God bless the United States of
America.
13
Call Bob Grady
494- Steve- 4457
This week, Congress sent me what's called -- "family leave
legislation. This bill has the noble goal of allowing a mom or
dad to leave a job -- without pay -- in order to take care of a
new baby, or maybe care for a sick parent. The bill would
require companies to keep the job open for three months, until
the employee could come back to work.
I believe family leave is necessary, and important.
A lot of progressive companies already offering it on their
own. Recently, 11 of the nation's largest corporations, combined
with over 100 small businesses -- to voluntarily put in place
programs that can help employees care for children and other
dependents. AT&T is at the forefront of this effort. Your
family-leave policy, in fact, should serve as a model for others
companies.
The bill I was sent this week would mandate that all
companies with more than 50 employees provide family leave. I
have an alternative, it would give all businesses incentives --
in the form of tax credits -- to offer family leave.
It's an election year, so Congressional leaders have sent me
their mandatory approach -- and dared me not to sign it. I want
to explain why I can't support this approach.
First of all, our economy is sluggish. Think of the small
ad agency, the other suppliers many of you work with. They are
cutting budgets and payrolls to the bone, and I don't want to
give them any more federal mandates, that will force them to lay
off people.
7
You might say -- you're protecting the rich. But you know
that entrepreneurs aren't all rich. In fact, more and more women
are starting their own small businesses. By the year 2,000,
women will run the majority of small businesses.
Here's another point to consider. You and I know, the best
benefit packages come from the largest employers. To give you an
example, 45 percent of companies with over 5,000 workers already
offer some form of child care benefit, just 11 percent of
companies with 100 or fewer employers.
The other approach exempts the smallest employers, so almost
40 percent of all workers wouldn't get family leave. My approach
offers incentives to every company, and it will cover 20 times as
many employees -- 20 times as many moms and dads.
I don't think you'll hear these kind of details discussed in
the media. But I'm going to take a stand. Because to me, it's
not worth putting politics ahead or social progress.
Let me talk about another job-related issue -- something
called the class ceiling.
One reason so many women are turning into entrepreneurs is
because they've bumped up against a glass ceiling. Companies are
promoting women to top positions in greater numbers, but not fast
enough. So a lot of talented women going into business for
themselves.
8
This isn't just a corporate problem, we're seeing the same
thing happen in government. Dr. Stewart talked about our record
in promoting women -- and I'm proud of it. But I'm especially
proud -- that we've put talented women in positions where don't
expect to see them.
Like Lynn Martin at the Labor Department. Lynn doesn't want
any special opportunity that a man won't get -- she wants to
right to fail -- by the same standards as any male Labor
Secretary.
I'm also proud of Carla Hills. There's an old saying --
anyone who can figure out who can get the jelly beans -- the six-
year-old or the three-year-old -- can negotiate any treaty to
mankind.
Carla Hills raised a family. And I don't know if that's
where she learned her negotiating skills. But as American
workers, I wouldn't rather have anyone else on our side of the
negotiating table.
We want to see the Lynn Martin's and Carla Hills of
corporate America also succeed. That's why Secretary Martin and
Pat Saiki have made shattering the glass ceiling top priority.
She's helping hundreds of business -- large and small -- confront
this issue. She has made sure that companies receive your tax
dollars -- with federal contacts -- career opportunities must be
equally available to women and minorities. (need line)
9
We have a whole series of policies we've developed, some
that directly help working women with pressing needs and some
that help them indirectly, by strengthening the marketplace.
Child care, for example, was a big issue in the 1988
campaign. We've made big progress on it.
Congress wanted a government-run child care program, with
dozens of mandated policies. But I pushed them to go in a
different direction. I heard from parents who wanted the right
to choose the best child care for their children. It might be a
public school, or it might be a church or an aunt's house. The
point is -- you want to make the choice, not to told where to
take your kid by some county clerk.
Congress wanted to give the money directly to public
agencies, and limit your alternatives. I fought for giving
vouchers directly to parents, who could use them to choose the
best care, regardless of who provided it. Our way was better,
and we won.
Now we're fighting a similar battle over health care. Once
again, the other side wants the government to solve the problem,
either by directly taking over our health care system, or
indirectly, by getting involved in setting prices. It sounds
appealing, but it will end up meaning longer lines and less
flexibility for you and your families.
I offer an entirely different approach. Give companies
incentives to provide coverage and use competition to drive down
costs. I want to get at the root cause of rising prices,
10
including skyrocketing malpractice insurance. I want to let
small businesses pool their coverage, so they can get the same
kind of efficiencies as the AT&T's of the world. My plan will
control costs, extend coverage to 30 million Americans who can't
afford it today, and build on our system -- which already
provides the highest quality care in the world. Again, I believe
my approach is right.
We have other priorities. Here's something that really
bothers me. 5 million women in America are entitled to child
support from ex-husbands. Know how many get all they are
entitled to? Just about half. I think it's crazy that fathers
in Pennsylvania may be shopping for new cars, while their ex-
wife in New Jersey is struggling to shop for food. I want to use
the law to get to every deadbeat dad and say -- fulfill you
duty. //
There's a lot more. I could read a laundry list of we've
accomplished and want to get done for working men and women.
We've made it so you can take a pension from job to job.
But the exact details of every program aren't as important
as the philosophy behind them. A philosophy that says that
ultimately -- the only way to make people more secure -- is to
give them more power over the decisions that affect their jobs
and family budgets -- not the government.
If we're going to use the power of government to move us
forward, we need to use the power of government to help, not
hinder. Not to add new barriers to opportunity, but to remove
11
old ones. Business barriers that burden new and small
enterprises, and social and cultural and legal barriers that make
working women's lives tougher.
(Brief pause.)
I started by talking about the economic challenge before
America, and I'd like to close the same way.
Because ultimately, that's this election is about. Who has
the ideas -- that can help America win the global economic
competition.
When stop to consider all the challenges we face in this
nation, don't ignore some of the advantages.
Let me give you just one statistic. Here in America, we
send more young people to college -- than any other nation. More
than twice as many as Germany, and more than twice as many as
Japan.
Basically, we have twice as many educated people than our
competitors, because American now have an equal chance.
The changes of the past few decades have improved the lives
of women. But more than that, they have improved our society.
They have made us far stronger, as we face the economic
challenges ahead.
The policies I've outlined today, are designed to build on
those strengths. To let us take advantage of the talents of
every American, by making their work and home more safe and
secure.
12
I have ( ) granddaughters. The oldest is ( ) It's
interesting for me to compare the world she enters today, with
the world Barbara entered many years ago.
If they want to go out to Texas and start an oil company,
like I did, my granddaughters can do it. If they want to write
the Vogue Book of Etiquette -- they can do that to. And at the
same time, they can raise children of their own.
I'm delighted with the opportunity my granddaughters are
facing, but they and my grandsons will only be able to take
advantage of this opportunity, if America remains the most
dynamic, free place on this great earth.
I think the path to economic security is with less
government, less regulation, more freedom and respect for
families and individuals -- like the policies I've outlined
today.
So what I offer in this election is pretty simple. A new
path to a Renewed America, based on some fundamentally old
values. Some values that I think can build a safer and more
secure America -- for all of us -- and our kids.
Thanks for listening. And God bless the United States of
America.
13
(Askew/Provost/Aarhus)
September 16, 1992
2:00 P.M.
WOMEN
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
AT&T WOMEN'S GATHERING
BASKING RIDGE, NEW JERSEY
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1992
2:40 P.M.
Thank you, Dr. (Mary) Stewart, and good afternoon, everyone.
May I say that it's good to see half my cabinet up here in
New Jersey -- maybe we can get some work done.
I want to recognize Secretary Lynn Martin, Ambassador Carla
Hills, Director ( ) Chao, Congressman Dick Zimmer, your great
former Governor Tom Kean and, of course, Chairman Bob Allen.
Thanks allowing me to visit this impressive facility.
I remember standing in the Rose Garden just last year, and
awarding a Presidential Citation to (Bob Allen), honoring all of
you for your world-class work in reducing CFC air pollutants.
It's good to be here and see first-hand the folks who made it
happen.
But there's also something a little sad about being in this
neck of New Jersey today.
You lost one of your most remarkable citizens just before
dawn Wednesday, when Congresswoman Millicent Fenwick died, at 82.
Millicent Fenwick was an incredible person -- whose life was
spent climbing over barriers -- pipe in hand.
1
She was born to a life of privilege. But in the early 30's,
her marriage split up and she moved to New York alone, deep in
debt, with two kids, and no education.
She wanted to get a job selling stockings at a department
store, but they turned her away -- she hadn't earned a high
school diploma. She finally landed a job modeling at Harper's
Bazaar, then worked her way over to Vogue Magazine, where she
ended up writing the Vogue of Etiquette. It only sold a million
copies.
Her kids grown up, she came home to New Jersey, and started
to get involved in town politics -- as the first woman member of
the Bernardsville Borough Council. She ran for the state
Assembly -- and won, and later served as State Consumer Affairs
Director.
At 64, at an age when most people are settling down to enjoy
life's rewards, Mrs. Fenwick was elected to Congress. She became
known as the champion of the underdog -- for everyone from
migrant workers in South Jersey to oppressed people all around
the world.
