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
120355053
label
Economic Conference of the President and Vice President: Briefing Papers on Select Administration Policies [binder] [1]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
120355053
contentType
document
title
Economic Conference of the President and Vice President: Briefing Papers on Select Administration Policies [binder] [1]
citationUrl
collections
Records of the Office of the Public Liaison (Clinton Administration)
Alexis Herman's Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
120355053
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-5721346-20120741F-Seg1-025-005-2017
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
a11f16d94d75759b
ocrText
FOIA Number: 2012-0741-F
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Office of Origin:
Public Liaison
Series/Staff Member:
Alexis Herman/Ruby Moy
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
10035
FolderID:
Folder Title:
Economic Conference of the President and Vice President: Briefing Papers on Select Administration
Policies [binder] [1]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
30
5
11
1
ECONOMIC CONFERENCE OF THE PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT
AUGUST PRE THE HO OF UNUM I STATES THE
Briefing Papers on Select Administration Policies
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
TOTAL ENT OF THE as UNITED STA O PRE ********** OF TA THE TBS HSS A
ECONOMIC CONFERENCE OF THE PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT
Briefing Papers on Select Administration Policies
THE
THE WHITE HOUSE
Drdit go
1
The Honorable
Alexis m. Human
]
The President
I
requests the pleasure of your company
ata/reception/to, be held at
1
The White House
on Monday, March 17, 1997
at five viclock
Inhanoraf
His Excellency
The Prime Minister of Ireland
and Mrs. Bruton
Please respond to
The Social Secretary
1
The White House
at your earliest convenience
-
giving date of birth and social security number
of your guest
(202) 456-7787
Please present this card
VISITORS NTRANCE
to
The White House
NOT TRANSFERABLE
BRIEFING PAPERS
ON SELECT ADMINISTRATION POLICIES
BRIEFING PAPER 1: THE NATIONAL ECONOMY
BRIEFING PAPER 2: REINVENTING GOVERNMENT
BRIEFING PAPER 3: REWARDING WORK FOR WORKING FAMILIES
A.
Earned Income Tax Credit
B.
Raising the Minimum Wage
C.
The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993
D.
Welfare-to-Work
E.
Child Support
BRIEFING PAPER 4: LIFELONG LEARNING
A.
Pre-school: Head Start Reform
B.
GOALS 2000
C.
School-to-Work Opportunities
D.
National Service
E.
Individual Education Accounts/College Loans
F.
New Skills for New Economy
BRIEFING PAPER 5: INTERNATIONAL TRADE
A.
Tearing Down Trade Barriers
B.
Helping American Business Do Business
BRIEFING PAPER 6: BUILDING SAFER COMMUNITIES
A.
100,000 New Police Engaged in Community Policing
B.
The Brady Act
C.
Assault Weapons Ban
D.
Stiff Penalties for Violent Offenders
E.
Violence Against Women
F.
National Police Corps
BRIEFING PAPER 7: COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT
A.
Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities
B.
Creating a National Network of Community Development Banks and
Financial Institutions
BRIEFING PAPER 8: HEALTH CARE
A. Health Care Reform
B. Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children
C.
Childhood Immunizations
D. HIV/AIDS
E.
Women's Health
BRIEFING PAPER 9: ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH
A. Protecting Public Health
B. Taking Responsibility for Our Land and Water
C. International Leadership
BRIEFING PAPER 10: A STRONGER, HI-TECH DEREGULATED ECONOMY
A. Improving the Nation's Infrastructure
B. The Information Superhighway
C. Technology for Economic Growth
D. Interstate Banking
E.
Trucking Deregulation in 1994
F.
Small Business
BRIEFING PAPER 11: PROTECTING OUR NATION'S SECURITY
A. Keeping Our Military Strong and Ready to Fight
B.
Reducing the Threat of Nuclear Weapons and Other Weapons of Mass
Destruction
C.
Advancing Regional Security
D. Acting as an Effective Peacemaker and Mediator
E. Promoting Democracy
F.
Confronting Transnational Threats
G. Defense Reinvestment: Meeting the Challenges of Defense Downsizing
Clinton Presidential Records
Digital Records Marker
This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative
marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff.
This marker identifies the place of a tabbed divider. Given our
digitization capabilities, we are sometimes unable to adequately
scan such dividers. The title from the original document is
indicated below.
1
Divider Title:
1. THE NATIONAL ECONOMY
Today, America's economy is as strong as it has been in a generation. Over the past
two years, the budget deficit has dramatically declined, trade barriers have come down,
growth has been strong, investment in productive equipment has increased at record rates,
private sector job growth has been impressive, and inflation has remained moderate. Yet
for all this progress, many working families still feel that the economy is not working for
them. Wages have been stagnant for twenty years. Too many Americans lack the
education and lifelong training opportunities they need to succeed in the new economy. And
too many working families feel that with the costs of health care, child care, housing, and
education, they are running faster and faster just to stay in place.
This overview chapter discusses the economy that President Clinton inherited, the
results of his economic plan, and the Administration's responses to the continuing struggles
of working families. The chapter is divided into four sections. Section I discusses the
economy President Clinton inherited. Section II details the progress over the last two years.
Section III discusses the challenges that remain to make the economy work for working
families. Section IV provides an overview of the President's policies for the future, with a
summary of the four main proposals in the President's Middle Class Bill of Rights,
included in his 1996 budget.
1-1
A. THE ECONOMY AND FISCAL ENVIRONMENT:
WHERE WE WERE
When President Clinton took office on January 20, 1993, his top priority was
restoring America's economic health. The nation faced five fundamental challenges: first,
an economy with extremely weak job growth; second, an escalating deficit and bloated
federal bureaucracy; third, a tax system widely perceived as unfair; fourth, stalled trade
agreements; and fifth, inadequate investment in our people. Confronting these basic
challenges was essential--not only to revitalize the economy in the short-term, but also to
address the long-term problem of stagnant wages for the middle class and working poor.
1. Anemic Job Growth: While the economy was expanding in 1992, nine million
people remained out of work, and the unemployment rate topped seven percent.
There were no signs that the jobs situation was improving: the economy was
creating only 34,000 private sector jobs per month, hardly a booming recovery.
Experts said that the nation was in a "jobless recovery," which most families said
was no recovery at all.
2. Escalating Deficits: The challenge of recovery was made all the more difficult by
the huge budget deficit that the President inherited. In the previous twelve years, the
federal debt -- the total of all the yearly deficits -- quadrupled from less than $1
trillion to more than $4 trillion. Worse still, the deficit as a percentage of the
economy (GDP) was at consistently high levels throughout the 1980s. The U.S. had
achieved the dubious distinction of going from the world's largest creditor nation to
the world's largest debtor nation in record time. Moreover, the deficit was projected
to grow rapidly -- even if the economy continued to recover -- if tax and spending
laws remained the same. For all these reasons, the President believed that his first
budget had to reverse the growth in the deficit--and restore fiscal sense and
accountability.
3. Tax Fairness: Americans also rightfully believed that the tax system had become
less fair, leaving middle-class families to bear the burden of fiscal irresponsibility.
Marginal tax rates for the highest-income Americans had declined substantially over
the past decade, yet working families were not enjoying the benefits of lower rates
because of increased payroll taxes. While the average tax bill for the wealthiest 1%
of Americans dropped by over $30,000 between 1977 and 1989, taxes for the
bottom 60 percent of Americans remained static--or even increased.
4. Stalled Trade Agreements: Two major efforts to open world markets for
American goods were in jeopardy. Passage of the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA) seemed unlikely. And the Uruguay Round of GATT was
stalled after seven long years.
1-2
5. Inadequate Investment in People: In a changing economy. Americans
recognized that the key to raising living standards was enhancing the education and
training of the American people. Yet the 1980s saw little federal effort to improve
or expand pre-school education, K-12 school reform, school-to-work opportunities,
college access, or lifelong learning for Americans already in the workforce.
B. THE PRESIDENT'S FIVE YEAR ECONOMIC PLAN OF 1993
The President's economic plan sought to address all of these fundamental problems--
reinvigorating the economy, controlling the deficit while reinventing government, lowering
trade barriers and expanding exports, restoring tax fairness, and increasing the investments
in people needed to raise the incomes of all Americans in the long-term.
I. CUTTING THE DEFICIT AND UNNECESSARY SPENDING
When President Clinton began his term, the deficit was at its highest dollar level in history:
$290 billion, equal to nearly 5 percent of all of the income generated in the economy.
Worst of all, without a fundamental change in policy, the deficit would grow even larger: to
over $400 billion by 1999, and over $600 billion by early in the next century. Such an
exploding deficit could not be sustained. Interest rates would rise, driving the deficit still
higher, and sending the economy spinning out of control. Yet there was little expectation
among either average citizens or the global financial markets that Washington would make
a serious effort to bring the deficit down. This lack of confidence hurt America's clout
internationally and led to higher interest rates -- even in our then-weak economy -- because
investors feared that the deficit would only get worse.
To meet the threat posed by the massive deficit, the President came forward only 27 days
after his inauguration with a line-by-line, specific plan for half a trillion dollars of deficit
reduction. Over the next eight months, the debating, lobbying, and criticism were intense,
but when the dust settled on August 6, 1993, Congress had passed the President's economic
plan, including the largest deficit reduction package in history -- $505 billion. The plan cut
over $255 billion in spending and over 300 domestic programs. Yet it also included tax
relief for over 15 million families earning under $28,500, made millions of small businesses
eligible for tax cuts, and increased investment in education and technology. Only the top
1% of individuals and corporations saw their income taxes increase.
1-3
As a result of the deficit reduction plan: :
The federal civilian workforce is declining by 272,900 employees over five years -- to
the lowest level since John Kennedy was President.
The deficit is coming down for three years in a row, the first time since Harry Truman
was President.
The deficit is being cut in half as a percentage of our national income.
In 1994, the deficit was over $100 billion less than projected before the President's
economic plan was passed.
In 1993 and 1994, the deficit declined by more than during any other two year period in
history.
There is about $10,000 less debt per family of four because the passage of the President's
economic plan.
If not for the interest on debt accumulated during the twelve years prior to his
Presidency, President Clinton's budget would not only be balanced--it would be in surplus.
"The actions taken last year to reduce the federal budget deficit have been instrumental
in creating the basis for declining inflation expectations and decreasing pressures on
long-term interest rates. Although we may not all agree on the specifics of the deficit
reduction measures, the financial markets are apparently inferring that, on balance, the
federal government will be competing less vigorously for private saving in the years
ahead. Partly because of these structural adjustments, the foundations of the economic
expansion are looking increasingly well-entrenched."
Alan Greenspan,
Federal Reserve Board
January 31, 1994
II. RESTORING TAX FAIRNESS
There has been considerable misinformation about the taxes in the President's economic
package. Tax increases fell overwhelmingly on upper-income Americans. The taxes of
middle-class Americans were basically untouched, and taxes for the working poor declined
dramatically. The only tax increase that affected working families with children was a
small 4.3 cents tax on gasoline that costs the average family only three dollars per month.
As financial experts recognized (see box), income tax rates increased only for the top. 1% of
1-4
individuals and corporations. The President cut taxes for millions of small businesses and
working Americans.
Two of the tax cuts in the President's plan were especially notable:
Earned Income Tax Credit-- A Rewarding Work Tax Cut. The expansion in the
Earned Income Tax Credit represented a dramatic change in the way the tax system
treats families that work hard and play by the rules but earn a limited income. The
EITC provides a tax break averaging $1,000 per household to 40 million people in
15 million families earning under $28,500. These are families working hard to stay
out of poverty and off welfare. The Earned Income Tax Credit could better be called
the rewarding work tax cut.
Small Business Tax Relief. The economic plan also expanded the expensing limit
for small businesses from $10,000 to $17,500. As a result, the plan lowered taxes
for over 1 million small businesses in its first year alone -- and likely several million
more over the next few years. In addition, the plan also gave a special capital gains
tax cut to prospective investments in new equity held for five years or longer in
small businesses.
III. EXPANDING TRADE
Due to strong bipartisan support and an intense effort by the President, the last two
years turned out to be perhaps the best in this century for opening trade for America.
Congress approved NAFTA, and in just one year, American exports to Mexico increased by
20%, while exports to Mexico and Canada created more than 100,000 new jobs -- jobs that
pay 13 to 17 percent more than non-exported related jobs. The subsequent passage of
GATT promises to create hundreds of thousands more export-related, high-paying jobs --
adding between $100 billion and $200 billion per year to the U.S. economy when fully
implemented.
The Economic Report of the President expressed some of the scope of the
President's trade achievements:
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with Mexico and Canada is a
pathbreaking accord with two of our three largest trading partners, achieving a
degree of liberalization well beyond that of similar international agreements. In its
bilateral negotiations, the Administration has been forceful in seeking market-
opening measures in Japan, China, and other countries and in advancing the interests
of U.S. exports through its National Export Strategy. Finally, during the second half
of 1994, the Administration helped launch negotiations that will lead to the creation
of open and free trade areas among the countries of the Western Hemisphere by
2005 and among the countries of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum by
2020.
1-5
While improving our own economy. the President's actions also sent a signal to the
rest of the world: the United States is assuming world leadership in world trade. As the
Economic Report put it, "The Administration's efforts. have established an environment in
which counties feel they must participate in meaningful trade liberalization efforts or be left
out."
While pursuing expanded trade, in 1994 the United States became the world's most
competitive economy, displacing Japan as leader.
IV. STRENGTHENING THE RECOVERY
The introduction of the President's economic plan had an immediate positive impact
on the economy. Once investors recognized that this was a serious deficit reduction package
that would set the congressional agenda, interest rates fell, business confidence increased,
and job growth surged. Financial expert after expert confirmed the key role of the
economic plan in the renewed recovery.
The interest rate decline that came from the strong deficit reduction effort spurred
private investment. Investment in producer's durable equipment has soared at an 18.2%
annual rate since the Administration began--bringing this investment to a postwar high
relative to GDP. And in 1994, the United States also overtook Japan as the world's
number one auto producer for the first time since Ronald Reagan was President.
As the recovery solidified, the American jobs machine finally started humming.
Since the passage of the President's economic plan in August 1993, employment has
expanded by nearly 5 million jobs (272,000 per month) -- with 93 percent in the private
sector. The economy added more private sector jobs in 1994 than in the previous four
years combined--making it the best year for job growth and economic growth in a decade.
All the while, the inflation rate remained low and stable. Today, the combined measure of
inflation and unemployment -- known as the "Misery Index" -- is at its best level since
1968.
Built on a foundation of lower deficits that stretches across the entire U.S. economy,
America's jobs recovery has reached every economic sector. After losing 2.2 million
manufacturing jobs during the 12 years prior to President Clinton's taking office, the nation
added 284,000 manufacturing jobs in 1994. Since January 1993, construction
employment has grown by 540,000. In 1994 alone, the nation created more construction
jobs than in the previous nine years combined. And in the last year and a half, more than
94,000 new jobs were added in the automobile industry, bringing auto employment to its
highest level since 1979.
It is not only the quantity of the new jobs that has improved; it is their quality. After
losing more than 170,000 jobs over four years, high-wage industries (those with average
wages above the median wage), have enjoyed a jobs rebound. High-wage industries have
1-6
added well over 2 million jobs since the beginning of 1993, and last year they created more
jobs than during the previous five years combined.