I was privileged to know Congresswoman Fenwick -- she helped
run my campaign here in 1980. I never knew anyone who was as
dedicated to public service.
You may not immediately think of Millicent Fenwick as a
feminist, but no one worked harder for equality. Once, a state
legislator questioned Mrs. Fenwick about her support for the ERA.
He said -- "I've always thought of women as kissable, cuddly and
2
smelling good. Mrs. Fenwick replied: "That's the way I feel
about men, too. I only hope for your sake that you haven't been
disappointed as often as I have. "//
Now, Millicent Fenwick lived during interesting times. She
saw a world transformed outside our borders -- and she helped
lead that transformation.
But while these remarkable changes took place overseas, here
in America, a quieter and even more profound revolution has been
unfolding -- and she was part of that too.
I'm talking about a move toward human justice at its most
basic level -- the movement toward equality of the sexes. A
movement that cuts across social and ideological boundaries --
and touches all of our lives.
of course, before we all get carried away with the
congratulations, we have to admit -- we still have a ways to go.
Some of you may know the story of the three business
executives -- maybe they were from AT&T -- who passed away and
went to heaven.
St. Peter greeted them at the Pearly Gates, and informed
them that although they had lived their lives nobly and with
compassion -- there would be one final test before they would be
allowed to enter.
The first executive -- a man -- came forward and St. Peter
asked him to spell the word: "GOD." He did, and the gates opened
before him.
3
The second executive -- also a man -- came forward and was
asked to spell the word "HOLY." He did, and the gates opened
again.
Then the third executive came forward -- a woman. Her voice
rising ever so slightly, she said: "All my life I had to work
twice as hard as men to get ahead, and now I get here and find
there's one more test. I can't believe it." And St. Peter said:
"I sympathize with you. Spell "Czechoslovakia."
Now, I did not come here today as just one more man,
lecturing women about how tough it is.
I'm here as a President whose policies affect your lives.
And I want to explain what we're doing so that you and your
daughters won't have to spell "Czechoslovakia."
Last week, I unveiled my Agenda for American Renewal --
answers to the questions American men and women are asking around
your dining tables. The Agenda is a comprehensive strategy to
guarantee that by the early part of the 21st century -- America
will have the world's first $10 trillion economy.
I have several priorities -- most are well underway. I want
to open new markets for the products who produce. I want to
create new schools for a new age. I want sharpen businesses'
competitive edge -- by providing relief from taxation, regulation
and litigation. I want reach out to all Americans, and
dramatically reduce the size and scope of the federal government.
These is my agenda. But today, I'm here to talk about a
4
special priority on my agenda -- providing economic security for
American working men and women.
The first order of business, as I said, is to admit that
there is still unfinished business. Equal pay for equal work is
still an unattained goal. It's unacceptable that women earn only
2/3rd's of every dollar men earn. And most working women do more
than equal work -- both on the job, and at home. That's not
acceptable either.
Taking care of home and kids is a full-time job, and I know
a lot of you are doing it on top of working here full-time.
And many women are trying to do it all alone. Divorce
happens. I know it from my own family -- my own daughter. I've
seen what single moms are up against doing 24 hours work in a 16
hour day.
The 'quiet majority' of America in the 90's -- may well be
those hardworking single moms -- who juggle career, school, kids
and home -- and somehow manage to get it all done.
As a nation, we must confront these challenges squarely.
Working American women today need government policies flexible
enough to help them meet their responsibilities at home.
That means child care. It means family leave policies. It
means child support enforcement. It means cheaper health care.
Both candidates in this election are talking about these
problems. But we offer entirely different solutions.
The other side puts the faith in government. On issue after
issue, the solution comes down to giving more power to government
5
-- so that government can help you. I put my faith you, and
giving you the tools to help you in your life.
The other sides ideas sound very enticing. But you have to
ask. Will they work for me? Will they make a difference in my
life?
I refer you to a story about Kaiser Wilhem the Second of
Germany. He was sort of a 'man's man' -- which I guess means he
was the kind of Kaiser who -- when he got lost -- would refuse to
stop and ask anybody for directions.
Well, the Kaiser got it in his head that he could design a
better battleship. So he drew up the plans and sent them to the
Naval shipyard for the experts to study.
The experts said the Kaiser's battleship-design was indeed
the finest on earth. It would be as fast as a speedboat. Its
range and power would overwhelm the enemy. And everybody on
board would feel like they were sitting in a living room.
There was only one teeny, tiny problem. If the boat were
built, and actually placed in water -- it would sink.
Well, I'm afraid a lot of policies like that have been
coming out of Capitol Hill the past few years. Policies with
wonderful sounding titles -- (like ---- ) all designed to use
government to achieve great things on behalf of working men and
women. But look closely, and I suggest that they just might not
float in water.
Let me give you some examples, you can decide for yourself.
6
(Askew/Provost/Aarhus)
September 16, 1992
2:00 P.M.
cochains
WOMEN
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS:
AT&T WOMEN'S GATHERING
BASKING RIDGE, NEW JERSEY
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1992
2:40 P.M.
B
Thank you, Dr. (Mary) Stewart, and good afternoon, everyone.
Secretary Lynn Martin, Ambassador Carla Hills, Director
Chao, Congressman Zimmer Governor Tom Kean and Chairman Bob
Allen,
thanks
for
the
invitation.
+
Speakerlofthe
Fst. St Senator Donald DiFrancesco
(Res, of Senate)
Assembly)
when Gov. isatofstate, Acting
I remember standing in the White House Rose Garden just last GOV.
my Environments Conservation Challenge
there
year, and awarding a Presidential Citation to AT&T on behalf of
Marla Domahue
(insert person), honoring all of you for your world-class work in
OPL
reducing CFC air pollutants. So it's good to be here and see
x7845
first-hand the folks who made it happen.
But there's also something a little sad about being in this
neck of New Jersey today.
X
You lost one of your most remarkable citizens just before
dawn Wednesday, when Congresswoman Millicent Fenwick died, at 82.
Millicent Fenwick was an incredible person -- whose life was
spent climbing over barriers, pipe in hand.
She was born to a life of privilege. But in 1938, her
marriage split up and she moved to New York alone, with two kids,
cut off from her family.
President's Environment
Cons. Challenge (Citation)
Award
did this before
divorce
She got a job as a model for at Harper's Bazaar then an Art
writer and an
Editor at Vogue for 14 years because those were about the only
jobs women could excel at in those days
Her kids grown up, she came home to New Jersey, and started
to get involved in town politics. She ran for the state Assembly
-- and won, and later served as State Consumer Affairs Director.
At 64, at an age when most people are settling down to enjoy
life's rewards, Mrs. Fenwick ran for Congress -- and won. She
became known as the champion of the underdog -- from migrant
workers in South Jersey to oppressed people all around the world.
I'm grateful to Congresswoman Fenwick because she helped run
my campaign in New Jersey in 1980 -- but more than that, she gave
selflessly to the public interest. One example. She always took
Amtrak back home to New Jersey every weekend -- because she
didn't want to waste taxpayer's money by flying. (My guess is
she probably also got a lot of work done -- she didn't have to
worry about running into too many Congressmen on the train.)
You don't always think of Millicent Fenwick as a feminist,
but no one worked harder for equality. Once, a state legislator
in NewJersey
here questioned Mrs. Fenwick about her support for the Equal
UGHI
Rights Amendment. He said -- "I've always thought of women as
kissable, cuddly and smelling good." Mrs. Fenwick replied:
"That's the way I feel about men, too. I only hope for your sake
that you haven't been disappointed as often as I have."
2
Now, Millicent Fenwick lived and led during interesting
times. She saw a world transformed outside our borders -- and
she helped influence that transformation.
But while these remarkable changes took place overseas, here
in America, a quieter and even more profound revolution has been
unfolding -- and she was part of that too.
I'm talking about a move toward human justice at its most
basic level -- the movement toward equality of the sexes. A
movement that cuts across social, ideological, and national
boundaries -- that touches all of our lives.
Of course, before we all get carried away with the high
fives, and proclaim that the Berlin Wall between men and women
has fallen -- we need to admit that we still have a ways to go.
Some of you may know the story of the three business
executives -- maybe they were from AT&T -- who passed away and
went to heaven.
St. Peter greeted them at the Pearly Gates, and informed
them that although they had lived their lives nobly and with
compassion -- there would be one final test before they would be
allowed to enter.
The first executive -- a man -- came forward and St. Peter
asked him to spell the word: "GOD." He did, and the gates opened
before him.
The second executive -- also a man -- came forward and was
asked to spell the word "HOLY." He did, and the gates opened
again.
3
Then the third executive came forward -- a woman. Her voice
rising ever so slightly, she said: "All my life I had to work
twice as hard as men to get ahead, and now I get here and find
there's one more test. I can't believe it." And St. Peter said:
"I sympathize with you. Spell "Czechoslovakia."
Now, I did not come here today as just one more man,
lecturing women about how tough it is to be you. You can get
enough of that on Donahue.
I'm here as a President whose policies affect the quality of
your life. And I want to explain what we're doing so that you
and grand -daughters
American
and your daughters won't have to spell "Czechoslovakia" -- so we
can X lift American women up to your rightful place as economic,
canhold their
^
social and legal equals.