Since the President took office, the unemployment rate has fallen from over 7 to 5.4
percent -- the lowest level since the summer of 1990. That means the number of
unemployed people dropped by 1.6 million in 1994 -- fewer people collecting
unemployment benefits, and more people are getting pay checks. The number of people
working part-time when they would have preferred full-time work fell by over half a
million in 1994. And although there is still a long road to travel, the unemployment rate
for African-Americans has fallen over the last two years, at one point dipping into single
digits for the first time in over two decades.
Output growth during 1994 was also impressive, far exceeding the forecasts of
almost all economists. The Gross Domestic Product, the best measure of national output,
grew by 4.0 percent after adjusting for inflation -- the strongest growth in a decade. This
conceals an even bigger story: government spending fell, and private sector GDP surged.
Excluding government purchases, GDP growth was 5.1 percent in 1994.
In the private sector, it was investment that drove the growth of 1994. As noted
earlier, investment and productivity growth have been robust over the last two years.
Consumers spent money on cars and houses, and businesses poured money into equipment--
not only increasing the quality of life in the short-term, but also increasing our rate of
productivity growth. Since the trough of the most recent recession, productivity has risen at
an average annual pace of 2.1 percent -- nearly twice the trend rate of productivity growth
over the past 16 years. Because economists agree that productivity growth and living
standards are closely linked, this increase should pay off in higher living standards.
As the economy has continued to grow, signs of inflation have been few. In 1994,
the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rose only 2.7 percent, while core inflation (excluding
volatile food and energy prices) advanced only 2.6 percent, its lowest annual increase since
1965.
1-7
Objective analysts have confirmed these
basic facts time and again
H&R Block: Income tax rates are raised only on the "top 1.2% of all taxpayers
[while there] is no income tax increase for middle-income taxpayers income
tax rates are unchanged on middle incomes -- 82.2% of all tax payers and a tax
cut for 16.6% of all taxpayers [who] benefit from Earned Income Tax Credit
Expansion." H&R Block Analysis of the Income Tax Consequences of the
Revenue Reconciliation Bill of 1993, pp. 21-24.
Wall Street Journal: "(E)xcept for a small gasoline tax boost and an increase for
the best-off social security recipients, the tax increases in last year's bill mostly
didn't touch the middle class, but hit the wealthiest 1.2% of Americans." (The
Wall Street Journal, 10/26/94)
Washington Post Citing the Congressional Budget Office: The Congressional
Budget Office has found "only a sliver of tax filers -- 1.2% will a face higher
income tax bill on April 15 because of the Clinton Administration's economic
program." The "income tax applies only to taxable income in excess of gross
income of roughly $185,000." ("GOP Tax Issue May Fade Away: Only 1.2% of
Filers will face Increase, CBO study Finds," Washington Post 1/13/94)
Fortune Magazine (October 3, 1994): "[President Clinton's] economic plan
helped bring interest rates down, spurring the recovery."
The Financial Times (February 26, 1993): "US Treasury price roared ahead at
the long end of the market yesterday on the growing hopes that the Clinton
Administration will take a tough line on tackling the budget deficit."
The Wall Street Journal (February 24, 1993): "The spectacular bond market
rally accelerated yesterday, with long-term Treasury bond yields plunging to
another record low as investors rushed to embrace President Clinton's economic
package."
1-8
ECONOMIC ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Over 6 million new jobs since President Clinton took office.
In the first 25 months of the Clinton Administration, the economy created 6.1
million new jobs.
93 percent of these jobs were in the private sector, a record compared to
comparable points of past economic recoveries.
Since the President's economic plan was passed in August 1993, employment
expanded by nearly 5 million jobs -- 93 percent in the private sector.
3.5 million jobs were added to the economy in 1994, the best year of overall job
growth in a decade.
In the first 25 months of the Administration, more than twice as many jobs
were created than during the previous four years combined. (6.1 million VS. 2.4
million).
Since January 1993, the economy has created five times more jobs per month
than during the previous four years (245,000 VS. 50,000).
Nearly 5.7 million private sector jobs in the first 25 months of the Clinton
Administration.
Since January 1993, the economy created 5.7 million private sector jobs -- 3.3
million in 1994 alone.
More private sector jobs were created in 1994 than in the previous four years
combined (3.3 million VS. 2.0 million).
4.6 million jobs were created in the private sector since the passage of the
President Clinton's economic plan in August 1993.
3.3 million private sector jobs were added in 1994, the best year of private sector
job growth in a decade.
93 percent of all job growth in 1994 was in the private sector, the highest
percentage of new jobs in the private sector in over a decade.
Eight times more private sector jobs per month were created in the first 25
months of the Administration than in the previous four years.
More than twice as many private sector jobs created per month since January
1993 than during the previous 12 years (228,000 vs. 111,000).
In 1994, more new jobs in high-wage industries than in the previous five years
combined.
The economy created more jobs in high-wage industries in 1994 alone than were
created during the previous five years combined.
Since the beginning of 1993, the economy has created 2.2 million jobs in high-
wage industries.
More than 1 million new jobs in high-wage industries were added last year
alone.
Over half of all the jobs created were in managerial and professional
1-9
ECONOMIC ACCOMPLISHMENTS
The manufacturing, construction, and automobile industries made impressive gains.
Manufacturing employment grew each and every month during the calendar year
of 1994 for the first time since the 1970's.
After losing 2.2 million manufacturing during the 12 years prior to the
Administration, the nation added 284,000 manufacturing jobs in 1994.
Since President Clinton was inaugurated in January 1993, construction
employment expanded by 540,000.
In 1994 alone, more construction jobs were created than in the previous nine
years combined.
Since President's Clinton's economic plan passed in August 1993, employment
in the automobile industry has increased 94,000.
Auto employment is at its highest level since 1979.
By the end of 1994, the unemployment rate had dropped to its lowest level in over
4 years.
The unemployment rate declined from over 7 percent in January 1993 to 5.4
percent in February 1995.
Since August 1993, the unemployment rate has fallen from 6.7 percent to 5.4
percent.
The unemployment rate is at its lowest level since July 1990.
Output and productivity growth were robust.
Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) increased by 4.0 percent in 1994, its largest
annual increase in a decade.
Since the President's plan passed in August 1993, spending by the federal
government on goods and services declined 5.5 percent (at an annual rate), while
private sector GDP growth was 5.2 percent.
In 1994, consumer spending on cars jumped up 6.2 percent.
Business investment on capital equipment has increased 18.2 percent per year
since the President took office.
Since the trough of the most recent recession, productivity has risen at an
average annual pace of 2.1 percent -- nearly twice the average rate of
productivity growth over the past 16 years.
In 1994, inflation remained low and stable.
The Consumer Price Index (CPI) increased 2.7 percent in 1994 -- the third
consecutive year with less than 3.0 percent inflation.
In 1994, the core CPI -- excluding food and energy prices -- rose only 2.6
percent, its lowest annual increase since 1965.
1-10
C. GROWING TOGETHER AND GROWING APART
Reducing the deficit, strengthening the recovery, opening markets, and making the
tax system fairer were all necessary steps in order to get our fiscal house in order and put
the economy on a solid path. Yet long-term economic prosperity depends on more. It
depends on increasing investment in technology, continuing to preserve our environment,
and empowering our communities. In particular, long-term growth requires strengthening
the overall skills and education of the American people. Because of these long-term goals,
the President has also implemented an ambitious strategy to improve lifelong learning. It
includes increasing investment for Head Start, WIC, and worker training, along with
passage of new legislation creating Goals 2000 education improvement efforts, a school-to-
work program, AmeriCorps National Service, and a new college loan program that makes
borrowing and repayment cheaper and more flexible.
In truth, the performance of the economy over the last two years has only
highlighted the need to invest in the long-term potential of our people, even as we take the
right short-term steps to solidify the economy. While economic growth over the last two
years has been robust, all Americans have not shared in the gains. Deeper economic forces
have proven stubborn -- and fiscal measures alone have proven insufficient to reverse
trends that been building over fifteen years.
Since 1979, real household income has grown by $767 billion -- roughly a $2,000
increase for the average household. But the average figure conceals a different story:
Adjusted for inflation and population growth, about 97 percent of the increase in income
has gone to the top 20 percent of households. Everyone else -- 80 percent of American
households -- has shared just 3 percent of the income gains. (See Chart 1A and Chart 1B
below.) As a result, in 1993, real median income was virtually unchanged from 20 years
earlier.
The shift from growth widely shared to growth narrowly distributed to a minority of
families--from growing together to growing apart--is as historic as it is troubling. The
promise of America has always been that we all could share in the fruits of the largest
economy on earth--that families who work hard and play by the rules would enjoy a rising
standard of living for themselves and their children. Yet over the last 20 years, many
families have found that they are working longer hours, taking extra jobs. drawing down
savings--yet still barely making their way.
This shift has many sources, but one is most striking. In the past two decades, new
technologies and expanded trade have reshaped America's economic landscape. As a
result, education has become the fundamental fault-line running through the workforce.
Demand for highly-skilled workers is soaring at the same time as demand for less skilled
workers is shrinking. Well-educated and skilled workers are prospering. Those whose skills
are out of date or out of synch with industrial change are anxiously contemplating their
1-11
prospects. And those without adequate education or skills are drifting further and further
away from the economic mainstream.
The data are striking. Fifteen years ago, a male college graduate earned 39 percent
more than a man with only a high school degree. By 1993, this gap had increased, and a
male college graduate out-earned his high school graduate counterpart by 80 percent.
Women are divided along similar, though slightly less stark, lines.
But earnings do not tell the complete story. Employer-sponsored health coverage for
workers with college degrees has declined only slightly, from 79 percent in 1979 to 76
percent in 1993. For high school graduates, rates have fallen further: 68 percent to 60
percent over the same period. And rates for high-school dropouts have plummeted -- from
an already low 52 percent in 1979 to only 36 percent two years ago. Retirement only
hardens these divisions. Nearly two out of every three workers with a college degree gets a
pension on the job, while more than three out of four high school dropouts do not.
The nation is moving inexorably toward a two-tiered society composed of a minority
who are profiting from economic growth and a majority who are not. That is very far
from the American Dream--and from American history. A large and sturdy middle class has
always been this country's defining feature. President Clinton believes it can be so in the
future-- but only if we equip Americans with the education and job training to prosper in
the new economy. That is why rebuilding a new middle class for a new era is the
President's fundamental mission over the next two years.
1-12
CHART 1A
1950 to 1978 -- Growing Together
Real Family Income Growth By Quintile
160%
138%
140%
120%
111%
106%
98%
99%
1-13
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Bottom 20% Second 20% Middle 20% Fourth 20% Top 20%
SOURCE: Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce. All data converted to 1993 dollars.
CHART 1B
1979 to 1993 -- Growing Apart
Real Family Income Growth By Quintile
20%
18%
10%
1-14
5%
0%
-3%
-7%
-10%
-15%
-20%
Bottom 20% Second 20% Middle 20% Fourth 20% Top 20%
SOURCE: Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce. All data converted to 1993 dollars.
D. GOING FORWARD
I. CONTINUED DEFICIT REDUCTION
The President's 5-year economic plan passed in 1993 is currently projected to
reduce the deficit by $616 billion. In the President's FY1996 budget. he proposed $144 in
additional savings, with $81 billion for additional deficit reduction. The FY1996 budget
also eliminated or consolidated over 400 programs. As a result, under the President's new
plan, the deficit as a percentage of our economy would be reduced from 4.9% in FY1992 to
2.1% in FY2000 and then to 1.5% by the year 2005. (See chart.) If not for the interest
being paid on debt created during the 12 years before President Clinton took office, his
1996 budget would not only be balanced--it would be in surplus. And the President is
committed to working with the current Congress to bring down the deficit further in the
context of serious health care reform.
II. CONTINUED INVESTMENT IN EDUCATION, CHILDREN AND TECHNOLOGY
Like his earlier budgets, the President's 1996 budget combines deficit reduction with
continued investment in areas that are essential to long-term economic growth. These
investments include key technology initiatives, environmental initiatives, and community
empowerment proposals such as Community Development Financial Institutions and
Empowerment Zones. The heart of the President's strategy is a comprehensive effort to
invest in the skills and education of our people throughout their lives. The President is
fighting not only to protect but to expand a number of investments in people, including the
following:
WIC TO BE FULLY FUNDED: By enabling parents and young children to get
the nutrition they need, WIC saves money and saves lives. WIC was put on a full-
funding path, and funding is projected to increase by $960 million from 1993 to
1996 -- a 34% gain. The new funding has already enabled WIC to enroll an
additional 1 million women, infants, and children since 1993.
HEAD START FUNDING WILL INCREASE BY 42%: Head Start funding is
projected to go up from $2.77 billion in FY1993 to $3.94 billion in FY1996. The
new funding will enable over 130,000 more children to enroll in 1995 than in 1992,
while also moving many students from part-time to full-time enrollment and
improving program quality.
K-12 EDUCATION IMPROVED BY GOALS 2000: The Goals 2000 bill
codifies the National Education Goals and offers grants to schools and states that
commit themselves to specific plans for systemic reform of K-12 education.
Already, 47 states and thousands of schools are uniting parents, teachers, and
1-15
principals in bottom-up reform efforts. Authorized funding for Goals 2000 in
FY1996 is $750 million.
INCREASED FUNDING FOR DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: Funding
under Title 1 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is expected to increase
from $6.7 billion in FY1993 to $7.4 billion for FY1996. Title 1 provides assistance
to local school districts to help disadvantaged students.
COLLEGE MADE MORE AFFORDABLE: Borrowers will be able to take
advantage of the new direct student loan program by consolidating their guaranteed
loans into direct loans. When fully phased in, approximately 20 million borrowers
will be eligible to pay for their education through direct lending. Some of these
borrowers will benefit from lower interest rates, and all will benefit from a greater
range of repayment options, including pay-as-you-can repayment. And the new
student loan program will save taxpayers over $6 billion over five years.
HISTORIC NATIONAL SERVICE PROGRAM CREATED: This year,
20,000 AmeriCorps Members are tutoring students, immunizing children, reclaiming
parks, and patrolling streets--and earning education awards in return to pay for
college or job training. AmeriCorps Members work inside community organizations,
improving neighborhoods from the bottom up. AmeriCorps is scheduled to grow to
34,000 members in 1995, and over its first three years, 100,000 Americans will
serve our country through AmeriCorps.
SCHOOL-TO-WORK PROGRAM WILL HELP STUDENTS GET JOBS:
President Clinton signed into law the School-to-Work Opportunities Act, a crucial
element of the Administration's lifelong learning agenda. With this landmark
legislation, the federal government will provide venture capital to spark a nationwide
system for moving America's young people smoothly from the classroom to a job
with a future. This year, 28 states have received funds for implementing their
school-to-work programs--with all other states receiving planning grants. Funding
has increased from $50 million to $400 million in 1994.
III. THE MIDDLE CLASS BILL OF RIGHTS
On December 15, 1994, President Clinton proposed a Middle Class Bill of Rights --
his plan to ensure that all Americans share the benefits from an expanding economy now
and in the future.
Three general features of the plan are most striking. First, it is tightly targeted at the
middle class families who need help most. About 85 percent of the tax benefits will go to
families that earn less than $100,000 per year. Second, the President's proposal invests in
those who are investing in our future: getting an education, buying a home, raising a
family. Third, every penny of the Middle Class Bill of Rights if fully paid for by spending
1-16
cuts--with billions left over for deficit reduction.
The "Middle Class Bill of Rights" has four components:
$10,000 Education Tax Deduction: Americans can deduct from their taxable
income the money they spend on post-secondary education for themselves or their
families. Once the policy is fully implemented, up to $10,000 of education spending
will be deductible each year. Taxpayers would not have to itemize their deductions
to get the education and training deduction. To focus the tax cut on the middle
class, deductibility is gradually phased out over the income range of $100,000 to
$120,000 for a couple filing jointly, and between $70,000 and $90,000 for
individuals.