Last week, I unveiled my Agenda for American Renewal, a
spch,
comprehensive set of answers to the economic questions facing
DetEconary
America today. It is a plan to guarantee that by the early part
of the 21st century -- America will have the world's first $10
trillion economy.
I have several priorities -- many are well underway. I want
to promote free trade, revolutionize our schools, sharpen our
businesses' competitive edge, reach out to all Americans, and
dramatically reduce the size and scope of the federal government.
But today, I'm here to talk about another priority --
providing economic security for American working men and women.
The first order of business, as I said, is to admit that
there is still unfinished business. Not only is equal pay still
4
just a lofty goal -- the 'equal work' part of the equation isn't
true yet, either.
Taking care of home and kids is a full-time job in itself,
and I know a lot of you are doing it on top of working here full-
time.
And you may be trying to do it all alone. Divorce happens
Shop Rite
Single mothers do struggle. You drive your minivans to Safeway
GrandUnton
pick up the kids at school, take them to church, the doctor,
stores
soccer practice -- cook and clean and coach and coddle -- and by
the end of the day, you're so tired, that you can't even stay
Cutper
eleven
awake for the ten-o'clock news.
Marla
Manapue OPL
The 'silent majority' of America in the 1990s -- may well be
that great, quiet backbone of dedicated, uncomplaining women --
who juggle career, school, kids and home -- and somehow manage to
get it all done with little or no help.
We as a nation need to face this challenge square in the
eye: Working AmericanSwomen today need workplace policies
flexible enough to stretch and fit extraordinary conditions at
home.
Now, how do we do this? That's a big question in this
election.
One approach is to weigh in with big government. Set up
agencies, pass heavy-handed laws, wind up the bureaucrats, and
try to legislate our way to a perfect world. It sounds great.
But you have to ask -- will it work?
5
William
empiror
I refer you to a story about Kaiser Wilhem the Second of
Germany. He was sort of a man's man -- which I guess means he
was the kind of Kaiser who -- when he got lost -- would refuse to
stop and ask anybody for directions.
Well, the Kaiser Bill got it in his head that he could design a
better battleship. So he drew up the plans and sent them to the
architect
him
Naval shipyard for the experts to study.
the anchitect
his
And when they sent back their report, it said the Kaiser's
battleship design was indeed the finest on earth. It would be
Stetl existing bad/leship
faster and quicker than anything in the water. Its range and
power would overwhelm the enemy. And everybody on board, from
Stet Commander
the lowest deckhand to the Admiral, would enjoy a comfort far
above the standards at the time.
naval architect
According to the shipyard, there was only one teeny, tiny
problem. If the boat were built
and placed in water
it
would sink like lead.
Well, I'm afraid a lot of policies like that have been
coming out of Capitol Hill the past few years. Policies with
and Medical Leave Actof 1992
Clert's office 2226
wonderful titles -- like the (Family Support and Working Women
Act) -- all designed to achieve great things on behalf of working
7
men and women. But look closely, and you see that they just
might not float in water.
Consider what's called the family-leave bill that was sent
to me this week. It's well-meaning, and has the noble goal of
Hanns
allowing a parent to leave a job -- without pay -- in order to
healthcare
take care of a new baby, or other pressing family need. The bill
6
for up to 12weeks
would require companies to keep that job open for up to a year,
Hanns
bill
Cong
x65634
so the employee could come back to work.
kind of
A lot of progressive companies already offer this family
leave plan and AT&T is one of them. Your family-leave policy, in
fact, should serve as a model for others companies; it's one of
the most enlightened I've ever seen.
AT&T started this program voluntarily. But what about the
woman down the street, running her ad agency on a tight budget,
with 50 or so employees? What if the Federal government walked
in and said to her, all right, this is law. You've got to offer
family leave.
Think about what might happen the next time a job opened up.
isnot we
Let's say there are two qualified candidates. One, a man. The
-
This the bill.
other, a woman of childbearing age. Equally qualified -- who do
1
on itwas 5m. hich mm in bus., Ablc most run
you think is going to get the job? Who's the small business
going to count on to stick around -- and not leave for a year to
have a baby?
and
by
Well, folks -- this is where the ship sinks -- and the businesses
drown.
people on board get hurt.
100!<
And that's why I vetoed Congress' family-leave bill this
week:
I
think it's well-meaning -- but not well-thought-out.
W
Sort of like the Kaiser's battleship.
And two days ago, I sent back to Congress an alternative
plan that not only looks good on paper, but also will float.
Hanns
x6563
My proposal doesn't force business men and women to comply.
Instead, it gives them incentives -- in the form of tax credits -
7
- to offer family leave. It's flexible, and it'll help 80% of
workers
who arein
the workplaces in this country ^ the small and mid-sized
Hanns x6563
businesses that otherwise couldn't afford a family-leave program.
Now they can provide a program without having to lay off people
to pay for it.
Understand, this isn't an attempt to let wealthy business
owners off the hook from doing what is right for society. It's
Marla
simply recognizing the fact that more and more, women
says
trans,
Sm.Bup,
entrepreneurs are starting small businesses. These businesses
And
doesn't
provide two out of three new jobs in the country -- and the Labor
and Small Business Administration
work
Martin Saiki
Department says that by the year 2000, half of them will be owned
sec Pat corf.
by women.
press/11/92
One reason so many women are turning into entrepreneurs is
because they've bumped up against the glass ceiling that blocks
their progress in so many companies. (need to humanize this --
example) Big companies are promoting women to higher positions
than they used to, but not fast enough. So a lot of talented
women are leaving and going into business for themselves.
That's why Secretary Martin has been working with Small
Business Administrator Pat Saiki -- to shatter that ceiling.
They're She making a special effort with small business, because like I
said, that's where two out of three new jobs are created. (this
is weak, need more)
We have a whole network of policies we've developed during
my administration, some that directly help working families women with
8
pressing needs and some that help them indirectly, by
strengthening the marketplace.
Child care, for example, was a big issue in the 1988
campaign. But you don't hear much about it this year, because
Hanns
it's not an issue anymore. My Child-Care Act became law in 1990
-- and I'm proud of how it happened. Bipartisan effor?
You know how difficult it can be choosing proper care for
your children. You can't tell about a facility from one
interview. You go on friends' recommendations, but they aren't
always accurate. Then you see those awful shows on television,
that expose the abuses that can happen.
More than anything else, the parents I talk to want to be
free to explore different options in child care. Maybe it's a
program run by a local school. Or maybe it's a church program,
or having your son or daughter stay with a relative down the
street.
Before ^ bill Everyone was passed,
in Washington wanted to help low-and middle-income
parents with child care support. But my opponents wanted to give
the money directly to public agencies, and limit your
alternatives. I fought for giving vouchers directly to parents,
Hanns
who could use them to choose the best care, regardless of who
provided it. Our way was better, and we won.
Now we're fighting a similar battle over health care. Once
again, the other side wants the government to solve the problem,
either by directly taking over our health care system, or
indirectly, by getting involved in setting prices. It sounds
9
appealing, but it will end up meaning longer lines and less
flexibility for you and your families.
I offer an entirely different approach. Give companies
incentives to provide coverage on their own. Allow small
businesses to pool coverage, so that they can get the same kind
Hanns
likeyou doright here AT&T.
of breaks on costs as the AT&Ts of the world. My system protects
your freedom to choose your doctor and build on America's
strength -- for providing the best care in the world.
health
We have other priorities -- like child-support enforcement.
We're working on legislation that would crack down on "deadbeat
a
dads who don't support their kids. We want State governments to
A
cooperate so these deadbeats can't hide across State lines. We
want to track these guys down and make them pay.
needsbetter
What happens when you see opportunity across the street -- a
better job, with more pay? But you'll lose all your pension
benefits if you change companies. What do you do? Well, just
this summer, we signed a law that will let you take your pension
from job to job.
There's a lot more. I could read a laundry list of what
we've done and want to do, in job training and discrimination
protection, and on and on.
But what's important here isn't details. It's the big
picture that's emerging, and it's very complex.
We're talking about altering our society's very fabric. As
women's roles evolve, economic issues that seemed unrelated
10
before, start to weave together -- into the broader fabric of
family issues.
And if we're going to use the power of government to move us
forward, we need to use the power of government to help, not
hinder. Not to add new barriers to opportunity, but to remove
old ones. Business barriers that burden new and small
enterprises, and social and cultural and legal barriers that
prevent working women from becoming true first class citizens. men,too.
(Brief pause.)
You know, I didn't come here today to make a political
allow to make
speech, but I hope you'll excuse me one political comment.
Some
The polls show me behind today, but I have a quiet
confidence that come November 3rd -- I will win.
I don't say this because of any great confidence in my
ability to campaign eloquently. Frankly, while I think I've been
a good President -- I'm a lousy politician. I say I'm going to
win because I really believe my ideas are right for America.
I also have a feeling that I will be the last President
to come from the World War II generation -- whose experiences and
views were shaped by that great central event.
I happen to believe the values of that generation -- things
importance
like the primacy of family and the individual -- are worth
passing forward. That's why my policies reflect those values.
But I believe something else. I believe that in many ways,
the world has become a better place, and many of those ways
relate to women.
too
11
7/26
I have 75 granddaughters. The oldest is 115) It's
Noelle she's (b.19720)
interesting for me to compare the world she enters today, with
the world Barbara entered many years ago.
If they want to go out to Texas and start a business, my they
she stat my grands want
granddaughters will be able to do it on their own, not just by
tagging along beside a husband. If they want to edit Vogue
magazine, well, they can do that Mor.
or a lawyer or a research scientist
But if they want to be a surgeon, they can do that too. Our
society is so much richer because now, women can have contributed in
any way they want.
so many positive ways.
Example set for future generations
But the old values still matter, to women and men.
As I travel this great nation, I hear the anxiety. But I
still believe that Americans put their faith first in family and
friends -- just like in my day. I don't sense any groundswell to
^
have government solve all our problems -- because common sense
tells us it won't work.
So what I offer in this election is a new path to
opportunity, based on some fundamentally old values. Some values
that I think can build a safer and more secure America -- for all
of us -- and our kids.
Thanks for listening. God bless you. And God bless the
United States of America.
12
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 9-17-92 ; 6:46PM ;
2027752710-
2024566218:# 1
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
FAX COVER SHEET
651
Number of pages
(excluding cover sheet):
2
Date:
9/17
TO:
Steve Provest
Fax Number:
6218
Telephone:
FROM:
Fax Number:
tom Swilly
Telephone:
Time:
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 9-17-92 ; 6:46PM ;
2027752710->
2024566218:# 2
09/17/92 18:29
001
fx6218
store
Provert
From Child Support and Alimony: 1989 U.S. Department of Oensus
10 million mothers over age 15, where father was not living with the
child and mother
5.7 million mothers had a child support award
about .7 million cases did not require payments
5.0 million mothers were supposed to receive child support payments
About 2.5 million received the full amount they were due
This implies that roughly
4.3 million fathers weren't obligated to pay, and
About 2.5 million fathers falled to pay the full amount they
were obligated to pay
-SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 9-17-92 ; 6:47PM ;
2027752710-
2024566218:# 3
09/17/92
18:29
002
1
Child Support and Alimony: 1989
INTRODUCTION
HIGHLIGHTS
The number of women living with children whose
(The figures in parentheses denote DO-percent con-
father was absent from the home was 9,955,000 as of
fidence intervals.)
spring 1990, an increase of 39 percent in little more than
a decade.' Approximately 16 million children with absent
As of spring 1990, 10.0 (±0.4) million mothers age 15
fathers lived in these households. At present, 26 per-
and over were living with their own children under 21
cent of all children are born to unmarried mothers.2
years of age whose fathers were not living in the
There is much concem about the low incomes and
households. About 58 (±1.0) percent, or 5.7 (±0.3)
accompanying high poverty rate of these mothers, and
million of these women were awarded child support
the Impact upon their children.
payments.
This report presents Information on receipt of support
payments by women following divorce or separation
The poverty rate for all women with children from
and receipt of child support payments for children of
absent fathers was 32 (#2.7) percent in 1869.
never-married women. It includes information on: 1) the
Of the 5.7 (±0.3) million women awarded child sup-
award and actual receipt of child support payments by
part, 5.0 (±0.3) million women were supposed to
women for the benefit of their children, 2) alimony
receive child support payments in 1989. Of the women
receipt for their own support, and 3) the receipt and type
due payments, about half received the full amount
of property settlement for ever-diverced women. The
they were due. The remaining women were about
questions were not asked of men with children from an
equally divided between those receiving partial pay-
absent mother as the survey sample size is insufficient
ment, and those receiving nothing.
to provide reliable statistics for this universe.
The data presented in this report were derived from
Theichild support award rate for never-married women
supplements to the Current Population Survey (CPS).
was 24 (±3.3) percent as of spring 1990; the award
Estimates for 1990 are based on women 15 years old
rate for ever-married women was 72 (±2.2) percent.
and over. Estimates for 1986 and earlier years are
The majority of absent fathers, 55 (±2.1) percent,
based on women 18 years and over, Two eate of 1988
had visitation privileges with their children in 1890,
estimates are included In this report: one based on
another 7 ( 1.1.1) percent had joint custody, but 38
women 18 years and over that is consistent with earlier
(±2.0) percent had neither.
estimates, and another (1988r) based on women 14
years and over to facilitate 1988 through 1990 compar-
The mean (dverage) amount of child support received
isons.
in 1989 was $2,995 (±$158), not significantly differ-
The Bureau of the Census, under joint aponsorship
ent than 1987 after adjustment for inflation.
with the Department of Health and Human Services,
first conducted e survey specifically designed to obtain
The aggregate amount of child support received in
date on child support and alimony in the apring of 1979.
1989 was $11.2 (+$0.8) billion in 1989, 69 (±6.3)
The survey, with minor modifications, was subsequently
percent of the total $16.3 (±$1.0) billion due.
conducted In 1962, 1864, 1986, 1988, and 1990 by the
Health care benefits were included In the child sup-
Bureau of the Census and sponsored, in part, by the
port awards of 40 (±2.0) percent of mothers, how-
Office of Child Support Enforcement, Department or
ever, only two-thirds of trie absent fathers required to
Health and Human Services. Date from the earlier
do so actually provided them.
reports were presented in Current Population Reports,
Series P-23, Nos. 112, 140, 148, 154, and 107. Sum-
Of the 4.2 (±0.3) million women who were never
mary statistics from all previous surveys are presented
awarded child support payments, 64 (=22) percent
in tables A, B, E, F, K, and M of this report.
wanted an award but did not obtain it for various
reasons, 14 (±3.1) percent had final agreement
Women 16 years and older.
pending or had made other errangements, and the
*NOHS Monthly Vital Statistics Report, Vol, 38, No. 4, August
remaining 22 (±2.6) percent did not want a child
1890.
support award.
09/17/92
11:59
2025238232
OIPA WDC
003
WSJ
A
SPECIAL REPORT
THE CORPORATE WOMAN
THE GLASS
CEILING
Why women can't seem to break
the invisible barrier that
blocks them from the top jobs
By CAROL HYMOWITZ
also the most intangible. Men at the top feel
And TIMOTHY D. SCHELLHARDT
uncomfortable with women beside them
"Chief executives who are my age or even
005 AT THE NAMES and pictures in
& Little younger still feel uneasiness dealing
L
almost any corporate annual report. Or
with women," says David Marwell, 57. chief
executive officer of the Federal National
consider the silence when a male exec.
unive is asked to name the women who
Mortgage Association "They're much more
hold policy-making positions in his
comfortable dealing with other men." Top CI-
ecutives, Mr. Marwell adds, are often "quick
company.
Notice how far women haven't come in
to feel the woman who is tough isn't being
corporate America
womenly. while the woman who isn't tough
isn't worth having around."
More than # decade after large numbers
of women joined American corporations as
The result is that in spite of the extraor-
Irst-level managers, few have climbed as far
dinary progress women have made in terms
or 45 fast as their male colleagues. Today,
of numbers, a caste system of men at the top
and women lower down still prevails in cor-
women fill nearly a third of all thanagement
>ositions (up from 195 in 1972). but most are
porate America. Only 2% of 1,362 top execu-
tuck in jobs with little authority and rela-
tives surveyed by Korn/Ferry International
ively low pay. Even those few wothen who
last year were women Just one woman-
Katharine Graham of Washington Post Co.-
use steadily through the ranks eventually
reshed into an invisible barrier. The execu-
heads a Fortune 500 company. and she ac-
ive suite seemed within their grasp, but they
knowledges that she got the job because her
USE couldn't break through the glass ceiling.
family owns a controlling share of the corpo-
To these women managers. the road to
ration. Even women who seem very close to
be top seems blocked by corporate tradition
the top concede that they don't have a shot
nd prejudice- Women have 2 hard time find-
atsitting in the chief executive's chair.
1% the necessary sponsors in their compa-
"Where do CEOs come from?" asks Rosa-
ies Furthermore. they often are thought to
lie Welf. treasurer of International Paper Co.
** the right credentials and the appropriate
and the corporation's only female officer.
rive and commitment to make it to the
"Usually, they come out of the manufacturing
card room
and marketing ranks There are very few
Unlike traditional male managers, women
women in meaningful middle-management
so are thought to be too easily diverted
jobs in those functions and hardly any in
om their careers by family considerations.
senior management." What can Ms Wolf as-
One thing that worries top managers is that
pire to? "Maybe one day chief financial offi-
omen take leaves of absence," says Alonzo
cer," she says. That would make her the
cDonald, 57 years old, former White House
only woman in that post among the top
aff director and now head of Avenir Group,
200 U.S. companies
company that acquires troubled small busi-
The caste system undoubtedly will crum-
'sses "A month before battle, you can't af-
ble more quickly in some fields than in others. It
rd to have your general do that.'
may disintegrate within a decade in financial
Yet the biggest obstacle women face is
services, insurance and retailing. where women
make up a third to R half of all managers. It also
could happen relatively soon in banking and
004
09/17/92
12:02
2025238232
OIPA WDC
GLASS CEILING
marketing or research-Ms. Roberts was offered posts
she judged to be lateral moves.
The explanations she got often sounded blatantly
Continued from page /
serist, she says. One men above her in the hierarchy
5
told her "it was his problem. but he couldn't make
But in manufacturing and technology companies,
serious decisions if a woman was in the room." An-
women are # long way from the executive board room.