$500 Child Tax Credit: A $500 non-refundable tax credit will be allowed for each
child under the age of 13. This tax credit will be available to any family whose
income is less than $75,000 -- the families with young and growing children.
An Expansion of IRAs: The IRA proposal would expand the availability of
deductible IRAs to all middle income families. Working Americans with family
incomes under $100,000 would be able to put $2,000 tax free into an IRA account
and then be able to withdraw that money tax free -- without penalty -- for education,
medical expenses, or a purchase of a first home.
G.I. Bill for American Workers: This proposal takes nearly 70 different training
programs and consolidates them into one program that directly empowers workers
with skill grants and vouchers of $2,620 per year for up to 2 years. This proposal
would be self-financing too, since it uses existing funds from the previous programs.
Workers who are laid off or disadvantaged would also be eligible for income
contingent loans through an expanded Individual Education Account. This proposal
centers on accountability and strong consumer information which should weed out
bad programs and reward those programs that successfully help workers get the
skills they need for new and better jobs.
A. EDUCATION AND TRAINING TAX DEDUCTION
HELP MIDDLE-CLASS AMERICANS GET THE SKILLS THEY NEED
The President proposes making tuition for college, community college, technical school,
graduate school and job-training fully deductible up to $10,000. The deduction will be
fully available to families earning up to $100,000, and phased out at $120,000.
BROADEN OUR MIDDLE CLASS AND NARROW THE GAPS BETWEEN US
Each year of college or job training beyond high school increases average future earnings
by 6 to 12 percent. And while workers with the right skills have seen their incomes rise
over the last 15 years, paychecks for everyone else have declined.
1-17
STOP RISING TUITION FROM CRUSHING MIDDLE-CLASS FAMILIES
Wealthy students can afford higher education and lower-income students receive
financial aid. The middle-class gets squeezed as college costs rise. Between 1981 and
1991, average college tuition rose more than 130 percent -- compared to about 50
percent inflation over that period.
OFFER AN INCENTIVE FOR EDUCATION SIMILAR TO BUSINESS INVESTMENT
The tax code already encourages business investments. It's time to create the same
incentive for families to make the best investment they can make: education.
MILLIONS OF WORKING FAMILIES WOULD GET TAX RELIEF
Twelve million students would benefit from the deduction, over 80 percent of them with
incomes less than $75,000.
FAMILIES DON'T NEED TO ITEMIZE TO GET THE DEDUCTION
The deduction will be "above the line" -- allowed in determining adjusted gross income--
so middle-class families that don't itemize will still get the tax break.
TAX BREAKS WON'T TRIGGER TUITION INCREASES
Little evidence links higher federal aid with higher tuitions: in the 1980s, education aid
virtually froze while tuitions jumped; in the last two years, President Clinton expanded
student aid and tuition increases slowed. With 7,500 schools competing for students
today, schools that try to cash in by raising tuition will lose students -- and money.
PART OF THE PRESIDENT'S COMMITMENT TO EXPAND CHOICE AND ACCESS
The President is already implementing Individual Education Accounts to make more
affordable student loans available to every American and save taxpayers billions of
dollars. Convenient "pay-as-you-can" options enable individuals to repay the investment
as their earnings permit. In addition, the President is proposing to raise Pell Grants to
$2600 and extend Skill Grants to laid-off and low-wage workers who usually can't take
full advantage of the education and training tax deduction.
1-18
An Example of How A Working American Family Will
Benefit from the Education and Training Deduction
A four-person family -- with $50,000 of wage and salary income, $7,500 of itemized
deductions, and $10,000 in personal exemptions (4 X $2,500) -- would benefit in the
following way from the education and training deduction.
This family has two children who are in college and they have $10,000 in education
expenses. When the tax cut is fully phased in, the family would get a $1,500 tax cut
since they are in the 15% tax bracket. This would lower their income tax liability by 31
percent.
Current Law
Fully Phased In Tax
Tax Reduction
% Reduction
$4,875
$3,375
$1,500
31%
B. $500 CHILD TAX CREDIT
GIVE TAX RELIEF TO MIDDLE-CLASS FAMILIES
President Clinton wants to give a $500 tax credit to families for each child under
age 13. The credit will be fully available to families earning up to $60,000 and
phased out at $75,000.
HELP RESTORE THE AMERICAN DREAM
Middle class families who work hard and play by the rules aren't getting ahead;
they're getting squeezed. The median family earned essentially the same in 1993
than in 1973.
THE COSTS OF RAISING CHILDREN CONTINUE TO RISE
For middle-class families, the costs of health care and education are rising faster
than inflation. In 1990, the average middle-income family with children in daycare
or afterschool care spent $3,000 on day care alone.
RESTORE FAMILIES' ERODED PERSONAL EXEMPTION
In 1950, the personal exemption was worth $3,800 in 1995 dollars. Today, it's just
$2,500 -- a 34 percent decline. President Clinton wants to restore the value of the
personal exemption for the people who need it most -- families with young children.
FOCUS RELIEF ON THE MIDDLE CLASS, NOT THE WEALTHY
President Clinton gives tax relief to families with incomes below $75,000--the
middle class that's been hurt the last 15 years. In contrast, the proposal approved by
the House Ways and Means Committee offers a child tax credit to families with
1-19
incomes up to $250,000 -- including some of the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans.
TARGET RELIEF WHERE WORKING FAMILIES NEED IT MOST
The tax credit goes to the families with the greatest needs, those with children under
13 who may require child care or afterschool care. For families with older children,
President Clinton has proposed a tax deduction for education expenses up to
$10,000. And for families earning less than $28,500, he has already expanded the
Earned Income Tax Credit -- offering an average tax cut of $1,000 to 15 million
families.
An Example of How A Working American Family Will
Benefit from the Child Tax Credit
A four-person family -- with $50,000 of wage and salary income, $7,500 of itemized
deductions, and $10,000 in personal exemptions (4 X $2,500) -- would benefit in the
following way from the Child Tax Credit.
This family has two children under the age of 13 and therefore receives two child tax
credits. When fully phased in, this will be worth $1,000 and would reduce the family's
federal income tax liability by 21 percent.
Current Law
Fully Phased-In Tax
Tax Reduction
% Reduction
$4,875
$3,875
$1,000
21%
C. EXPANSION OF IRAs
HELP WORKING AMERICANS SAVE FOR THEIR FUTURE
The President's proposal would enable more middle-class families to save in two ways:
First, he would double the income thresholds for tax deductible IRAs: eligibility
would now be phased out for couples with incomes between $80,000 and $100,000.
Second, President Clinton would allow Americans to withdraw money from IRAs
without penalty to pay for education and training, a first home, or medical
expenses.
1-20
EXPANDING IRAs WILL INCREASE PRIVATE SAVINGS
Private savings are key to creating good jobs and raising incomes in the long-run.
Yet our private savings rate has declined from 8.1 percent of GDP in the 1970s to
5.1 percent in the 1990s. Several empirical studies have shown that expanded IRAs
can increase private savings--and the President's proposal will do so in three ways:
Dramatically increase the number of families eligible for tax-free IRAs, enabling
middle-income families now putting away less than they'd like to save more, tax-
free.
Giving families more incentives to save by allowing them to use savings for
purposes other than retirement, like paying for education or buying a home.
Increasing awareness of IRAs, because as more people are eligible for IRAs, banks
will promote them more, and more people will decide to save.
ANOTHER WAY TO HELP AMERICANS PAY FOR COLLEGE OR JOB TRAINING
Middle-class Americans will be able to use IRAs to pay for education without
penalty. Together with the education tax break and the G.I. Bill for Workers, it's
another way that President Clinton is helping Americans to invest in their future.
HELP A FAMILY BUY A HOME
Families will now be able to save tax-free in an IRA and then use the money
without penalty to buy a first home--or help a child buy one.
MORE CHOICES FOR MIDDLE-CLASS FAMILIES
The President's plan allows families to take the tax breaks from IRAs either when
they deposit money or when they withdraw it. And President Clinton allows
withdrawals without penalty for more reasons -- such as care of an elderly parent or
unemployment.
TAX RELIEF TARGETED AT THE MIDDLE CLASS, NOT THE WEALTHIEST
President Clinton's proposal is targeted at those who have seen their incomes
stagnate over the last 15 years -- middle-class families with incomes under
$100,000. (The "Contract with America" offers them fewer options but offers a
costly tax break to people earning as much as $250,000 -- people who are already
saving.)
1-21
An Example of How A Working American Family Will
Benefit from Expansion of IRAs
A four-person family -- with $50,000 of wage and salary income, $7,500 of itemized
deductions, and $10,000 in personal exemptions (4 X $2,500) -- would benefit in the
following way from the expansion of IRAs.
The family has two children who are over the age of 12 and are not in college. If they
only wanted to save for their children's education, each working parent could put $2,000
in their IRA to save for their children's college and save $600 in taxes for a 12 percent
reduction of their tax liability.
Current Law
Fully Phased In Tax
Tax Reduction
% Reduction
$4,875
$4,275
$600
12%
D. G.I. BILL OF RIGHTS FOR WORKERS
FROM FEEDING BUREAUCRACIES TO EMPOWERING INDIVIDUALS
Collapse some 70 Federal programs for education and job training
Put the power to learn in workers' hands-- offering low-income and unemployed
workers Skill Grants for education and training up to $2,620 per year, and Individual
Education Accounts to get low-cost loans and repay them on a flexible schedule.
EMPOWERING WORKERS DIRECTLY
Instead of just shifting money from a federal bureaucracy to a state bureaucracy, the
President consolidates programs and empowers workers directly with Skill Grants -- so
they can choose the quality training and education they want, where and when they want
it.
LEANER GOVERNMENT
The current maze of job training programs wastes money and doesn't get the job done.
The President will replace some 70 separate programs with one integrated system.
STATE FLEXIBILITY
The President's proposal enables states to work with communities, schools, and the
private sector to tailor information systems, job search assistance, and on-the-job training
to meet local goals. Most federal rules dictating procedures will be wiped out.
1-22
GOOD INFORMATION TO GUIDE GOOD CHOICES
The proposal encourages states and the private sector to develop a system of One-Stop
Career Centers or other information networks where workers get access to real job search
help and reliable information on jobs and the records of training institutions.
ACCOUNTABILITY
For the first time, training programs will have to pass the same test as the private sector:
meet your customers' needs or lose business. Choice, competition, and good information
will empower individuals to pick providers who deliver. And performance standards for
training providers will cut off the frauds and the incompetents.
PRIVATE SECTOR PARTNERSHIP
The President's proposal isn't about government. It's about jobs, so the private sector has
a central role. Business and labor will be full partners in designing new systems so that
workers and education providers know what skills employers will pay for. New awards
will recognize excellence in creating workplaces that reward worker skills.
PATHS FROM SCHOOL TO WORK FOR YOUNG PEOPLE
This initiative will fold federal training programs for young people into the school-to-
work movement underway at the state and local level. Young people can look forward to
clearer paths to new skills and better jobs.
HELPING WORKING AMERICANS: AN EXAMPLE
When a worker is laid off, he becomes eligible for a Skill Grant. He can go to a
One-Stop Career Center to learn about the community college and job training programs
nearby and study their success records in detail. Then he can choose the program with the
best placement record in a field that interests him, and use the Skill Grant to pay for it.
The worker will learn a new trade, and at the end of the program, receive job search
assistance with area employers.
1-23
Clinton Presidential Records
Digital Records Marker
This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative
marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff.
This marker identifies the place of a tabbed divider. Given our
digitization capabilities, we are sometimes unable to adequately
scan such dividers. The title from the original document is
indicated below.
2
Divider Title:
<
2. REINVENTING GOVERNMENT
Actions to Date
President Clinton has promised a revolution in government--to reduce the federal
government by 100,000 jobs, eliminate wasteful spending and make government
more accountable to the American people. Under the leadership of President Clinton
and Vice President Gore, the Administration is already making government work
better and cost less. The Administration:
Has already cut over 100,000 federal jobs. In less than five years, the federal
government civilian workforce will drop by at least 272,900 -- the smallest
it's been since the Kennedy Administration (See Chart 2-A on following
page).
Has saved $63 billion.
Is cutting an additional $76 billion by eliminating obsolete federal programs,
letting states or private businesses take over programs they can operate better,
and by not increasing current spending levels.
Has cut through reams of red tape like reducing the 2-inch thick Small
Business Administration's loan application to only 2 pages.
Is streamlining organizations, including closing 1,200 U.S. Department of
Agriculture field offices and eliminating over 30 customs management offices
and reassigning 1,400 people from administrative jobs to serving customers
on the front lines.
2-1
CHART 2A
Executive Branch Civilian Federal Employment
(In thousands)
NATIONAL
2400
PERFORMANCE
2300
REVIEW
AL GORE
Vice President of the United States
2200
2100
2000
1900
1800
1963
1966
1969
1972
1975
1978
1981
1984
1987
1990
1993
1996
1999
Year
2-2
Background
Many have talked about reforming government in the past. When President Clinton
and Vice President Gore arrived in Washington, the federal government had plenty of
reports on reform just gathering dust on the shelves.
President Clinton changed all that by putting Vice President Al Gore in charge.
When Herbert Hoover finished the Hoover Commission report in 1955, he went back to
Stanford. When Peter Grace finished the Grace Commission report in 1983, he went back
to New York City. But when Al Gore finished his report, he went back to his office and
got to work turning the recommendations into reality.
The Initiative: Phase I
The driving question for the first phase of Reinventing Government was "how can
government work better and cost less?" Beginning in March 1993, the Vice President led
an intensive 6-month review of federal government structures and procedures called the
National Performance Review (NPR). The Report, issued in September 1993, was a
challenge to the entire federal government and a promise of something better for the
government's customers -- the American people.
Realizing that the problems with the federal government stemmed from the archaic
systems which had developed over the years, Vice President Gore asked the people who
knew best what was wrong with the way government worked -- career civil servants -- to
lead the revolution to reinvent government.
The four main principles were simple:
Put customers first -- change government's culture by focusing on what matters to
the people it serves;
Empower employees to get results -- remove layers of oversight, give front-line
employees not only responsibility, but also accountability, for results;
Cut red tape -- eliminate unnecessary paperwork, procedures, and requirements for
2-3
the federal government, its state and local partners, and its customers; and
Cut government back to basics -- eliminate obsolete and duplicate programs and
functions, and reengineer what's left.
The NPR report was well-received. Max DePree. author of the popular Leadership Is An
Art, called it "the best book on management available in America."
What follows is a sampling of accomplishments in Reinventing Government, Phase I.
Some are great and some are small. All show our commitment to making government
work for people again.
A GOVERNMENT THAT WORKS BETTER AND COSTS LESS
Government has started working better. Over 90 percent of the NPR's proposals
have moved forward -- implemented by a Presidential Executive Order or by agency action
or proposed in legislation.
We have focused on improving the performance of federal programs to ensure that
they achieve real results like cleaner air and fewer teen pregnancies, rather than just
spending taxpayer dollars. For the first time, federal agencies have asked customers
what they want and set more than 1,500 customer service standards.
HISTORIC CUTS IN THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE
President Clinton is streamlining federal agencies and cutting management layers
and excessive controls as he shrinks the federal workforce to its smallest size since John
F. Kennedy was President.
FEMA
"FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, has gone
from being a disaster to helping people in disasters."