EST
Right DOW. women in most fields hit the barrier
$20
other boss suggested that management at Sears Roe-
back & Co_ which acquired Dean Witter in 1982,
well below the board-room level "It often happens
"couldn't deal with a woman in the director's posi-
when * woman approaches a key managerial position
tion."
where she'll affect company policy." says Nella Bark-
Ma. Roberts resigned from Dean Witter in August
ley, a New York management consultant At manufac-
The
to start her own marketing-consulting firm She says
turing companies, that can happen even before a
she could have reconciled herself to not getting &
woman reaches the general manager level On Wall
Power
promotion if the process had been fair. "What's so
Street, it happens when women approach the manag
mg director or partnership slot, and in banking, the
barrier usually appears when a woman becomes an
LEVELI
Pyramid
disturbing," the says, "is to know you have the creden-
tials and area't even being considered." Dean Witter
Percentage of women
officials declined to comment.
operating vice president:
in management levels at AT&T
Corporate women say most of the discrimination
"Up to a certain point, brains and competence
Wyphia
they encounter is subtle, even unconscious. A bank
work," says Ariene Johnson, program director at Cata-
Source Ammiraz Telephone & Teleproph Ca. 1005
vice president is excluded from a meeting to which all
lyst, . New York-based women's research group. "But
her male peers are invited. A marketing manager
then fitting in becomes very important. It's at that
Wall Street. In the five years Ma Roberts spent at
doesn't play solf with her boas and thus doesn't hear
point that barriers against women sec
Dean Witter. she advanced from vice president and
valuable industry scottlebutt
Bumping the glass ceiling case be excruciatingly
coordinator of research services to senior vice presi-
"A lot of male bonding and informal mentoring gets
painful, especially for women who were early pioneers
dent and a member of the securities firm's board. "I
done on golf courses," says Allan Kennedy. co-author
f) their fields. Barbara Roberts, 38, started on Wall
worked extremely hard to get where Igot," she says.
of "Corporate Cultures," R book about management
Street when the women who worked at what was then
But then the annual promotions stopped. Instead
The result, be says, is that "senior male managers
Blythe Easuran DIE ware-required to use the back
of being considered for what seemed like the next
become much more comfortable with each other."
naircase. She spent IT years moving up the ranks on
logical post-executive vice president and director of
Frustrated by the strain of fighting what seem like
Venturing Out on Their Own
magazine. "Women have
is admired in men but still dis-
Rightfully so. Women who
That perception compli-
By STEVEN P. GALANTE
been socialized to marry
couraged in women "We live
become entrepreneurs say
cated efforts to attract capi-
princes. Now, more and more
in a society stat is supposed to
they have to overcome more
tal and employees, says Ms.
ORPORATE America
women are starting to have
reinforce entrepreneurship,"
than the usual problems of
McCurry. who is also pres-
C
is giving rise to a new
this entrepreneurial dream."
says Bestrice A Fitzpatrick,
starting small businesses. Un-
ident of the National Associa-
breed of business
To be sure, many women
president of the American
familiarity with legal, account-
tion of Women Business
owner. the female en-
are forfeiting the relative se-
Women's Economic Develop-
ing and financial matters-not
Owners.
trepreneur.
curity of corporate life to test
toent Corp. in New York "But
to mention the lack of personal
They are women
their mettle as entrepreneurs
women get very little cultural
contacts in those industries
When recruiting. Ms.
like Marie-Christine Law-
for many of the same reasons
reinforcement for becoming
are serious handicaps, some
McCurry now combats that
rence, who last year quir her
that have long motivated
entrepreneurs. Everyone who
women say. Moreover, in more
perception by telling appli-
men. They're venturing out
loves them tells them they're
cants what she sees for the
post as an executive are di-
traditional marriages. the need
rector at CBS Inc. After
on their own in search of
leaving certain income for cer-
to balance the rigors of start-
company's future and how she
eight years at the company.
levels of wealth autonomy
tain failure,"
ing A new business with the
plans to get there "I" think you
convinced that gender
and personal satisfaction that
While the risk of failure
responsibilities of child-rearing
share far more proprietary in.
blocked her from the next
aren't available in larger or-
may be acceptable to women
formation with potential can-
can be burdensome
rung on the ladder. Ms. Law.
ganizations. But a sense of
still in entry-level positions,
didates than you ever would in
Most frustrating of all
rence left to co-found No-
frustrated ambition, and the
women at higher levels often
& Large corporation," she says.
however, is a credibility prob-
vember & Lawrence Inc. a
nagging suspicion that it's re-
wrestle with an agonizing am-
"And there are some obvious
lem "Many people felt my
New York graphic-design
lated to gender,' is a recurring
bivalence. Ms. Lawrence, for
risks E doing that
business wasn't serious and
agency.
and troubling theme in the
instance, says she debated for
that I was not at committed to
Despite the risks and ob-
"The time comes when
stories that women relate
two years before leaving CBS.
building an enterprise" as a
stacles, many female entrepre-
you say either you're going
Ruth M. Owades quit a
"It was a direction that I grad-
man might be. says accountant
neus say starting their own
to stay and remain on the
Boston mail-order catalog
usily wanted to go in, but
Mary Kelley McCurry, who
businesses has been far more
treadmill, or you're going to
company in 1978 after its man-
wishing I didn't want to do it,"
left Touche Roas & Co. five
rewarding then they had antic-
move out and make things
agement first embraced, then
she recalls "It was extremely
years ago to establish McCurry
ipated. Ms. McCurry, for et.
happen for yourself," Mr.
abruptly cooled on her pro-
risky. The prognosis for small
& Co. in Denver. "They
ample, had feared her profes-
Lawrence saya. "The pats on
posal for a new catalog busi-
businesses isn't good. It's kind
thought I was just free-lanc-
sional growth would suffer
the back do not really substi-
bess catering to affluent home
of scary."
ing"
when she left Touche Ross
tute for true growch."
gardeners. "I wasn't one of the
But. "in fact, it has acceler-
Increasingly, American
boyz," she contends. "That
ated," she says. "I think I've
women 2he seeking profes-
made them all the more -
Trends in Self-Employment
exceeded my peera."
sional growth outside the cor-
easy about the project They
In thousands
As women enter the work
poration Last year. there
all went off on weekend strat-
Women
Men
force in increasing numbers,
were 2.8 million self-em-
egy sessions where to women
7
experts project that more of
ployed women in the U.S. 4
were involved. I think the
43% leap from A decade ear-
6
them will opt for entrepreneur-
prospect of having 3 woman
ship over corporate careera
Ger, according to the Bureau
along made them uncasy."
ML Owades Isunched the
5
For one thing, their growing
of Labor Statistics In the
experience in the workplace fi-
same period. the number of
idea on her own at Gardener's
4
nally is providing women with
self-employed men rose only
Eden Inc., and it seared In
essential skills they previously
5 million
1982. in need of growth capital
3
have lacked. "They have expe-
09/17/92
12:03
2025238232
OIPA WDC
005
unassailable barriers, hundreds
edly have to prove their
themselves pressing up against
of the brightest women toan-
But it may be easier to
competence, says Jan Johnson,
a glass celling, they also find
"and the very top male execu-
agers are leaving corporations
who left her job as manager of
reach that pinnacle by climbing
themselves on display under
tives I deal with treat me a lot
off the corporate ladder and
for smaller companies or to es-
marketing analysis at Interna-
glass Often the lone woman At
pursuing entrepreneurial goals.
more equally than the women
tablish businesses of their own
tional Business Machines Corp.
their level, they worry not just
Self-employed women are now
"A lot of us started out as high-
they employ." she says
last year to start her own con-
about performance but about
increasing five times faster
risk ventures, but we've liter-
Women like Ms. Balan
sulting business. Ms Johnson
how they dress, their political
than self-employed men, ac-
ally grown into corporations."
recalls that at one meeting she
eventually could be offered top
views and even the jokes they
cording to a 1984 survey by
says Marjorie Balazs. who left
chaired at IBM, financial man-
corporate posts, bypassing
tell or laugh at on the job.
Vogue magazine.
agers kept addressing her male
& management position in the
women trying to come up
Many women who are now
The exodus undoubtedly
subordinates for answers only
semiconductor industry 11
through the ranks, says Ms.
beginning their management
will disrupt some of the
years ago to found Balars Ana-
Barkley. the management con-
she could provide. The subordi-
careers or who have climbed
women's careers, but it also
lytical Laboratory Inc in
suitant, "Once there are
nates would then have to turn
quickly through the manage-
may threaten the future of the
to her for the information.
Mountain View, Calif Today,
enough women running power-
ment ranks believe that chang-
corporations, which are losing
her company does business
Not only do senior women
ful. businesses of their OWTL,"
ing times eventually will shat-
competent and experienced
with such giants as Du Pont
managers frequently find
she says, "the corporate bar.
ter the glass ceiling
managers "We're getting to
Co. and Dow Chemical Co.,
riers could begin to lift"
the point where women are half
the available talent," says Ms.
Johnson of Catalyst. "If you
can't make use of that talent,
you're hampered That has to
be . concern to business."
But often it isn't Many
chief executives are oblivious
to this brain drain because
their women managers are
pooled in low-visibility posi-
tions Corporate women often
complain that they're trapped
in staff posts in which they
don't have the opportunity to
run * profit-and-loss center.