President Clinton, January 24, 1995
After Hurricane Andrew in 1992, FEMA was criticized for waiting too long to act
and for making inaccurate damage assessments. The immediate needs of victims, as well as
the need of the general public for a competent presence in the midst of the destruction,
went largely unmet.
2-4
But under this Administration. FEMA has completely turned around. Ask the
farmers in the midwest who fought the flood there or the people in California who have
dealt with floods and earthquakes and fires. and they'll tell you that the Administration has
reinvented FEMA. Government workers working hand in hand with private business
rebuilt Southern California's fractured freeways in record time and under budget. And
because the federal government moved fast, all but one of the 650 schools damaged in
the January 1994 earthquake are back in business.
FEMA eliminated two layers of organization, cutting supervisors by 34 percent, and
is now organized around functions. Everyone works when disaster strikes. For example,
48 days after Hurricane Hugo in 1989, FEMA had registered 55,228 disaster victims and
checked 8,418 housing units. But 45 days after the 1994 Los Angeles earthquake,
FEMA had registered 392,992 disaster victims and checked 124,848 housing units.
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
"Putting people first means ensuring that the Federal Government provides
the highest quality service possible to the American people."
President Bill Clinton
Executive Order 12862
Setting Customer Service Standards
September 11, 1993
The Social Security Administration has become an independent agency under a bill
that President Clinton signed and is putting the highest premium possible on customer
service. As one indication of SSA's commitment to customer service, the agency conducted
a nationwide series of customer focus groups and surveyed 10,000 customers in person or
by phone and another 22,000 by mail.
SSA's reengineering efforts are intended to improve the processing of its major
workloads. The agency's initial effort focuses on disability claims processing. The average
disability claim passes through the hands of 26 workers over 150 days. Many claims are
rejected and then reconsidered, involving more people, more processing and more time. By
the end of the full appeal process, the average claim is handled by 43 employees over a
span of 700 days.
SSA's goal in redesigning the disability claims process is to give initial decisions
within 60 days and reduce the time for appeals decisions, if necessary, by nearly 60%.
Suppose the social security check that you need to pay your rent doesn't come the
day you expect it. As things stand now, you call the Social Security Administration and set
2-5
in motion one of those systems that was designed to please somebody other than you.
First, the agency notifies Treasury to stop payment on the first check. You begin waiting.
Meanwhile, Treasury searches its records to see whether the check has been cashed. You
keep waiting. If you're lucky, and it has not been cashed, Treasury mails you another
check. Total waiting time for you and your landlord: two to three weeks. If you're
unlucky, and the missing check has been cashed, you'll wait an additional six weeks.
We have cut four days off the time to reissue an uncashed check. In cases where
checks have been cashed, Treasury is working to get the added six weeks pared down to
one week.
And before President Clinton took office, millions of people did not receive their
Social Security cards within 5 days. Now they do.
Ultimately, the best way for customers to avoid all the problems associated with
paper checks is to get benefit payments electronically through the government's direct
deposit program; it's much faster and safer. Plans are underway for a nationwide system
to deliver other government benefits such as food stamps directly. An electronic benefits
card can eliminate paperwork and deliver services more quickly, cheaply, and accurately,
with less fraud. The program will produce federal savings of $195 million a year once in
operation, and 31 million people in 12 major state and federal programs will benefit.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
"I think I might rather eat a cake that FAILED that particular test."
Vice President Al Gore
The Defense Department is aggressively eliminating ridiculous military
specifications such as this one:
CAKE MIX
4.6.3 Breaks and cracks. Bake as in 4.6.1
a. Cool the cake in the pan for 2 hours at
room temperature 69 degrees F + 5 degrees F and a
relative humidity of 50 + 5 percent.
b. Space two 4 inch diameter cylinders
(for example, two flat-topped metal
cans) 6-1/2 inches apart at the closest
point.
C. Place the cake (with pan and liner re-
2-6
moved) with the flat side down equally
on the two cylinders.
d. Examine after 2 minutes for breaks
and cracks.
The Pentagon decided to reinvent the cake mix with a method used widely in homes
across America -- TASTE the cake! If you like it, great. If you don't, get another cake
mix. The Pentagon scrapped all military specifications for mess hall food and is buying
real food.
U.S. CUSTOMS SERVICE
The Customs Service often took hours, even days, to move fresh flowers and fruit
and other perishable cargo through its port in Miami. Viewing shippers as its customers,
Customs worked with other agencies (e.g., the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the
Food and Drug Administration, and the Fish and Wildlife Service) to find ways to move
cargo more quickly, constantly asking the airlines and other customers how they wanted the
system to work. By relying on electronic filings of shipping documents, Customs
discovered how to please shippers and regulators simultaneously. Now, Customs pre-
approves most cargo before it reaches Miami, permitting agents to focus on inspecting
higher-risk shipments, like illegal drugs.
GIVING STATES AND LOCALITIES MORE FLEXIBILITY
Moving towards a new partnership with states and localities, the Clinton
Administration has made extensive use of waivers to provide states and localities flexibility
in managing existing programs, especially in health services and welfare. President Clinton
has given 25 states the right to slash through federal regulations to reform their welfare
systems. He has also been involved in an ongoing effort to consolidate planning
requirements for 199 federal programs targeted to children and families in the states and
local jurisdictions of Indiana and West Virginia.
In December 1994, the Administration designated 104 community empowerment
zones and enterprise communities. The Community Empowerment Initiative is an
experiment in community-based decision making with the federal government as a partner
to help communities meet their needs.
2-7
Case Study: The Oregon Option
In Oregon, we are creating a new partnership based on an outcomes-oriented
approach to intergovernmental service delivery. In December, Oregon's governor
and numerous mayors signed an agreement with Vice President Gore and several
federal agencies to pilot a redesigned system that will be:
based on results;
oriented to customer needs and satisfaction;
biased toward prevention of problems, not remediation; and
simplified and integrated -- delegating responsibilities to front-line, local
level providers.
THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS
Too often the procurement process ties people in knots. For example, during
Operation Desert Storm, the Air Force needed better communication among its units. The
Air Force found just the right procedure in Motorola's commercial radio, and they ordered
6,000 of them. But Motorola lacked the record-keeping systems required by the
procurement rules to show the Pentagon that it was getting the lowest available price.
(Never mind that the price could be easily checked on the commercial market.) To
circumvent the problem, the government had to persuade the Japanese government to buy
the radios and donate them back to the Air Force.
The system made no sense. Early in the Administration's efforts to implement NPR,
President Clinton revolutionized the federal procurement process with the stroke of a pen,
signing a memorandum through which the executive branch will implement a government-
wide electronic commerce acquisition system. A year later, the President signed into law
the Procurement Reform bill, reinventing the federal government's procurement system.
The Department of Defense, which spends 75 percent of the government's
procurement budget, jumped at the new opportunity. Defense Secretary Perry ordered the
Pentagon to reduce reliance on military specifications. In a move that will save billions of
dollars, Perry directed the department to allow contractors to make greater use of
commercial items in the equipment they sell the government. Freed from the burdensome
"mil specs," more contractors will seek defense work and competition means better quality
and prices.
All aspects of procurement -- ordering, invoices, payment, and so on -- will change
2-8
from a paper-based to an electronic system for small purchasers. It will cut costs and
present a host of opportunities for small business to bid on business from the government.
It also will cut the time for many purchases from three weeks to three minutes.
ENDING YESTERDAY'S GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES
Wool and Mohair
During World War II and the Korean conflict, the United States imported half the
wool required for military uniforms. Determined to reduce dependence on foreign fibers
and to insulate American producers from foreign competition, Congress declared wool a
strategic material and enacted the National Wool Act in 1954. The Act was designed to
increase domestic production of wool by providing direct payments to farmers based on a
percentage of their market sales. In other words, the more wool farmers produced, the
more federal funding they received. About one-third of the payments went to ranchers who
raised Angora goats for mohair. Although mohair never had strategic value, it was
included in the 1954 Act as an offshoot of the wool industry.
Wool was removed from the Pentagon's strategic materials list in 1960. However,
the Act remained in effect until the Clinton Administration ended it, saving an estimated
$923 million over a four-year period.
Honey
Until the Clinton Administration ended it, the federal government supported honey
production since 1950. The program was enacted after honey prices dropped following
World War II because of reduced demand and excess inventories. During the war, the
government declared beekeeping war-essential and encouraged heavy production. Beeswax
was used in place of petroleum to waterproof ammunition and other equipment, and honey
replaced tightly rationed sugar. After the war when demand decreased, Congress
introduced price supports for honey in the Agricultural Act of 1949. The purpose of the
legislation was to ensure that enough honeybees would be available for crop pollination.
The market overcame the original need for the program, and by eliminating the
program we are saving about $15 million over a four year period.
2-9
The Initiative - Phase II
"We are sticking to the principles we used in the first National Performance
Review - principles that underpin America's most innovative and successful
private companies: put customers first, cut red tape, delegate authority and
cut back to basics. And we are going to make government work better and
DO less. We are going to trade interference for opportunity and make it
possible for middle-class Americans to have the break they 've earned to raise
a family, educate their children and get ahead in life."
Vice President Al Gore
The purpose of the second phase of Reinventing Government is to answer the
question, "what should the federal government be doing?" The goal is a smaller federal
government that helps communities solve their own problems and delivers quality services
so that Americans know they are receiving value for their tax dollar.
How will we know when this effort is successful? We will know when there are
fewer decisions being made by the federal government that can best be made elsewhere,
and when customers of the federal government see substantial improvements in services.
And when we move from a process where lawyers and bureaucrats write volumes of
regulations to one where people work in partnership to issue sensible regulations that
impose the least burden without sacrificing rational and necessary protections.
REGULATORY REFORM
"I believe we can bring back common sense and reduce hassle without stripping
away safeguards for our children, our workers, our families."
President Clinton
Remarks at Regulatory Reform Event
February 21, 1995
"Everyone wants reform. This administration is the first to take it seriously and
make it work."
Philip Howard
Author, The Death of Common Sense
February 21, 1995
2-10
In February 1995. President Clinton announced sweeping changes in the federal
regulatory process with specific instructions to federal regulators:
First: Cut Obsolete Regulations
President Clinton ordered regulators to conduct a page-by-page review of all agency
regulations and eliminate or revise those that were outdated or in need of reform. A list of
eliminated or modified regulations will be delivered to the President by June 1, 1995.
Second: Reward Results, Not Red Tape
The President directed the agencies to change the way they measure the performance
of the agency and the frontline regulators in order to focus on results, not process and
punishment. By June 1, agencies must eliminate all personnel performance measures based
on process (number of visits made, etc.) and punishment (number of violations found,
amount of fines levied, etc.).
Third: Create Grassroots Partnerships Outside of Washington
President Clinton directed agency directors to convene groups of frontline regulators
and the people affected by their regulations around the nation -- at our cleanup sites, our
factories and our ports.
Fourth: Negotiate, Don't Dictate
The President directed regulators to substantially expand efforts to promote
consensual rulemaking instead of the traditional rulemaking that has dominated the
regulatory arena. By March 30, regulators must submit to the President a list of upcoming
rulemakings that can be converted into negotiated rulemakings.
To highlight the Administration's regulatory reform efforts, the President visited
Custom Printers, a small print shop in Northern Virginia, where he announced the first in a
series of government-wide reforms to cut red tape and reduce the regulatory burden on
American businesses, especially small businesses.
President Clinton unveiled a landmark package of 25 environmental reforms and
announced a government-wide policy that allows regulators to waive fines where small
businesses have acted in good faith, but violated the rules. He also announced a set of
reforms that will make high-quality drugs and medical devices available to consumers more
quickly and cheaply.
The regulatory reform process will continue as the Administration continues to
2-11
throw out yesterday's regulations without sacrificing real protection for our citizens.
REINVENTING FEDERAL AGENCIES - Phase II
President Clinton and Vice President Gore are examining the basic missions of
government to find and eliminate things that don't need to be done by the federal
government and sort out how best to do the things the federal government should continue
to do. Agency teams are using this chart to determine whether their programs should be
eliminated, consolidated, privatized or given to state and local governments. (See Chart 2B
on following page).
After President Clinton said, "We have to change yesterday's government and make
it work for the America of today and tomorrow," The President got some quick results from
agencies on the leading edge of our government revolution.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD)
The housing needs of low- and moderate-income families have worsened in the past
decade and a half. Our cities have increasingly become enclaves of the poorest of the poor.
Violence and drugs, homelessness and AIDS have ravaged inner city neighborhoods.
Decades of efforts to solve urban America's problems of poverty and lack of affordable
housing have created layers of programs, regulations and bureaucracies that shifted the
focus away from people to projects. The President has called for a radical transformation
of HUD, giving back responsibility to cities and states, empowering people and eliminating
the layers. To do this, the President will:
1. Transform public housing. Federal assistance will no longer go to public
housing projects, but instead will go directly to people, particularly those who work
or are making meaningful efforts to become employed. And President Clinton will
end the monopoly of public housing agencies. They will have to compete for tenants
like others in the marketplace. Current residents of public housing and privately
owned assisted housing projects will get certificates and the freedom to move to use
these certificates to help pay rent in the private market if they wish.
2. Consolidate 60 major HUD programs into three performance-based funds -
a Community Opportunity Fund, an Affordable Housing Fund, and Housing
Certificates for Families and Individuals, to provide flexible resources to mayors and
governors for critical housing and economic development activities in their
communities. The consolidation will sweep away the clutter of separate application
processes, rules and regulations that has accumulated at HUD over the past 30 years,
as programs were piled on top of programs. And it will free cities and states to solve
their housing and community development problems in their own ways.
2-12
NAT
PERFORMANCE
Sample Decision Tree for Analyzing Agency Programs
REVIEW
AI Gere
Existing Program or Function
View
President of the United States
Is this program or function critical to the agency's mission
based on "customer" input?
YES
NO
Can it be done as well or better at the state or local level?
Terminate
Privatize
2-13
YES
NO
Give
Sell
Away
CHART 2B
Devolve to Other Govt's
Is there any way to cut cost or improve performance
by Introducing competition?
Best chances for
introducing competition
Same $
Fewer $
Similar services available
YES
NO
commercially; e.g., food
service, scientific research
Rapidly changing technology;
How can NPR principles be applied to put customers first,
e.g., information technology
cut red tape, and empower employees?
Services paid directly by
customers; e.g., Alaskan
Power, air traffic control
Franchise
Privatize
Continue Reinvented
Multiple federal locations;
Operation
e.g., six shipyards, six IRS
revenue centers
Strictly internal services; e.g.
Govt.
Contract
Require Fed. Govt.
Vouchers
travel, payroll
Corporation
for Services
units to Compete
3. Reinvigorate the Federal Housing Authority (FHA). creating new flexibility
as a government-owned corporation. The new entrepreneurial FHA will work with
private enterprise and non-profit organizations to expand homeownership
opportunities to low-and moderate-income Americans, and provide decent. affordable
housing to low-income renters.
ELIMINATING THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION (ICC)
For a more efficient government that is out of areas where it doesn't belong, we
must eliminate governmental functions that are no longer needed and streamline those that
are essential.
The Interstate Commerce Commission is a relic of nineteenth century government,
created to address nineteenth century problems. In the mid and late 1800's, railroads'
monopoly and arrogance earned their owners the label of "robber barons." The creation of
the ICC was the result.