Companies seldom choose
women for overseas jobs-er-
Today, more and more
perience considered essential
for choice senior management
women understand that
posts. Many executives claim
looking professional
they don't mind sending
women sbrond, but they say
plays a major role in
foreign customers-or cus-
making an impact on the
toms-preclude them from do-
ing so.
business world. Dressing
Prevailing stereotypes-
in an appropriate and
even when they're blatently
false-somerimes explain why
attractive manner is an
women hit the glass ceiling.
effective way to
Amoug these bieses: Women
don't know how to get along in
communicate your own
the business world. and women
personal and business
have ineffective management
style. A well-polished
styles. A study last year by the
Harvard Business Review.of
image gives you a genuine
900 male and female executives
competitive edge.
found that while these stereo-
types had diminished since
Achieving this image is
1965. they were still wide-
one of the most easily
spread.
acquired business assets.
More than half of the men
surveyed said they wouldn't
The Wallachs Woman
feel comfortable working for X
will discover a world of
woman Nearly one in five felt
that women are "tempermen-
choices including this
tally unfit" for management
sophisticated tropical
And more than half of all re-
spondents, both men and
weight pure wool suit by
women said they thought
Austin Reed of Regent
women never would be wholly
Street. Austin Reed
accepted in business.
Yet, recent research by the
tailors this season's suit
American Management Associ-
with a slightly longer,
ation indicates that women
bosses don't manage any differ-
double-breasted jacket
ently from men, and that
and slim skirt. Made in
women are more committed to
America in a black and
their careers than men are The
association's survey, of 1,460
white worsted glen plaid.
managers. found women more
6-14, $345.
likely than men to relocate for
promotions and in conflicts be-
PatTyler, speecharter@DOC
Louise west
To CAROL
(602) 623-8456 (h)
Date
Time 1:00
(602) 889-7765 (training site)
WHILE YOU WERE OUT
M Sally Jo Vasicke
of
5236050
-worked for Ansel Rubber
Phone
Area Code
Number
Extension
TELEPHONED
PLEASE CALL
Gloves in AZ. They went
CALLED TO SEE YOU
WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU
URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
out of business; they she got
Message
retraining $ thru the Trade
Assistance Act. (TAA funds)
23-021 200 SETS IP
Being retrained for something
Operator
else.
AMPAD
Over155
age
EFFICIENCY®
23-421 400 SETS
CARBONLESS
Tina Colbert, works w/dislocated
6318
workers
Those values abided with Barbara when she hung her Smith
College diploma on the wall
and then stayed at home for years
with the six kids.
I wonder what Barbara would accomplish tomorrow if she had
just graduated today.
I know one thing wouldn't be different. Those values.
You know, I've been on the road a lot lately, talking with
folks from coast to coast, and I think there's some confusion out
there over that word values, especially family values.
I'm concerned in particular by the folks who think it means
that some people look down on American women who don't fit the
traditional role of homemaker.
Well, that's very wrong. For starters, the 'homemaker' role
isn't even typical anymore. Today, a typical American woman's
more likely to work outside the home
and there's a good chance
she's a single mother.
That's just a reality of the new American family. But
traditional values apply just as much to those working women as
they do to my grandkids.
And my administration happens to have strong initiatives to
help that working woman in real-world ways. And if I haven't
explained well enough to the American people
just what our
policies are meant to do -- well, today, I want to correct that.
You know, the last four years have been remarkable. The
world looks completely different from when I took office. A
Germany sewn together
a Soviet Union torn apart.
3
But while these remarkable changes took place overseas
here in America, a quieter, more ancient and even more profound
revolution has been unfolding.
It's a movement toward human justice at its most-basic
level.
I'm talking about the movement toward gender equality
and
it's important because it cuts across all social, ideological and
national boundaries. It affects every society on earth.
You can't just mandate it to happen. But intelligent
policy, applied with care, can bring it to pass, step by step.
Now
I'm not here today as just another man lecturing
women on the significance of gender.
I'm here as a President whose policies can affect your life.
And I want to explain what I'm doing to help lift American women
up to your rightful place as economic, social and legal peers of
American men. Because I think that's fundamental to family
values today.
The first order of business is to admit that things still
aren't fair. Not only is equal pay still just a lofty goal
the 'equal work' part of the equation isn't true yet, either.
Taking care of home and kids is a full-time job in itself,
and a lot of you are doing it on top of working here full-time.
And you may be trying to do it all alone. Divorce happens.
Single mothers do struggle in our country. They drive their
minivans to Safeway
pick up the kids at school
take them to
church
the doctor
soccer practice
and cook and clean and
4
coach and coddle their kids because they love them better than
anything on earth.
In fact, folks
the 'silent majority' of America in the
1990s
may well be that great quiet backbone of dedicated,
uncomplaining women in this country
who juggle career
school
kids
and home
and somehow manage to get it all
done with little or no help.
And until that reality changes, we as a nation need to face
the issue square in the eye. Working American women today
need workplace policies flexible enough to stretch and fit
extraordinary conditions at home.
Now, how do we do this?
Well, one approach is to weigh in with big government. Set
up agencies
pass heavy-handed laws
wind up the
bureaucrats
and try to legislate our way to perfection.
I remember a story about Kaiser Wilhem the Second of
Germany. He was sort of a 'man's man' -- which I think means he
was just the kind of Kaiser who would refuse to stop and ask
directions when he got lost.
Well, the Kaiser got it in his head that he could design a
better battleship -- and he did.
He drew up the plans and sent them to the Naval shipyard for
the experts to study.
And when they sent back their report, it said the Kaiser's
battleship-design was indeed the finest on earth. It would be
faster and quicker than anything in the water. Its range and
5
power would overwhelm the enemy. And everybody on board, from
the lowest deckhand to the Admiral, would enjoy a comfortable
layout far beyond the standards at the time.
The only trouble was, according to the shipyard
if the
boat were built
and placed in the water
it would sink like
lead.
Well, I'm afraid policies a lot like that have been coming
out of Capitol Hill the past few years. Wonderful-sounding
policies designed to achieve great things on behalf of working
women. But look closely, and you see that they just might not
float.
Consider the family leave bill Democrats passed through
Congress recently. It's well-meaning, and has the noble goal of
allowing a parent to leave a job -- without pay -- in order to
take care of a baby, or some other pressing family need. The
bill would require companies to keep that job-slot open to the
employee so he or she could return, for up to a year.
Now, there are progressive companies that already offer this
sort of plan. AT&T is one of them. Your family-leave policy, in
fact, is one of the most-enlightened I've seen, and it should
serve as a model for others.
It should also attract good employees who demand that sort
of flexibility. So it helps you recruit.
AT&T started this program voluntarily. But what about the
small business down the street, with ten employees? What if the
6
Feds walked in and said, all right, this is law. You've got to
offer family leave.
What would happen the next time a job opened up? Let's say
there are two qualified candidates. One, a man. The other, a
woman of childbearing age. Who do you think's going to get the
job? Who's the small business going to count on not to leave for
a year to have a baby?
Well, folks -- this is where the Bismarck sinks.
And that's why I vetoed Congress' family-leave bill this
week. I think it's well-meaning
but not well-thought-out.
It's like the Kaiser's battleship.
And two days ago, I sent back to Congress an alternative
plan that not only looks good on paper, but also will float.
My proposal doesn't force businesses to comply. Instead, it
gives them handsome incentives -- in the form of tax credits --
to offer family leave. It's flexible, and it'll help 80% of the
workplaces in this country -- the small and mid-sized businesses
that otherwise couldn't afford a family-leave program. Now they
can provide a program without killing them.
And by the way
who do you think starts and owns small
businesses in this country? I'll tell you: A lot of them are
women. Small businesses provide half the jobs in the country
they provide two out of three new jobs in the country
and the
Labor Department says that by the year 2000, half of them will be
owned by women.
7
One reason women are turning into entrepreneurs is because
the alternative is bumping up against the glass ceiling that's so
common in larger companies. Big companies are promoting women
higher than they used to, but not fast enough. A lot of talented
women are leaving and going into business for themselves.
That's why Secretary Martin has been working with Small
Business Administrator Patricia Saiki -- to draw attention to the
problem. She's making a particular effort to shatter that
ceiling in smaller businesses especially, because like I said,
that's where two out of three new jobs are created.
And creating jobs is what we need.
That's the thinking behind a whole network of policies I've
developed during my administration
some that directly help
working women with pressing needs
and some that help them
indirectly, by strengthening the marketplace.
Child care, for example, was a big issue in the 1988
campaign. But you don't hear much about it this year, because
it's not an issue anymore. My Child-Care Act became law in 1990,
and the result is, parents can choose what kind of child care
they want for their kids -- without having to go to an office and
apply for government assistance or fill out a bunch of new forms.
Instead, low-income parents can get tax credits to spend like
they want on child care. So when they walk into that child-care
center, and it's bedlam, but there's that special something about
it they like -- or don't like, on the gut level -- they're free
to come or go somewhere else.
8
And to me, that's family values.
Child support's something else that needs reform. We're
working on legislation that would crack down on 'deadbeat dads'
who don't support their kids. We want State governments to
cooperate so these deadbeats can't hide across State lines. We
want to track these guys down and make them pay.
And that's family values, too.
Pension portability's another. What happens when you see
opportunity across the street -- a better job, with more pay?
But you'll lose all your pension benefits if you change
companies. What do you do? Well, I have a bill that would let
you take your pension with you, from job to job.
And that's family values, too.
Health benefits, for another. I sent a bill to Congress
this year that lets small businesses deduct 100% of health-
insurance costs. They used to deduct only 25%. But now, they
can afford to give employees much better coverage.
And that's family values, too.
There's a lot more. I could read a laundry list of what
we've done and want to do, in job training and discrimination
protection, and payroll deductions, and on and on.
But what's important here isn't details. It's the big
picture that's emerging, and it's very complex.
We're talking about altering our society's very fabric. As
women's roles evolve, a bunch of economic issues that seemed
9
unrelated before
start to weave together
into the broader
fabric of family issues.
And as we weave them together
we can see that things are
getting better. They're not good enough yet -- but better.
And if we're going to use the power of government to move us
forward
we need to use the power of government
not to pile
on, but remove
barriers. Business barriers that burden new
and small enterprises
and social and cultural and legal
barriers that tell working women they're second-class citizens.
In the 1990s, I believe that qualifies as family values.
(Brief pause.)
You know
from the beginning, families have been the stem
that winds the American watch.
Mothers staying at home with the kids
Dads working
nothing's wrong with that; if it's what you want to do and you
can afford it, great. We stand behind you all the way.
But that choice is a luxury to a lot of Americans today.
And to a whole lot more
it's an impossibility.
That's one of the changes I've presided over as President.
And it means that just in the last four years, women's roles have
changed.
I think that's good. I look at my granddaughters and I'm
glad they'll have more chances that Barbara, and Millicent before
her.
10
I'm going to be the last President of my generation
a
generation shaped largely by World War II
a conflict with
clear sides and clear, black-and-white issues.
Not at all like Vietnam, with its ambiguity and shades of
gray.
But a lot of what's changed is good.
I may be the last President who served in World War II
but I'm the first President to be able to say, the Cold War's
over
and freedom finished first.
The Berlin Wall is down
weapons of mass destruction are
being dismantled
and finally -- our children's nuclear
nightmares are becoming a thing of the past.
Now I look at our grandkids and all the hope I feel is
crystallized in them
especially my grand-daughters.
What a world they face. Uncharted possibilities.
Remarkable hope. And disorienting winds of change swirling all
around them.
I pray that my grand-daughters define themselves in this
brave new world
by taking on a new world with gusto
but
anchoring themselves in the timeless values that have led Barbara
and me so far
and Millicent Fenwick before us.
The timeless values
of hope, peace, love
and the
freedom to be who you really are.
Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the United States
of America.
11
Carol-
1:55p
1
175ept.92
To LAROL
Tom Scully is
Date
Time 1:50
WHILE YOU WERE OUT
M SALLY to VASICKU
dropping off a bunch
of
Phone
523-6050
Area Code
Number
Extension
TELEPHONED
PLEASE CALL
of stull (glass
CALLED TO SEE YOU
WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU
URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
ceiling) off with
Message
SENT MATERIALS
Ken 1
INCLUDED - NEW JERSEY
Operator
AMPAD
23-021 200 SETS
JB
EFFICIENCY®
23-421 400 SETS
CARBONLESS
He (Tom) called for you.
09-17-1992 01:40
P.01
U.S. Department of Labor
Assistant Secretary for
INVOICE E DISTRIBUR LEBOR
Employment and Training
Washington, D.C. 20210
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET
FOR: Carol Asrhus
FROM: Roberts T. Lones Vasicks
DATE: 9/17/92
TIME:
1:39
RECEIVER TELECOPIER #:
456-
6218
TRANSMITTAL TELECOPIER #:
202/523-6827
PAGES TO FOLLOW (INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET) :
5
Per our discussion
Thanks
Suly J
09-17-1992 01:40
P.02
ding
3 Program
:ing Room
cian
im
alifornia
San Mateo Private
Vanessa Joiner - Operating Room Technician Program
3 surgical procedures.
rtunity to obtain skills
Ten years ago, Vanessa turned to San Mateo County for help. She was eighteen
years old, a Mississippi transplant with en 18 month old child and no job skills.
Vanessa tried to escape the cycle of poverty associated with being a single mother
was experiencing a
on AFDC. Although she worked a variety of sales and clerical jobs, homelessness
ment of the operating
was always just a paycheck away.
nined that a highly
f the San Mateo PIC, the
Vanessa enrolled in various training programs as a way to achieve financial
rriculum included orien-
independence. She lacked confidence and never dreamed she could afford the time
ent care, aseptic techni-
to train for a professional occupation. Her search for marketable job skills brought
lures training.
her to the Private Industry Council through one of its contractors, Opportunities
Industrialization Center West. Results of the comprehensive assessment conducted
patient care, the
by OICW staff revealed an aptitude and Interest In the medical field.
pital with the creation of
ocal community; a cost.
The Operating Room Technician program was suggested as a viable training option.
il eductional resources.
Vanessa hesitated, afraid that she did not have what It would take to complete the
uced unemployment, in-
training. OICW encouraged Vanessa to enroll In the training, Illustrating potential
entry/access to the health
expansion in Job opportunities and wages. Armed with this encouragement and the
mmunity and local
commitment of transportation and child care support, Vanessa enrolled in the
program.
h demand, above
With support from OICW, Kaiser Instructors, and the Private Industry Council,
ship between local educa-
Vanessa completed the program and is now working at Kaiser Hospital in Redwood
ition. Most importantly,
City, earning approximately $27,500 a year.
ng Room Technicians and
Vanessa has proven herself. She expected that she would only see simple surgeries,
ne employment paying
"But I've already assisted a physician who was doing laproscopic surgery. I've
handled all the instruments for some new technologies and it's thrilling," she said.
Vanessa proudly tells anyone who will listen, "My life has really changed for the
better."
1992 JTPA Presidential
Award WINNES
25
from outstanding training
program "operating Room
Technician Program -
Redwood City, California
09-17-1992 01:41
P.03
anding
ng Program
er Training
:ute Displaced
emaker
ram
er
ontana
program, designed to em-
Marguerite M. Santy - Displaced Homemaker Program
to make a difference In
concentrated employment
Marguerite was a displaced homemaker and long-term AFDC recipient when she
gram.
enrolled in CTI's JTPA displaced homemaker program In September 1990. She did
not have a significant work history, and also had serious health problems.
PA funds, the program
nultiple barriers of par-
Marguerite was born with a hole in her heart and later diagnosed with a progressive
elfare, JOBS enrollees,
hearing loss, At 12, she contacted rheumatic fever and was left with an additional
workers and the wide
damaged heart valve. Although her life expectancy was, 16, Marguerite went on to
onal families, CO.
marry at 35 and have 2 children. However, Marguerite's marriage turned abusive
experience.
and she and her children escaped with virtually nothing. They were fortunate to be
able to stay with Marguerite's parents but she craved Independence and was
aining, which is jointly
frustrated living on public assistance.
al Act Funds. Using pre-
ed an 85 percent overall
After 4 years of welfare dependency and frustration, Marguerite went to the Helena
Job Service seeking employment opportunities. After a thorough assessment, the
/ere coordinated and
Job Service referred her to CTI. She participated In CTI's Intensive career prepara-
nses. Other non-JTPA ser-
tion course and their computer literacy course./CTI placed Marguerite In further
clerical training at the Helena Adult Learning Center. Once she had finished the
ations for participants.
kers who addressed par-
clerical training, Marguerite was placed in a community work experience program
through the CTI/JOBS program, In the Personnel Department of the U.S. Forest Ser-
needs were met through
wing agencies: Helena
vice. While working at the Forest Service, Marguerite was assisted by CTI and JTPA
a Indian Alliance, AFL-
staff with her Job search, She soon secured employment with the Montana Depart-
ment of Administration In the State Personnel Division,
Helena Vocational-
ell as mental health agen-
Marguerite proudly says that, "Rather than allowing my handicaps to hinder me
private and public sector
from living an independent life, I have chosen to meet my handicaps head on and I
consider them to be challenges rather than obstacles."
displaced homemaker
:ifically related to the
1992 JTPA Presidential
ent from enrollment to 6
S success.
Award WINNER
from buding 31
Caseer TRAINING Inshlute
draining program
Displaced Homemaker
PRogram-
Helena, Montana
09-17-1992 01:42
P.04
ling
Program
ployment
tration
uncil, guided by the Cor-
Carolyn Moore, Graduate
litional JTPA program
/ and place them in the
Carolyn used to feel that she would be on welfare forever. Now she owns and
SS ownership.
operates a janitorial service that grosses approximately $1400 per month. She was a
participant in the SEID.
demonstration in which
2-month waivers, allow-
During the initial training phase of the program, Carolyn talked about the
business" without loss of
degradation she felt by being on welfare. She recalled a situation when she was in
line at a supermarket purchasing groceries with her sons. As she was paying for
her groceries with her food stamps, a man at the back of the line shouted out,
public and private sec-
"Shouldn't they be in another line? We're paying cash."
Mississippi Department of
e Levi Strauss Founda-
Carolyn started her business in October 1989 and is receiving reduced AFDC
The JTPA Title II-A
benefits. She expects to be able to leave welfare with a few more contracts.
ed funds to be used as
Carolyn is a single mother with three sons. Her children are very proud of her
erved as mentors and
and assist her in the business. She feels very good about herself and hopes that she
can be a role model for other women on welfare.