Circumstances have dramatically changed. In 1885, railroads had twice the level of
revenues as the federal government. Today, the federal government takes in almost 30
times more revenue than the nation's railroads. The most significant changes occurred
fifteen years ago with the enactment of broad deregulatory legislation. It is now time to
write the final chapter on deregulation. President Clinton is recommending the elimination
of the ICC. Those functions for which there is a need will be transferred to other federal
agencies.
During the 1887 debate on the Interstate Commerce Act, Congressman Crisp, the
champion of the creation of the Interstate Commerce Commission, stated: "I maintain, sir,
that the railroad business, or the business of transportation, is no exception in one respect
from any other business, and that is, it is to the interest of the public to have
competition." That principle applies no less forcefully today than it did 108 years ago.
THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
The Energy Department owns and operates one of the largest oil fields in the United
States - the Naval Petroleum Reserve. During World War I the Navy changed the fuel for
our battleships from coal to oil and decided it needed its own oil field to fuel the battleships
if we ran out of oil from all other fields. We no longer need that oil to fuel these
battleships, so the federal government is getting out of that business. By letting the private
sector operate the oil field, taxpayers will get a more efficient product at less cost.
The Department of Energy will save taxpayers over $14 billion by privatizing the
Naval Petroleum Reserve and four Power Marketing Administrations, making government
2-14
contractors more accountable, consolidating research facilities and programs, and
implementing other streamlining activities.
TRANSPORTATION-AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
A reinvented government should not perform functions government doesn't do best.
The core federal role in aviation is regulating safety and encouraging infrastructure
investment. The day-to-day operations of the air traffic control system need not be part of
this direct federal role.
The Administration is proposing to transfer the FAA's air traffic control services to
a wholly-owned government Air Traffic Services Corporation. The corporation will not be
subject to federal procurement, personnel and budget restrictions, so it will have the
flexibility to speed modernization of the air traffic system and improve its operating
efficiency.
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
The General Services Administration was created in 1949 to help agencies perform
administrative services cost-effectively and to provide selected administrative services
directly to departments and agencies, taking advantage of economies of scale and avoiding
duplication. But the government has grown in size and complexity in the post-World War
II period and agencies, particularly the larger ones, now provide for themselves most of the
services that GSA offers. Assumptions about economies of scale and the cost-effectiveness
of traditional means of providing goods and services must be challenged and tested in the
current marketplace.
GSA will be transformed into the policy and oversight organization for government-
wide administrative services, except personnel. This will increase agencies' accountability
for results, encourage innovation and better government-wide planning and assure
responsible asset management. The agency will examine its service functions and ask:
"Why can't this service be provided more effectively by the private sector?" If government
must do it, the question will be: "Why should it be done centrally; why can't other
agencies do it just as well?"
PERFORMANCE PARTNERSHIPS
The Clinton Administration is reinventing relationships with states and local
governments by consolidating funding and eliminating overlapping authorities, creating
funding incentives to reward desirable results and reducing wasteful paperwork. It's time
to focus on outcomes. President Clinton and Vice President Gore are proposing
2-15
performance partnerships with states and localities that will empower communities to make
their own decisions about how to address their needs and make them accountable for
results. In addition to the HUD performance partnership discussed above, the
Administration's job training improvements highlight the benefits of performance
partnerships. By combining some 70 education and job training programs into one system
which will provide Skill Grants to low income and unemployed workers, the Administration
will give states and local governments substantial flexibility for developing workforce
development programs to meet local needs.
"Government of the future is about never sacrificing our standards of
excellence, never abandoning our responsibilities, but always discarding the
remnants of yesterday's government. always discarding red tape in favor
of results."
Vice President Al Gore
January 12, 1995
For all of the success to date, reinvention is no short-term challenge. Consider this:
even the most successful businesses have needed years to overhaul their operations in order
to compete in the new economy. The federal government, which dwarfs even our largest
corporations in size, will also need to continuously renew its processes.
As the process of reform continues, this Administration will accelerate reinvention
efforts, move ahead more boldly and ask even more fundamental questions about what the
federal government does and how it can do it better. President Clinton has asked the
departments and agencies to bring him bold, creative, innovative, new ideas about how to
deliver services and benefits to the American people. They are responding, and our vision
of a government that works better and costs less is becoming a reality.
2-16
Clinton Presidential Records
Digital Records Marker
This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative
marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff.
This marker identifies the place of a tabbed divider. Given our
digitization capabilities, we are sometimes unable to adequately
scan such dividers. The title from the original document is
indicated below.
3
Divider Title:
3. REWARDING WORK
FOR WORKING FAMILIES
Introduction
Earned Income Tax Credit
The 1993 expansion gives 15 million working families a tax cut.
The credit returns a total of $21 billion to working families making up to $28,500
per year.
When fully phased in, the EITC will offer a maximum credit of about $3,560 for
families with two or more children, more than double the maximum basic credit of
$1,511 in 1993.
Making Work Pay - The Minimum Wage
The President has proposed increasing the minimum wage from $4.25 to $5.15 over
two years through two 45-cent increases.
The proposal would offer 11 million workers a raise and provide a full-time, year-
round worker a raise of $1,800 a year as much as the average family spends on
groceries in over seven months.
Over a dozen empirical studies show a proposal like the President's can increase
wages without costing jobs.
Family and Medical Leave Act
In February 1993, President Clinton signed the Family and Medical Leave Act,
mandating 12 weeks of unpaid, job-guaranteed leave for childbirth, adoption, or
illness of an employee or family member.
The Department of the Treasury estimates that 42.5 million American workers are
covered under the new legislation.
The General Accounting Office estimates that up to 2.539 million workers were
likely to need unpaid leave in 1993.
3 - 1
Welfare to Work
In its first two years, the Clinton Administration has granted welfare reform waivers
to 25 states to cut through red tape and launch welfare reform initiatives.
In June 1994, the Administration introduced the Work and Responsibility Act - the
most sweeping welfare reform plan a President has ever proposed.
President Clinton has pledged to launch a National Campaign Against Teen
Pregnancy and his welfare bill includes challenge grants for teen pregnancy
prevention programs at 1,000 schools around the country and the establishment of a
national clearinghouse on teen pregnancy.
President Clinton hosted a national bipartisan working session on welfare reform in
January 1995 with leading officials from both parties and all levels of government.
The session produced a bipartisan agreement to work together to pass sweeping
welfare reform legislation this year.
Child Support
The Administration collected a record $9 billion in child support in 1993 a 12%
increase over the previous year. President Clinton's welfare reform bill included the
toughest child support enforcement measures ever proposed. The plan would
increase child support collections by $24 billion over the next decade and signal that
both parents have a responsibility to raise the children they bring into this world.
The plan's provisions would require AFDC mothers to help establish paternity,
streamline the paternity establishment process, ensure fair child support awards, help
states establish superior processes to enforce awards, track parents across state lines,
and enable states to set up work and training programs for noncustodial parents who
earn too little to meet their child support obligations.
In February 1995, the President signed an executive order to make the federal
government a model employer in the area of child support, ensuring its employees
are fulfilling fair obligations to their children.
3 - 2
3A. EARNED INCOME TAX CREDIT
"The new direction I propose will make this solemn, simple commitment. By
expanding the refundable earned income tax credit, we will make history. We
will reward the work of millions of working poor Americans by realizing the
principle that if you work 40 hours a week and you've got a child in the house,
you will no longer be in poverty."
President Clinton
February 17, 1993
Actions to Date
With the passage of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, the
Administration took the first step toward fulfilling one of President Clinton's strongest
commitments: to ensure that no child of full-time working parents would have to live
below the poverty level. This expansion, which began in 1994, will be fully phased in
by 1996. This expansion:
Gives 15 million working families a tax cut.
Returns a total of $21 billion to working families making up to $28,500 per year
over 5 years.
When fully phased in will offer a maximum credit of about $3,560 for families
with two or more children, more than double the maximum basic credit of
$1,511 in 1993.
When fully phased in will offer a maximum credit for families with one child of
about $2,156, compared to the maximum basic credit of $1,434 in 1993.
Will, for the first time, offer a maximum credit of $324 to very low-income
workers without children.
3 - 3
Background
Our country was forged by men and women who came to America looking for a
better life. People who were willing to work hard prospered. For many centuries the
American dream was within reach for most Americans because hard work paid off. It paid
with wages that men and women used to support their families.
Yet the promise of hard work started to flicker in the 1970s. Adjusted for inflation,
wages for the average worker were essentially no higher in 1993 than they had been twenty
years earlier. For the first time in many generations, children earned less than their parents
had. Each year, working men and women seemed to have to toil harder, just to stay in the
same place.
The toll was particularly hard on young families. No longer could one take a job
and be sure of supporting a family. In 1979, all but 12 percent of full-time jobs paid
enough to support a family of four above poverty. By 1993, the figure had climbed to 16
percent. More young working families were poor. Like most Americans they responded
by working still harder, with increasing tolls on family life.
The Initiative
In his first major address to the nation on February 17, 1993, the President
committed to expanding the EITC in order to make work pay for young families. Instead
of using the tax system to take money away from low and moderate income working
families, it would be used to reward them for their hard work. He called for expanding the
Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), which might better be labelled the working family tax
credit.
The EITC amounts to a pay raise for the working poor. For every dollar a low
income family with children earns - up to a certain maximum -- they earn additional tax
credits they can collect in a refund. The EITC has enjoyed strong bipartisan support for
many years. First adopted in 1975, the EITC is nearly universally acknowledged to be a
powerful way to help working families struggling to make ends meet. And it provides
support, without stigma, without interference in the marketplace, and with almost no
bureaucracy.
But unlike any of his predecessors, President Clinton called for raising the EITC to
the point where any person who works full-time, even at a minimum wage job, earned
3 - 4
enough so that, combined with food stamps, he or she could keep a family of four out of
poverty. He also called for increasing the credit so that families struggling above poverty,
with incomes up to about $28,500 also benefitted from an increase in the credit.
The President proposed and the Congress adopted a dramatic expansion in the EITC.
With the EITC, a worker earning under $8,900 with two children, will effectively receive a
40% pay increase by 1996. Every dollar of his or her earnings will bring 40 cents in tax
credits in 1996. A family with a full time minimum wage worker could qualify for up to
$3,560 in EITC from the government--$2,500 more than they would have in 1990. Even
families earning $25,000 per year benefit from the EITC. In 1996, they would qualify for
nearly $750 in tax rebate. In 1990, they would have received nothing.
Indeed, one of the great untold stories of the budget which passed in 1993 the first
year of the Clinton presidency -- is that it dramatically lowered taxes and increased incomes
for millions of working families. Twenty million taxpayers will take advantage of the EITC
in FY 1995 with resulting tax cuts reaching $22 billion. Eighty percent of these claims were
refunded as direct payments to families. When fully phased in 1996, 16.1 million families
are expected to take advantage of the credit with tax cuts totaling $25.2 billion.
Under present law, EITC claimants can opt to receive part of the EITC in advance
payments throughout the year, rather than wait to file for a lump-sum refund. However,
only a small percentage choose to do so. While reasons vary for the low utilization rate for
advance payments, it is partly due to a lack of information and the fact that employers are
responsible for determining eligibility and administering the advance payments. In President
Clinton's Welfare Reform Bill the Work and Responsibility Act of 1994 he proposed
that States be allowed to conduct demonstration projects to make advance payments of the
EITC through a State agency. Welfare recipients who move to the workforce could particu-
larly benefit from receiving the EITC in advance payments throughout the year because they
would experience the rewards from work on a more timely basis.
The EITC offers a genuine alternative to welfare. By going to work, rather than
remaining on welfare, families can earn tax credits which make their income exceed welfare
payments. By doing the right thing for their own dignity and independence, they are also
doing the right thing for their families economically. By moving toward independence, they
are being rewarded, rather than penalized.
3 - 5
3B. RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE
Action to Date
On February 3, 1995, the President's proposed an increase in the minimum wage
from $4.25 to $5.15 over two years, through two 45 cent increases. The last
increase, passed by an overwhelming, bipartisan vote in 1989, and implemented
in 1990 and 1991, was also a 90 cent increase in two 45 cent stages.
Background
Americans know a raise in the minimum wage is one way to help make work pay.
A higher minimum wage -- a floor to ensure workers that they're getting a fair deal for
their efforts provides a foothold into the middle class for many hardworking Americans.
And for those Americans who already rely on the minimum wage, an increase is essential
to their standard of living.
Minimum wage work just does not pay. The real value of the minimum wage is
now 27 percent lower than it was in 1979, and by next year -- if it is not increased -- the
minimum wage will be at its lowest real level in four decades. Contrary to popular
opinion, the average worker affected by an increase in the minimum wage is not just a
teenager flipping hamburgers. The fact is that the average minimum wage worker brings
home half of his or her family's earnings, and that two-thirds of minimum wage workers
are adults. Furthermore, an increase in the minimum wage will help working families get
by: for example, just a ninety cent per hour increase in the minimum wage means an
additional $1,800 for a minimum wage earner who works full-time, year-round -- enough
for the average family to pay for groceries for seven months.
$4.25 an hour is not enough earnings to pay the bills, and $8,500, for a year of
full-time work, is not a decent, livable income. At the same time as inflation has stolen
much of the value of the minimum wage, the condition of America's working poor has
declined. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that, adjusted for inflation, the average
hourly wage of male high school graduates fell by 19 percent since 1979, and by 3 percent
for female high school graduates. High school drop outs have fared even worse. This
3 6
trend of declining real wages for less-skilled Americans has continued for 15 years.
Most disturbing, less-skilled workers have done poorly in times of economic growth
as well as in times of economic downturns. The U.S. economy created more jobs in 1994
than in any other year in the past decade, and the unemployment rate fell to a four year low
while the help wanted index climbed to a four year high. Yet the prosperity of this
recovery, and of the past 15 years, has not been shared by all our citizens.
The Initiative
President Clinton's proposal to increase the minimum wage 90 cents an hour over
two years can help lift the lives of the eleven million Americans who currently earn less
than $5.15 an hour. For those workers putting in 40 hours a week, all year round, this
minimum wage increase provides $1,800, which is enough money for the average American
family to buy groceries for seven months.
The most productive and powerful country in the world does not even guarantee its
people that if you work full-time, year round even with the Earned Income Tax Credit
(EITC) that you can raise a family out of poverty. To that end, President Clinton made a
simple compact with the nation: if you work 40 hours a week, you will not have to bring
up your children in poverty.
In pursuit of this objective, the President expanded the EITC as a way for low and
moderate income families to make ends meet. But expanding the EITC is not enough. In
order to ensure that there is a strong incentive for work over welfare, there needs to be a
multi-tiered strategy. The EITC has fulfilled its part of this plan, now, the President has
proposed an increase in the minimum wage to make every hour of work pay more.
With a 90-cent minimum wage increase, food stamps, and the EITC, a family of
four with a full-time, year round minimum wage worker would be lifted above the poverty
line. Simply, a $5.15 minimum wage would provide every American the simple guarantee
that they could raise a family out of poverty, if they were willing to fulfill their side of the
bargain: to work hard and play by the rules.
The critics claim, though, that an increase in the minimum wage will not guarantee a
brighter future for working Americans, but will cost jobs for exactly the people that the
President is trying to help. But their criticism is off-target. Over a dozen studies have
found that increases in the minimum wage have had an insignificant effect on employment.
Several of these studies even extended previous ones that had claimed that raising the
3 - 7
minimum wage decreases employment and these studies. when updated, no longer find a
significant impact. This "new view" is gaining support among economists: Professor
Robert Solow, a Nobel laureate in economics, commented: "When the minimum wage has
deteriorated so much in purchasing power, there are probably enough people who would be
worth the higher wage and would not lose their jobs." Solow also notes that, "[T]he
evidence of job loss is weak. And the fact that the evidence is weak suggests that the
impact on jobs is small." And in a recent review of the literature, Professor Richard
Freeman of Harvard, a widely respected labor economist, wrote: "At the level of the
minimum wage in the late 1980's, moderate legislated increases did not reduce employment
and were, if anything, associated with higher employment in some locales."
If the minimum wage doesn't cost jobs, critics say, then it certainly doesn't help the
neediest workers. They base their views on the conclusion that the typical minimum wage
worker is a middle-class high school student. The facts suggest otherwise. Only one in 14
workers earning between $4.25 and $5.15 per hour is a teenaged student from a family with
above-average earnings. Fully 47 percent of workers who would be affected by the
President's proposal have family earnings in the bottom 20 percent of all working families;
families that earn less than $360 per week. The average worker who would be affected by
the President's proposal brings home half of his or her family's earnings; 38 percent of
those affected are the sole breadwinner in their family.
Despite the criticism in some corners, the minimum wage has traditionally had
bipartisan support. In 1989, the minimum wage increase passed the House by a vote of
382 to 37 (with 135 Republicans voting for the bill), and 89 to 8 in the Senate (with
support of 36 Republicans).
The current situation -- with the real minimum wage heading for its lowest real level
in 40 years and with more and more workers finding that full-time work doesn't pay is
unacceptable. And a reasonable remedy is at hand.
3 - 8
3C. THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL
LEAVE ACT OF 1993
"Family and medical leave is a matter of pure common sense and a matter of
common decency. It will provide Americans what they need most: peace of mind.
Never again will parents have to fear losing their jobs because of their families."
President Clinton
Remarks on the Signing of the
Family and Medical Leave Act
February 5, 1993
Actions to Date
President Clinton signed the Family and Medical Leave Act into law on February
5, 1993, fulfilling his pledge to "treat families right."
The Act guarantees 12 weeks of unpaid, job-guaranteed leave for childbirth,
adoption, or illness of the employee or a family member.
The Department of the Treasury estimates that 42.5 million American workers
are covered under the new legislation.
The General Accounting Office estimates that up to 2.539 million workers were
likely to need unpaid leave in 1993.
Background
Until President Clinton signed the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) on
February 5, 1993, the United States was the only country in the industrialized world with
the exception of South Africa that did not provide family leave protection to workers.
The FMLA replaced measures twice vetoed by former President Bush.
3 9
The Initiative
"I know that men and women are more productive when they are sure they
won't lose their jobs because they 're trying to be good parents, good
children. Our businesses should not lose the services of these dedicated
Americas. And over the long run, the lessons of the most productive
companies in the world, here at home and around the world, are that those
that put their people first are those who will triumph in the global economy."
President Clinton
Remarks on the Signing of the
Family and Medical Leave Act
February 5, 1993
The Family and Medical Leave Act promotes "family values" in the fullest sense by
enabling an estimated 40 to 50 million working Americans to balance the demands of their
workplace with the needs of their families. Before they were covered by the Family and
Medical Leave Act, such employees were forced into agonizing choices between keeping
their jobs and taking care of their loved ones. Hospitalized employees routinely lost their
jobs -- as well as their health insurance -- for "excessive absenteeism." Working parents
who had to leave work to take care of ill or aged parents were being fired.
The Family and Medical Leave Act has not only helped workers facing difficult
family or medical situations, it has also proven beneficial to employers. As many of
America's most respected business leaders testified during legislative hearings, there is a
direct correlation between stability in the family and productivity in the workplace. The
costs incurred in providing leave are more than offset by savings realized from lower
turnover, higher productivity, and reducing or avoiding the costs of training new employees.
Despite sensational predictions by FMLA opponents that the Act would prove
ruinous to business, the experience of the first year and a half indicates that the federal
legislation has caused little disruption or expense to employers. As many companies have
discovered, providing family and medical leave is not only the right thing to do; it is also
cost-beneficial.
For example, the software and computer services company Compuserve had a policy
similar to FMLA in place two years before the Act went into effect and found it relatively
easy and inexpensive. And it paid off handsomely in company loyalty. Other companies
have had similar experiences. According to the New York Times, attrition at Aetna Life
3 10
and Casualty dropped from 23 percent in 1986 to 9 percent in 1990 after the firm adopted a
family and medical leave policy.
The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 became effective on August 5. 1993 for
most private and public sector employees. The legislation allows eligible employees up to
12 weeks of unpaid leave for specific family and medical reasons, such as the birth or
adoption of a child, care of a spouse, child or parent who has a serious health condition, or
when a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform his or her job.
An employee returning from Family and Medical leave is entitled to the same or an
equivalent position as he or she held before the leave and is entitled to the continuation of
health insurance benefits.
In the first year-and-a-half that the Act has been in place, most employers have
demonstrated that they want to do the right thing, once they understand what is required.
The vast majority (91%) of valid complaints have been easily resolved, usually over the
telephone, without the need for litigation or any complex administrative procedure.
Case Study:Employee Terminated for Attending
to Critically-III Husband in Intensive Care
"Jane Smith" and her husband, "Joe," were both involved in a serious car
accident and taken by ambulance to the hospital. Although Jane was treated and
released, her husband was admitted to the intensive care unit. When Jane asked her
employer for leave to care for her husband, she was told to take "whatever time she
needed." Each day she called in to work and let her supervisor know the current
situation. When Jane called in on the seventh day and reported that her husband's
condition had worsened, she was told to report to work immediately. Leaving the bed
side of her critically-ill husband, she arrived at the office to be informed that she was
being terminated because of "excessive absences." A desperate Jane called the
Department of Labor (DOL), the federal agency responsible for enforcing the FMLA.
A DOL official explained the law to the employer's lawyer, who understood that Jane
was entitled to Family and Medical Leave while her husband was seriously ill. Jane
was immediately reinstated and granted leave.
3 11
Case Study: Employee on Cancer Surgery Leave
Terminated Because Employer Feared Increase
in Insurance Rates
Following her cancer surgery and treatment, "Maria Lopez" had been recovering
at home for a month and four days. Now she was feeling much better and had been
cleared by her doctor to return to work. But when she advised her employer that she
was ready to come back, the employer terminated Maria, instead of restoring her to her
job. Maria contacted the Department of Labor, which discussed the situation with her
employer. The firm readily acknowledged that Maria was an excellent employee, but
had fired her anyway because they were self-insured and feared rising insurance rates if
Maria had a relapse.
The Department of Labor explained that under the FMLA, the employer was
required to grant leave to an eligible employee with a serious health condition -- such as
Maria's -- and to reinstate her to the same or a comparable position when she returned.
The employer agreed to reinstate Maria, but fired her three weeks later. DOL once
again contacted the employer and advised the firm that employees may not be
discriminated against for filing FMLA complaints. Maria was not only reinstated, but
was also compensated for the pay she lost during the time she was not allowed to return
to work.
3 12
3D. WELFARE-TO-WORK
Last year I introduced the most sweeping welfare reform plan ever presented by an
Administration. We have to make welfare what it was meant to be -- a second chance,
not a way of life. We have to help those on welfare move to work as quickly as possible,
to provide child care and teach them skills if that's what they need for up to two years.
And after that, there ought to be a simple hard rule: anyone who can work must go to
work.
President Clinton
State of the Union Address
January 24, 1995
3 13
Actions to Date
To date, the Clinton Administration granted welfare reform waivers to 25
states more than the previous two administrations had granted in 12 years.
These waivers cut through federal rules and red tape so that states can launch
their own initiatives to reform welfare.
After a year of bipartisan consultation with state and local officials, members of
Congress, reform experts, citizens, and people on welfare, the Administration
introduced a sweeping welfare reform plan in June 1994. The New York Times
called the Clinton plan "a genuine attempt to impose the toughest work
requirements ever attached to welfare, the first serious effort by any President,
Democrat or Republican, to stop the disastrous generational cycle of America's
dole society." (NYT Magazine, 7/31/94)
President Clinton has pledged to launch a National Campaign Against Teen
Pregnancy. The welfare reform plan the Administration proposed in 1994
included challenge grants for teen pregnancy prevention programs at 1,000
schools around the country. The President has also challenged business, civic,
and religious leaders, foundations, and parents to join in an initiative outside
government to attack the growing problem of teen pregnancy and births outside
marriage.
President Clinton hosted a national bipartisan working session on welfare reform
in January 1995 with leading governors, members of Congress, and local
officials from both parties. The session produced a bipartisan agreement to work
together to pass sweeping welfare reform legislation this year that will move
people from welfare to work, discourage teen pregnancy and encourage
responsible parenting, set the toughest possible national standards for child
support enforcement, and give states more flexibility in return for more
accountability.
3 14
Background
"Last year I introduced the most sweeping welfare reform plan ever
presented by an Administration. We have to make welfare what it was meant
to be -- a second chance, not a way of life. We have to help those on welfare
move to work as quickly as possible, to provide child care and teach them
skills if that's what they need for up to two years. And after that, there ought
to be a simple hard rule: anyone who can work must go to work."
President Clinton
State of the Union Address
January 24, 1995
There is near universal consensus that the present welfare system is broken. The
public disdain is clear in polls and talk shows alike. And the harshest critics of all are the
supposed beneficiaries -- welfare recipients themselves. They talk of a system which isolates
and stigmatizes. A system that seems to penalize them when they try to go to work, and
sends the message that welfare recipients should not work.
President Clinton has been on the forefront of the effort to fix the welfare system both
as a State Governor and as President. As Governor he led the effort, along with Senator
Moynihan, to pass the Family Support Act of 1988 (FSA). As President he has led the way
with the introduction of the Work and Responsibility Act of 1994.
The 1988 reform reflected a growing expectation that welfare should be a transitional
period of preparation for work and self-sufficiency. For those without sufficient work skills
or education it would provide the necessary education, training and job search assistance
activities through the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS) Training program. For
many welfare recipients, the JOBS program has worked, and they have moved off welfare
and into the workforce. Unfortunately, the FSA did not change the welfare system as much
as was intended. Many states did not have the ability to draw down the full amount of
available funds as a weak economy in the initial years after enactment put additional demands
on state budgets and AFDC caseloads mushroomed. Broad exemptions also limited the
program participation. Even after 1988, the welfare system was primarily a system designed
to get money to people who were not working, rather than one designed to move people to
self-support.
As the President has pledged, it is time to end welfare as we know it, and to create a
system that is based on work and responsibility designed to help people help themselves. We
need to move beyond the old debates and offer a simple compact that gives people more
opportunity in return for more responsibility. Work is the best social program this country
has ever devised; it gives people hope and structure and meaning to their daily lives.
3 15
Responsibility is the value that will enable individuals and parents to do what programs
cannot -- because governments don't raise children, people do. And ultimately, we need to
change the very culture of welfare offices, from writing checks to helping people move off
welfare. It's time for the welfare system to reflect our values as Americans.
The Initiative
The Administration vision is straightforward: People should not have children until
they are ready to support them. Parents - both parents - have responsibilities to support
their children. Government has an important role to give people a hand up and give people
access to the skills they need - but we can and should expect work in return. And support
should be limited to a maximum of two years of cash assistance during which time the
recipients should be in job placement or training or education so as to move off aid as
quickly as possible. After two years people should be expected to work, preferably in the
private sector, but in community service jobs if necessary. Anyone who is willing to work
ought to be able to support their family. But those who are able but not willing to work,
should not be eligible for welfare.
In June of 1993, President Clinton formed a Working Group to develop a welfare
reform plan. The Working Group actively sought input from State Governors, State
administrators and the public. Five hearings were held throughout the country in Illinois,
Washington, D.C., New Jersey, California and Tennessee. Members of the Working Group
and staff met with some 250 different organizations and took testimony from 150 groups.
The Working Group visited many welfare offices to observe first hand the problems with
the existing system and to discuss these problems with caseworkers. Most importantly,
perhaps, the Working Group sought input from those most affected by welfare reform -
welfare recipients themselves. The Working Group met with over 100 welfare recipients
and heard about the struggles they endure daily: with poverty, with the welfare system that
is often demeaning, stigmatizing and isolating, and with the difficulties in leaving welfare
and finding work that can support their families.
The plan, which was introduced in Congress in June, 1994 as the Work and
Responsibility Act of 1994, has four major principles: 1) work, 2) responsibility, and
3) reducing teen pregnancy and births outside of marriage; and 4) state flexibility and
accountability.
1. Work
Making Welfare a Transition to Work: The plan the Administration proposed last year
3 16
changes the focus of welfare to helping people get jobs, not writing them checks for life.
From the first day, the new system would focus on making recipients self-sufficient.
Working with a caseworker, each recipient will develop an employability plan identifying
the education, training, and job placement services needed to move into the workforce.
Participants who are job-ready would be immediately oriented to the workplace. Parents
who refuse to stay in school, look for work, or attend job training programs would be
sanctioned. For the first time, time limits would be imposed - receiving welfare cash
benefits, without work, would end after two years. (While there would be appropriate
exceptions for the disabled or those with disabled children, existing exemptions would be
reduced.)
Those people unable to find work at the end of two years must go to work,
preferably in the private sector, but in a community service job if necessary. People would
be paid for the hours they work - this is work, not workfare.
Supporting Working Families: The EITC, Health reform, Child Care and Minimum
Wage. -- Work must pay so that a person leaving welfare for work is better off than on
welfare. The earned income tax credit (EITC) expansion, enacted by the Administration in
1993, is one important way to help support working families. Under the welfare reform
proposal, four states would be able to work with the Treasury Department to issue the EITC
on a monthly basis. Health care reform remains vitally important - we have to ensure that
those leaving welfare for work don't lose health care coverage. We should expand child
care for those leaving welfare for work and for low-income working families. Finally,
increasing the minimum wage would make every hour of work pay more and guarantee that
a worker willing to work hard can raise a family out of poverty.
2. Responsibility
"We should demand responsibility from parents who bring children into the
world, not let them off the hook and expect the taxpayers to pick up the tab
for their neglect."
President Clinton
National Association of Counties
March 7, 1995
Parental Responsibility. -- Both parents have a responsibility to support their children.
The plan calls for the toughest child support enforcement measures in the history of this
3 17
country. This includes universal paternity establishment efforts and education and outreach
efforts aimed at stressing the importance of paternity establishment. Young people should
be taught that parenting a child brings real responsibilities, and that they should not become
parents until they are able to nurture and support their children. The plan also provides for
regular awards updating, a national child support clearinghouse to track delinquent parents
across state lines, and tough enforcement measures such as license revocations.
Accountability for Taxpayers. -- To eliminate fraud and ensure that every dollar is used
productively, welfare reform will coordinate programs, automate files, and monitor receipt
of benefits through a national public assistance clearinghouse and state tracking systems.
Performance, Not Process. -- The plan the Administration proposed last year demands
greater responsibility of the welfare office itself, existing programs will be better
coordinated and simplified and improved incentives will be directly linked to performance.
Under a separate initiative developed by Vice President Gore, States will be encouraged to
move toward Electronic Benefit Transfer, leading to reduced fraud and substantial savings
in administrative costs. The plan also calls for increased state flexibility - allowing states to
try innovative approaches within broad parameters designed to ensure that children are
appropriately protected.
3. Reducing Teen Pregnancy
"We must discourage irresponsible behavior that lands people on welfare in
the first place. We must tell our children not to have children until they are
married and ready to be good parents."