5.
omically disadvantaged,
d less than 7th grade
th participant program in-
researching and writing
1992 JTPA Presidential
I cash flow projections,
Award WINNER
ved individual assistance
ness was started, the pro-
from outstanding training
rt services to alleviate
program "self - loyment
langes in two diverse com-
INItiAtive Demons herition
siness community. Since
program participants who
micro-business creation is
PROGRAM, Jackson, Mississippe
arket where unemploy-
25
09-17-1992 01:42
P.05
Valerie Mondycz
34 yrs old
2 children
welfare recipient
was enrolled in JTPA Title IIA Project
1
Trained in Ultrasound Diagnosic School
(TTPA Training fability)
Clark, NJ.
Graduated in Mar. 1992 + placed n:
Nartheasty Imaging
still Road
Parsipanny, N.J.
earns 616. per hour
Diagnostic medical Sound Graphing
New Jersey
from Hops Nance
5 pm
(Cong ) Dick Zimmer
Lynn Martin
Carla Hills
Elaine Chao
Boballen, Ch
-$ CED ATT
Dr. Mary Stewent -will intro POUS
400 attendees
at AT&T HQ
in Basking Ridge, NI
Welfare
Welfare passed in the 1930's
meant to help widows, when
the breadwinner died
Today, a majority of recipients
are kids born out-of wedlock
(one-parant families)
demographics Id
you household have to be a poor one paint
Fortume 500 is paintal leave
becoming an incentive
whented? ?
to draw women to work
ATT
their plan
(212) 522-1212
Forune Magazine
August 15 1992
Support from
President George Bush
The White House
working
Dear Mr. Bush,
women
I have débated about writing you and have start
to throw them away, because I couldn't possibly imagine
Korem W
having the time to listen to one small town person such as me.
My decision to write you anyway is as much to help myself, because
I just can't stand the negative press that I am hearing these days. I think
that you are a remarkable man ; even under the worst circumstances you've
without managed to stay cool and calm, you always seem to know what to do and
but, being disrespectful to anyone. I admire those qualities in say,
normal person feelings. During the gulf war it seemed as if you could not do
someone who has been under such scrutiny; I think is far and beyond any person the
anything do wrong, (especially in the eyes of the press), but now it is as if you
can nothing right. Well I'm here to tell you that this woman thinks that
you do a lot of things right!
I am the mother of three and I work outside the home (I am office
manager for a local physican). I am happily married, my husband, Bob, an is
supervisor for McDonalds restaurants. We would probably be considered middle a
class people. We both work very hard and long hours, but I feel that it gives
us a sense pride and worth for the things that we have.
My concerns are with the amount of bad publicity that you have been
recieving. There are SO many young people who will not take the time and read
the issues of both presidential nomimees, they are busy and only listen to
the television and radio for their information concerning you. I am SO dis-
couraged by the press and the way that they are covering your campaign. I realiz
that a lot of this behavior is politics and should be expected; but, I resent
the fact that they are trying to influence the voters through negativeness.
I realize that you are not hearing anything that you have not already
heard; but, I felt that you should know that there is one woman in "small town"
America that thinks that you are doing a great job; and frankly I'm scared to
think what will happen if (God forbid) that your'e not re-elected in Nov. Thank
you for taking the time to read this letter and please do not give up. My family
would like to extend an open invitation to you and Mrs. Bush, if you are ever in
southern Mo. we would be extreemly honored to have you in our home. We admire
and respect our President of the United States of America.
Respectfully,
Lynn Haar
3002 Kentucky
toplin mo. 64804
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DATE:
TO: CAROl
FROM: BEVERLY WARD
Office of Presidential Correspondence
Room 94, OEOB, x7610
Hope there help
BW
President George Bush
1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Washington D.C.
Dear President Bush,
In listening to all the "bappity bap" from the podium
and the "who's in and who's out" of this past week, I am compelled
to write you to say that this is one American who voted for you
in 1980, 1984, 1988 and will continue to support you - without
reservation in this election.
After hearing all the criticism of you and your administration
that was displayed at the Democratic convention in New York, I
almost feel as though I have been living under a ROCK all these
years. And I am angry about it.
Mr. President, I am a 34 year old, single, female, and I
am proud that last year I was able, by myself - to buy my first home.
In the 12 years since my college graduation I have worked for 2
outstanding companies. I am grateful to the administration of
which you have been a part of during this time. And I am also
grateful that as the youngest daughter of middle-class parents,
I was taught at an early age the value of saving - and by example,
the value of hard work. Our family of five accomplished our goals
as a family unit.
I am disappointed in listening to many a mayor of other cities,
talking about their "urban decay". I would encourage them to
take a look at our city of PORTLAND. In proportion, we have
received the federal funds of other American cities. What has
made our city the beautiful success story that it is, is the
PARTNERSHIP between our government, businesses and citizens.
Our Urban League, our Police Agencies, our Business Organizations,
our Government, Bureaus and our Social Service Agencies actually
communicate with each other. As Oregonians we feel we live in
the most desirable towns, cities and state in our country. As
citizens we passionately work to balance our environment and
business opportunities. It is not up to our federal government -
it is up to us.
I have never written to an elected offical before. I know
you are a very busy man, President Bush, but I hope that somehow
you will be able to read my letter.
I appreciate your leadership, not only as our President,
but that of a world leader. I don't care what the polls say
today. I am confident that when all the issues are raised,
you will be returning to the White House. You are in my prayers.
Hang in there
Sincerely yours,
Kathy SheRman
Kathryn I. Sherman
98 S.W. Cervantes, Lake Oswego OR 97035
Dear President Bush,
Most of the letters written to you by American citizens
are probably never seen by you personally. Thinking
practically, I can understand, but I wish this letter could
be an exception.
I have spent time watching the Democratic nd Republican
Conventions. I have been an independent until this past May
primary when I voted on the Republican ticket. I am worried
that Bill Clinton might win. He is not a bad person, but his
liberal politics could, with the help of a liberal
Democratic-controlled Congress, jeopardize America's future.
You have a big task in convincing the American voters of
your ability to solve our country's economic and social
problems. You have done a remarkable job, thus far, with
little help from Congress. Please work hard these next few
months. America needs four more years of your conservative
leadership, and I am secretly hoping that your vice-president
Dan Quayle will carry it further. He impresses me as a man
of conviction, and loyalty.
Who am I, you ask? I am just a middle-class ($45,000),
small-town (50,00+) woman, mother of 3 children,
schoolteacher, and patriot. Probably there are a lot of
people like me out there who want you to take heart.
Please keep doing your best to stand for the values upon
which you were elected 4 years ago. Don't be swayed by the
special interest groups that have strayed far from the Judeo-
Christian ethic and Constitution upon which this nation was
founded.
Your fellow American,
Karen Long
Mrs. Karen Long
309 Aberdeen Drive
Middletown, Ohio 45042
September 3, 1992
6261 Shadybrook #288
Dallas, Texas 75206
The President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
In May, 1992, I graduated from Baylor University in Waco,
Texas. I moved to Dallas to begin looking for a job. For
several months, I made applications and sent out resumes with
no luck.
I listened to your acceptance speech at the Republican
Convention and heard you say that you were going to do
something to help the employment situation. The very next
day, I went in for an interview, and was offered and accepted
a position. Mr. Bush, you certainly work quickly!
Thank you for your help. You can count on my vote in
November!
Respectfully,
Heather Van Wyli
Heather Van Dyke
Doro
Bureau of Jourism
in Maine Convention
(Bitland) part-time!
moved to DC
4/90
10/90 Nat'l RehabHopital
full-time
divorced 1 ?? don't ask
wedding was June
For
Ken askew:
Bokgrnd on Doro
- when she was a
working single mom.
2yrs. ?
m
-
Presidential Appointments: From Katja Bullock, Director for
Computer and Information Systems
Office of Presidential Personnel
x2964
*President Bush has appointed more women to PAS positions
(positions requiring Senate confirmation) than any other
President has.
Presidential Breakdown:
(percent women of total PAS
appointments; calculated as of
August 31 in the last year of their
first administration)
Carter: 14.09%
Reagan: 14.37% (1st term only -- no calculation available
for second term)
Bush: 20.29%
*More than 40% (actual: 41.8%) of full-time appointments by
President Bush are women.
Breakdown:
Women
Men
Presidential appointments --
51
152
PAS appointments --
252
1147
Non-career Sr. Exec. Service
396
1024
Schedule C --
2209
1727
Women in the Cabinet:
* Lynn Martin (Labor) and Barbara Franklin (Commerce) are the
only two female Cabinet Secretaries.
Women-owned small businesses
*According to Juanita Weaver (205-6740), of the SBA: According
to 1989 sole-proprietorship data (most recent) : 31.3% (nearly
5 million -- actual 4.977 million) of small businesses are
women-owned. They bring in $89 billion, which is only
12.9%. In 1987, the number was 30%. I'm waiting for more
recent numbers from the IRS and the BLS.
*Lynn Sherr of 20/20 did a special on Lifetime last night, where
she used the following excerpt from a press conference
(August 11, 1992) with Lynn Martin and Pat Saiki: "We
predict by the year 2000, nearly half of all businesses will
be women-owned."