President Clinton
National Association of Counties
March 7, 1995
Preventing Teen Pregnancy. -- To prevent welfare dependency in the first place, teenagers
must get the message that staying in school, postponing pregnancy, and preparing to work
are the right things to do. The President has called for a National Campaign Against Teen
Pregnancy, with a national clearinghouse on teen pregnancy, mobilization grants and
demonstrations in middle and high schools, and most important, an initiative outside
government that brings parents, religious, civic, and business leaders, and foundations
together to change the signals we send the next generation.
A Clear Message for Teen Parents. -- Teenagers who have children will face
responsibility - they will be required to stay in school, live at home or with a responsible
adult, and identify the fathers. At the same time, caseworkers will work closely with them,
3 18
offering them encouragement and support, assisting them with living situations, and helping
them access services such as parenting classes and child care.
4. State Flexibility and Accountability
"In the last two years we made a good start in continuing the work of welfare
reform. Our Administration gave two dozen states the right to slash through
federal rules and regulations to reform their own welfare systems, and to try
to promote work and responsibility over welfare and dependency."
President Clinton
State of the Union Address
January 24, 1995
As a former governor, President Clinton has worked hard to give states the
flexibility they need to reform the welfare system. In its first two years, the Clinton
Administration granted welfare reform waivers to 25 states -- more than the previous two
administrations had granted in 12 years. These waivers cut through federal rules and red
tape so that states can launch their own initiatives to reform welfare.
The welfare reform plan the Administration proposed last year provided
unprecedented flexibility to the states. Under the plan, many initiatives that currently
require a waiver such as expanding work incentives, removing penalties for two-parent
families, and denying additional benefits for additional children conceived on welfare --
would become options that states could carry out on their own, without having to ask
special permission from Washington.
The Clinton Administration is committed through welfare reform and many other
initiatives to giving the states much greater flexibility, and changing the way Washington
works to begin holding the states accountable for real results, instead of dictating all the
processes by which states achieve those results.
The plan the Administration proposed last year would dramatically change the nature
of the welfare system from one that just writes checks to one that helps people get
paychecks. By the year 2000, under this reform proposal, 2.4 million adults would be
subject to the new rules, including time limits and work requirements; almost one million
people would either be off of welfare or working; 873,000 recipients would be in school or
training programs leading toward employment; and federal child support collections would
more than double to $20 billion. Most importantly, children will be better off.
3 19
Case Study: Ohio's "State of Opportunity" program
Ohio received approval from the Clinton Administration to implement its "State of
Opportunity" welfare reform program on March 7, 1995. The goal of the new project is
to increase the incentives for welfare recipients to go to work. The key elements of the
State of Opportunity program include working with the private sector to create wage-
supplemented jobs for welfare recipients, expanding eligibility for two parent families,
extending transitional child care for those moving from welfare to work, increasing
earnings disregards, and encouraging education by requiring school attendance for
dependent children. The project builds on Ohio's Learning, Earning and Parenting
(LEAP) Program, implemented in 1989, in which teen parents are encouraged to stay in,
or return to school. The demonstration will operate for five years.
Case Study: Florida's Family Transition Program
Florida's Family Transition Program is testing time limits for achieving financial
independence, combining the threat of benefit loss with intensive case management and
assistance in preparing for and finding work. The project encourages families to work
and get off of welfare by increasing earnings disregards and asset limits, and extending
transitional medical care and child care benefits. To encourage parental responsibility,
the demonstration requires dependent children to be immunized and attend school
regularly. The Family Transition Program began operating in February of 1994.
Case Study: Indiana's Manpower Placement and Comprehensive
Training Program (IMPACT)
Indiana's IMPACT embodies President Clinton's ideal that welfare should be a
transitional support system, not a way of life, which provides opportunity, but demands
responsibility in return. Through IMPACT, Indiana is promoting work and responsibility
by imposing time limits on cash benefits; requiring recipients to create a personal
responsibility plan; increasing asset limits and earnings disregards; extending transitional
support services, including case management; eliminating the 100 hour rule for recipients
in the AFDC Unemployed Parents (AFDC-UP) program; and requiring children to stay in
school and be immunized. Indiana's welfare reform program, approved in December,
1994, makes work pay and provides assistance families need to move from dependence to
independence.
3 20
3E. CHILD SUPPORT
We have to make responsibility a way of life. If deadbeat parents paid all
the child support they should in this country, we could immediately move
over 800,000 mothers and children off welfare.
President Clinton
Radio Address
March 18, 1995
3 21
Actions to Date
In June 1994, President Clinton introduced the Work and Responsibility Act of
1994, which contains the toughest child support enforcement measures ever in the history
of the country. The plan would collect billions more in support, and send a clear signal
that both parents have a responsibility to raise the children they bring into this world.
The plan would:
1)
require that AFDC mothers fully cooperate with efforts to establish paternity
before they can receive welfare benefits;
2)
expand outreach and education programs aimed at voluntary paternity
establishment;
3)
streamline the paternity establishment process and impose tough paternity
establishment requirements on the states;
4)
ensure fair child support award levels that are regularly updated;
5)
create a more uniform and service-oriented program by giving all states the
effective enforcement tools and techniques that the best states have used and
proven to be successful -- such as denying drivers and professional licenses to
parents who refuse to pay;
6)
create a National Clearinghouse to track delinquent parents across state lines and
ensure that states can efficiently collect support in these cases;
7)
create a state option to make money available for work and training programs for
noncustodial parents who earn too little to meet their child support obligations.
In February 1995, the President signed an executive order to crack down on federal
employees who owe child support.
In 1993, the federal government collected a record $9 billion in child support -- a
12% increase over the previous year.
Background
Almost everyone agrees that the child support system is badly in need of overhaul.
According to a recent Urban Institute study, there is a gap between what is currently
received in child support and what could potentially be collected of $34 billion dollars
annually. Child support enforcement is vitally important for millions of families - in 1991,
14.6 million children lived in a female headed family, almost triple the number in 1960,
3 22
and 56 percent of them lived in poverty.
The present child support system, initiated in 1975, involves a joint federal and state
effort. The Federal government provides partial funding for state child support enforcement
programs, and the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement provides technical
assistance to states and operates the Federal Parent Locator Service. States are required to
provide child support enforcement services, although the way they do this varies
tremendously.
The Family Support Act of 1988, championed by then Governor Clinton,
strengthened the Child Support program considerably. The Omnibus Reconciliation Act of
1993, signed by President Clinton, requires states to implement in-hospital paternity
establishment programs, a proven cost-effective way of establishing paternity.
These recent legislative initiatives are having an impact, but they still don't ensure
that millions of parents who should be paying child support are doing so. In 1989, of the
over ten million women potentially eligible for child support, 42 percent did not even have
an award, and another 12 percent had an award, but actually received nothing. Indeed only
26 percent of those potentially eligible both had an award and received the full amount.
Thus, millions of noncustodial parents do pay support, often because they care deeply about
the well being of their children. But many more do not pay, or pay less than they should.
Unfortunately the child support system seems to be sending the message in all sorts of
ways that once a parent ceases living with their child, their responsibilities for supporting
and nurturing the child end.
One of the major reasons for this failure is the lack of paternity establishment.
Paternity is established in only about one-third of cases, in large part because efforts do not
keep up with the continuing increase in out-of-wedlock births. Because the enforcement
systems are often weak, many noncustodial parents who do not pay support have been able
to elude state officials, leaving a perception that the system can be beat. Interstate cases,
which represent about one-third of all child support awards, continue to pose a major
problem because, states do not have similar laws governing essential functions, and there is
no effective way to track delinquent parents across state lines.
Child support must be treated as a central element of social policy, not only because
it will save welfare dollars, but also because children have a fundamental right to--and need
for-- support from both their parents. It is central to a new concept of government, one
where the role of government is to aid and reinforce the proper efforts of parents to provide
for and nurture their children, rather than the government substituting for them.
3 23
The Initiative
President Clinton introduced his child support reform plan to Congress as part of his
welfare to work proposal, the Work and Responsibility Act of 1994. The plan truly does
contain the toughest child support enforcement measures ever in the history of the country.
It will collect billions more in support. And it contains a few simple elements.
Paternity Establishment. The first principle is that paternity establishment ought to be
the starting point for child support that works. We need to send a clear message to parents -
especially young parents - that bringing a child into this world brings with it real
responsibilities. For fathers this means that fathering a child will bring real and immediate
financial consequences. Paternity establishment ought to be seen as a right of the child - a
right to financial support, absolutely - but perhaps even more importantly, a right to the
emotional connection and the chance for a nurturing relationship with the father.
And mothers should cooperate in establishing paternity. Our system should say to
mothers, "Help us identify and locate the father, or you cannot get public aid, because
parents have the primary responsibility for supporting their children." But at the same time,
we also need to hold the state child support agencies responsible. and if the mother has done
her part, they should be held accountable for having effective programs to get paternity
established.
The child support plan builds on the in-hospital paternity establishment programs
passed as part of the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1993. The plan requires that AFDC
mothers fully cooperate with efforts to establish paternity before they can receive welfare
benefits. It expands outreach and education programs aimed at voluntary paternity
establishment and promoting the importance of paternity establishment as both a parental
responsibility and a right of the child. It streamlines the paternity establishment process so
that paternity can be established more quickly and easily. Performance incentives will
encourage states to establish paternity for all births.
Fair Awards. Once paternity is established, we need to ensure that the child support
award amount is fair. This means that it considers the needs of the child first, but that it
also reflects the current ability of the noncustodial parent to pay support. A commission will
study whether national awards guildelines should be adopted. States will automatically
update awards for families as non-custodial parents' incomes change.
Tough penalties to ensure collection. And once a fair child support obligation is
established it ought to be paid - no exceptions, no excuses, no way out. Once fair child
support awards are set they will be collected through a more uniform and service-oriented
program. All states will be given the effective enforcement tools and techniques that the best
3 24
states have used and proven to be successful. States will be able to use central registries of
child support orders to track cases, making use of economies of scale and modern technology
to handle routine cases in volume. Wage withholding orders will commence immediately at
the time the obligor is hired and states will withhold drivers and professional licenses if
parents who are able to pay support refuse to do so. Changes in the funding and incentive
structure would encourage and reward states for good performance.
Interstate tracking. Finally, interstate cases ought to receive the same attention as
other cases. We need the capability to track parents across state lines so that people are
unable to evade their responsibility simply by moving to the next state.
Under the President's plan, the federal government will assist in tracking the
interstate cases to ensure efficient location and enforcement when people cross state
boundaries. A National Clearinghouse will track delinquent parents across state lines and
uniform laws for interstate cases will ensure that states can efficiently collect support in these
cases.
Work requirements. The reform plan would, for the first time, create a state option
to make money available for work and training programs for noncustodial parents who earn
too little to meet their child support obligations. Ultimately, anything we ask of mothers we
should also ask of fathers. States can choose to make these programs mandatory so that
noncustodial parents work off what they owe. At the same time, demonstration grants for
parenting and access programs - providing mediation, counseling, education, and visitation
enforcement would foster noncustodial parents' ongoing involvement in their children's
lives.
Case Study - Maine
The State of Maine recently enacted a "Deadbeat Dads" bill to withhold licenses
from parents who are delinquent on their child support obligations. The State found that
the threat of suspension is really the most powerful deterrent, absent parents usually pay
after receiving warning letters. "The Maine plan is designed not to suspend thousands
of licenses," says State representative Sean Faircloth, "but rather to create a credible
sanction that will motivate deadbeat parents to pay up." Maine's program expects to
collect an additional $4.7 million biennially for AFDC families and $12 million for
families not on welfare. The Clinton plan would give every state the authority to follow
Maine's lead in denying driver's and professional licenses to those who refuse to pay
the child support they owe.
3 25
Clinton Presidential Records
Digital Records Marker
This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative
marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff.
This marker identifies the place of a tabbed divider. Given our
digitization capabilities, we are sometimes unable to adequately
scan such dividers. The title from the original document is
indicated below.
4
Divider Title:
4. LIFELONG LEARNING
Introduction
"We can do all these things -- put our economic house in order. expand world
trade, target the jobs of the future, guarantee equal opportunity -- but if we 're
honest, we'll admit that this strategy still cannot work unless we also give our
people the education. training, and skills they need to seize the opportunities of
tomorrow."
President Clinton
State of the Union Address
January 25, 1994
Pre-School and Parenting, so that every child starts school ready to learn.
Reformed Head Start to create tough new quality standards, reduce child-to-teacher
ratios, expand services, and create the new Early Head Start for infants and toddlers.
Expanded Head Start to enable over 130,000 more children to participate in 1995
than in 1992 -- with a proposed increase of 31,500 for 1996.
Introduced the new Early Head Start for infants and toddlers.
Goals 2000 and School Improvement, to enable our K-12 students to pursue challenging
academic standards--and meet them.
Signed the Goals 2000: Educate America Act, including the Safe Schools Act, and
the Improving America's Schools Act, to provide top-down support for bottom-up
reform.
Empowered teachers, principals, and parents to change the way schools work -- with
cutting-edge technology, challenging academic standards for what students should
know, renewed commitment to involving parents in schools, and new, flexible
partnerships with states and communities -- cutting red tape so that communities can
tailor their schools to meet their children's needs.
Kicked off an anti-crime initiative inside schools to make sure students can learn in
safety, not fear.
School-to-Work Opportunities, to prepare all young people for further education and first
jobs that lead to high-wage, high-skill careers.
4-1
Signed the School-to-Work Opportunities Act to support efforts in all 50 states to
create and reform school-to-work systems. The Act has sunsets in 2001 -- a limited
national catalyst for local initiatives.
Every school-to-work initiative will enable all participants to develop high-level
academic and technical skills, obtain a high school diploma and an occupational
skills certificate, and move toward further training and first jobs that lead to high-
skill, high-wage careers.
National Service, so young people have a change to help their communities -- and help pay
for college, too.
Signed the National and Community Service Trust Act, creating AmeriCorps, the
new national service initiative.
AmeriCorps gives young people the chance to spend a year or more in tough. direct
service making our people safer, smarter and healthier -- while earning an award of
nearly $5,000 per year to pay for college or job training.
AmeriCorps already engages 20,000 Americans as AmeriCorps Members in more
than 350 community efforts around the country.
AmeriCorps relies on the initiative of communities and the support of states to
change communities from the inside out -- not with bureaucracy, but with citizens
helping each other and building voluntary organizations -- getting things done.
College Loans, so that every American is able to borrow the money to pay for college and
pay it back on an affordable schedule.
Signed into law the biggest change in student loans ever--a new direct lending
program which takes the middlemen out of the process.
Will enable any student to get loans for college or job training and repay them in
one of four ways, including "pay-as-you-can" repayment as a small percentage of
income over time. Students can change repayment plans throughout the life of their
loans, and "pay-as-you-can" gives them more freedom to choose careers without
repayment as a dominant concern.
Dramatically cut back red tape, making it faster and easier for students to get the
money to pay for college.
Will save taxpayers more than $6 billion by the year 2000.
Training and Reemployment, so Americans can continuously learn to obtain better jobs
and better wages.
President Clinton has signed into law major reforms in the first five areas. In the
sixth, training and reemployment, he has taken major strides -- and proposed comprehensive
reforms for this Congress to enact.
4-2
4A. PRE-SCHOOL: HEAD START REFORM
"Head Start reminds us that our country cannot afford to waste its young or
ignore their families. We must value every child and help every parent succeed.
Head Start creates the sense of community that all of us need in our lives. The
dedication of thousands of volunteers, staff, and parents helps create the special
relationship that defines the Head Start program. Head Start is indeed a
celebration of human diversity and creativity."
President Clinton
May 18, 1994
Actions to Date
President Clinton has promised to improve and expand preschooling initiatives
for America's youngest citizens. The budget reconciliation act that President Clinton
signed in 1993 authorized $1 billion in new family preservation and support efforts,
and on May 18, 1994, the President signed legislation reforming and enlarging Head
Start, America's leading program preparing children for school. In two years, President
Clinton has increased investment in our children through Head Start by more than $750
million, and taken together, his efforts will:
Create tough new quality standards for Head Start.
Enable Head Start programs to improve staff training and reduce child-to-
teacher ratios.
Allow Head Start Centers to expand their services to include more full-day and
full-year programs.
Create the new Early Head Start program for infants and toddlers.
Expand Head Start to enable over 130,000 more children to participate in 1995
than in 1992 -- with a proposed increase of 31,500 for 1996 -- while also
moving many students from part-time to full-time enrollment.
4-3
Background
"I've often said that governments can't raise children, that people have to do that.
But parents need help in a lot of places in this country today, just like they did in
1992."
President Clinton
May 18, 1994
Launched in 1965, Head Start has helped almost 14 million children to prepare for
the challenges ahead with education, health care, and parental education. Yet the world of
Head Start today is very different from thirty years ago -- with more children who have
lived with violence and substance abuse, and more families with linked problems of
homelessness, poor education, and unemployment. The ranks of those needing help have
expanded to include more single parents, and increasingly, more working parents as well.
President Clinton promised to expand and improve Head Start to meet the needs of
pre-school children in the twenty-first century. In the first months of the new
Administration, President Clinton and Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna
Shalala convened a bipartisan team of experts to form the Advisory Committee on Head
Start Quality and Expansion. Six months later, that Committee issued a Final Report -- a
blueprint for reforms to come.
Echoing parents and scientific studies, the Report noted that Head Start improves the
cognitive ability and school readiness of the children who participate. Yet the Report also
found that quality in Head Start is uneven, and that the 30-year-old program has not
entirely adjusted to the changing needs of America's families. With more parents single and
more working full-time, full-day and infant and toddler programs are in rising demand. Yet
Head Start has remained primarily a half-day program for three- and four-year-olds. And
even in this traditional niche, demand increasingly outstrips supply: less than half of eligible
three- and four-year olds participate.
The Report made three major recommendations. First, make quality the centerpiece
of the new Head Start. Second, become more responsive, serving more children, but also
serving them differently in a way that better answers to parents' changing needs. And third,
forge new partnerships--to build on what works and build a more caring community for
children and parents.
These recommendations formed the basis of the Head Start reform signed into law
by President Clinton on May 18, 1994.
4-4
The Initiative
"This is not a program involving bureaucrats in Washington making decisions that
individuals and families and teachers have to live by. This is a program that is built
at the grassroots by families and teachers and communities."
President Clinton
May 18, 1994
Last year's reform of Head Start, the biggest change in years, makes improvements in
five major areas.
First, the legislation requires tough performance standards to define the scope and
quality of Head Start services. For the first time, the past performance of applicants will be
a key factor in determining future funding. Head Start is demanding results, and programs
that do not show them will be cut off.
Second, Head Start programs will now have the resources to raise levels of quality
dramatically. Programs can invest in staff training and raise staff salaries in order to
increase morale, attract qualified staff, and reduce turnover. They can increase the number
of staff on site, to provide more individualized attention to both children and parents. And
programs can invest in basic necessities, like quality equipment and transportation services,
in order to provide more opportunities for children to grow.
Third, more children will be served under the reform. Enrollment is up 27,000 in
1994, and between 1992 and 1995, the total number of children served is rising from
621,000 to 752,000. The President's 1996 Budget proposes to increase participation in the
Head Start program by an additional 31,500 children, for a total of 784,000 in 1996.
Fourth, programs gain the freedom to expand the scope of their services. Under the
new legislation, Head Start centers can provide full-day, full-year services to meet the needs
of parents who work full-time. More services aren't a requirement, but they are an option:
the decision rests with the community itself, not the federal bureaucracy.
Finally, the reform recognizes that children from birth to age three also need positive
early child development experiences. The new Early Head Start represents a turning point in
America's commitment to our youngest children. Drawing on the lessons of Head Start,
Early Head Start will dedicate new resources to high-quality services promoting healthy child
and family development. Families and communities will have the flexibility to develop
programs that meet their own needs, but also satisfy tough national standards. Early Head
4-5
Start should join Head Start in lasting well into the next century--always changing to provide
high-quality, responsive, and respectful services to America's youngest children and families.
Case Study: Rachel DeBruler and her son Michael
Six years ago, Rachel DeBruler and her oldest son, Michael, began to chart a
bright new future by walking through the door of a Head Start center in Olympia,
Washington.
Michael quickly came to love Head Start. He told his mother that the best part
was passing around bowls, family style, at lunch time. Michael liked sharing with the
other children.
While her son benefitted from Head Start, Rachel DeBruler contributed to it.
She was continuously engaged in improving the Head Start center. She attended parent
meetings. She got involved with fundraising for her program. She even participated in
Head Start's state association.
Her commitment--and the commitment of the teachers and staff in Olympia--
produced real results. Today Rachel DeBruler's three children are doing very well in
school. As she wrote in a letter of thanks, "I never knew that there was a program that
would ask parents to be so involved in their child's education."
Case Study: The Results of Head Start Reforms
With the new resources from the Head Start reauthorization, here are a few
things that Head Start programs are doing:
Reducing average class size.
Hiring mental health staff to work individually with children experiencing
behavioral difficulties.
Adding bus aides -- to make sure there are always two adults with every busload
of children.
Replacing outdated and potentially unsafe playground equipment and facilities.
Expanding part-time programs to run full-day in order to meet the needs of
parents who are working or in job-training.
Hiring additional family workers to reduce unacceptably high caseloads.
4-6
Pre-School-Addendum Family Support and Preservation
Summary
President Clinton recognizes that government doesn't raise children -- parents do.
But he also knows that sometimes parents need a helping hand in their communities and has
promised to support them in their efforts to raise their children. As President, he signed the
Family Preservation and Family Support Act. This legislation authorizes almost $1 billion
over 5 years to help states to develop a continuum of services to assist families with children
at risk, including:
Help for parents of all backgrounds to strengthen their parenting skills, before
crisis hits;
Referrals and improved access to other important services; and
In emergencies, crisis intervention in order to prevent family breakup
whenever possible.
Background
While the vast majority of parents are committed to doing right by their children,
many parents can use help with child-rearing. These needs exist everywhere, but they're
particularly great for parents who have few resources and little education, and face
neighborhoods torn by crime, drugs, and gangs. Smart investments that teach parents to
teach their children can yield tremendous dividends in the lives of parents and children
alike.
While the movement to maintain intact families dates back at least to the turn of the
century in the United States, the goal of helping parents moved on to the national agenda
once more during the 1970s and 1980s, as incomes stagnated and millions of parents
struggled to balance the demands of work and family. Starting in the 1970s, states and
communities developed a range of promising initiatives to use home visits, classes,
referrals, and other services to help parents with their own efforts to raise their children.
President Clinton has promised to support programs that support families. President
Clinton and Mrs. Clinton know the success of these programs first-hand; in Arkansas, they
4-7
helped to bring from Israel the Home Instructional Program for Pre-school Youngsters
(HIPPY), now a model for family support nationwide.
Recognizing the variety of successful efforts at the grassroots, President Clinton
endorsed the emerging consensus that services for families with young children ought to
cover a wide continuum. At one end, programs would help parents of all backgrounds to
enhance their own parenting skills in areas such as education, health and nutrition, and
child safety. These "family support" services would prevent crises by helping equip parents
in advance. At the other end of the continuum, for families under deep stress, family
preservation efforts would offer emergency services designed to prevent imminent breakups
when possible. By keeping children in the home and out of foster care whenever possible,
these would save families from wrenching experiences and could also save the government
money.
The Initiative
In his first months in office, President Clinton worked together with Congress to
enact the Family Preservation and Support Act. Included in the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act signed in August 1993, the legislation authorizes close to $1 billion over 5
years for states and communities to develop a continuum of care for families. The program
is designed not only to offer direct support to successful programs, but also to help states to
redesign their family services--eliminating duplication, connecting efforts, and offering
parents easier access to an array of services. The law brings the principles of reinventing
government to bear on programs directly affecting our families and children.
Already, all 50 states are developing plans to redesign their family preservation and
support services, and in future years, the funds will support a range of models. Models like
HIPPY and Parents as Teachers center on home visits in which parents receive individualized
help in areas like child development and education. In these programs, parents also attend
classes where they can meet other parents addressing similar issues, and their children
receive screening to track their developmental success. Other model programs, called family
resource centers, focus on helping parents gain access to the help they need, including job
search and job training, health care, and substance abuse treatment. And still other efforts,
such as Homebuilders, offer intensive short-term services and access to 24-hour assistance
for families in crisis.
These and other models supported by the new legislation promise to help a new
generation of parents achieve their own highest hope--raising their children successfully.
4-8
4B. GOALS 2000
"Goals 2000 is a new way of doing business in America. It represents the
direction our government must take with many problems in the 21st century."
President Clinton
May 16, 1994
Actions to Date
President Clinton promised to transform our public schools by offering "top-
down support for bottom-up reform." In 1994, President Clinton signed the two acts
that constitute the most important school reform legislation in a generation: on March
31, the Goals 2000: Educate America Act, including the Safe Schools Act; and on
October 20, the Improving America's Schools Act, reauthorizing the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act. These Acts are already empowering teachers, principals, and
schools to change the way we teach children with:
Challenging academic standards for what students should know and how well
they should know it.
Violence prevention initiatives inside schools to make sure that the academic
environment is conducive to learning, not fighting.
Cutting-edge technology to create new opportunities and new excitement in
learning.
Strong parental involvement so that parents help their children learn and schools
reinforce parents' efforts.
Less red tape, so communities can offer challenging and tailored opportunities to
children and government can help--not hinder--their efforts.
Already, 47 states have applied for and received grants to develop plans to
reform their schools -- and better educate millions of children.
4-9
Background
"Our states and communities have always taken the lead in public education, and
they 'll continue to do SO. But the national government can do more to help.
President Clinton
February 22, 1994
Americans take pride in a public school system that strives to give all our children
the education they need to make the most of themselves. Community control of schools
and parental involvement in education have made America's schools uniquely successful in
the world. But since the 1980s, a series of studies confirmed what many parents already
knew: America's schools have not been doing their jobs.
The problems are diverse. Many schools have stopped demanding high achievement
from students: in "the tyranny of low expectations," students are asked for little and deliver
less. Some teachers are inadequately prepared for the demands of the classroom and
inadequately assisted once inside it. The curriculum often fails to engage students or their
teachers. Technology inside the schools has not kept pace with changes outside them.
Violence in communities has entered the hallways and engulfed many schools. And
complicated bureaucracies create a government octopus that tends to slow change down.
Red tape stifles the very people--the parents--whose involvement is most essential to
children's educational success.
While researchers studying schools have found the problems, educators have gone to
work solving them. Governor Clinton made education the centerpiece of his program to
prepare a rural state for a complex economy. He pursued comprehensive school reform--
including a tough new curriculum, incentives and requirements for parental involvement,
statewide testing of students and teachers, and mandatory reporting on school performance.
The results were impressive: in 1992, at a time when educational performance in many
states was declining, Arkansas boasted rising student scores on standardized tests and the
highest high school graduation rate in the region. Other states pursuing similar reforms
scored equally striking victories.
The movement for school reform picked up national support in 1988. As head of
the National Governors' Association, Governor Clinton joined President George Bush to
convene a national Education Summit. Participants together hammered out six goals for
American education. These represent a lighthouse to guide the efforts of communities and
states to improve education. (See box for the goals, now totalling eight, as formalized in
law by the Goals 2000 Act passed last year.)
4-10
National Education Goals
By the year 2000:
1)
School Readiness: All children in America will start school ready to learn.
2)
School Completion: The high school graduation rate will increase to at least 90
percent.
3)
Student Achievement and Citizenship: American students in America will leave
grades four, eight, and twelve having demonstrated competency in challenging
subject matter--including English, mathematics, science foreign languages, civics
and government, economics, arts, history, and geography--prepared for
responsible citizenship, further learning, and productive employment.
4)
Teacher Education and Professional Development: The nation's teaching force
will have access to programs for the continued improvement of their professional
skills and the opportunity to acquire the knowledge and skills needed to prepare
students for the next century.
5)
Mathematics and Science: U.S. students will be first in the world in science and
mathematics achievement.
6)
Adult Literacy and Lifelong Learning: Every adult American will be literate and
will possess the knowledge and skills necessary to compete in a global economy
and exercise the rights and responsibilities of citizenship.
7)
Safe, Disciplined, and Alcohol- and Drug-Free Schools: Every school in America
will be free of drugs, violence, and the unauthorized presence of firearms and
alcohol and will offer a disciplined environment conducive to learning.
8)
Parental Participation: Every school will promote partnerships that will increase
parental involvement and participation in promoting the social, emotional, and
academic growth of children.
4-11
The Initiative
"[We set world-class standards of excellence] because we believe every child can
and must learn at world-class standards of excellence. And those of us who are
older believe we have a practical and moral obligation 10 see that you have a
chance to do it."
President Clinton
March 31, 1994
President Clinton has initiated national reforms that bolster community efforts,
offering "top-down support for bottom-up reform." The reforms are embodied in two key
pieces of legislation, both passed with broad bipartisan support in 1994: the Goals 2000:
Educate America Act, and the Improving America's Schools Act, reauthorizing the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).
The centerpiece of the program is Goals 2000. At the national level, the Act revises
and codifies the National Education Goals, making them the official benchmarks for
educational excellence in America. The legislation then challenges states and local school
districts to set their own high standards -- and to design plans to help all children reach
them. Goals 2000 will offers financial support for the implementation of those plans --
with 90 percent of the funds going to the local level.
At the state and local level, the Act offers assistance to states and school districts to
establish broad-based panels to develop reform plans for their schools. If the plans meet
broad national guidelines, Goals 2000 will then offer financial support for their
implementation.
The state and local provisions of Goals 2000 are voluntary and designed entirely to
achieve each state's and community's own goals and challenging standards. States need not
participate -- although 47 states already are. The legislation specifically prohibits federal
mandates. The Goals 2000 application is a simple, four-page document with no
accompanying regulations. And Goals 2000 gives the Secretary of Education authority to
waive some federal requirements and delegate waiver authority for promising reform plans.
The key features of the reform process fall into five areas:
High Standards
America's students will need to meet new and challenging academic standards in
order to meet the high demands of the new economy. And high standards do more than set
benchmarks; they galvanize young people. The more you ask of our nation's students, the
more you get back from them.
4-12
Goals 2000 encourages every state to develop challenging content standards (what
students should know) and performance standards (how well students should know it).
Through the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the
Administration has taken another stand for standards. For many years. economically-
disadvantaged students. those helped by "Chapter 1" (now called "Title I"), were not
expected to reach the same levels of achievement as other students. Instead, these students
were often taken out of their regular classes, placed in remedial classes, and offered a
watered-down curriculum. The new Title I raises expectations again: schools will once
more expect students in the program to learn to meet challenging academic standards like
all other students.
Under Goals 2000, standards should be much more than abstract ideals cut off from
the day-to-day activities of the school. Rather, standards can become guidelines around
which states and localities align virtually everything in their education system, including
curriculum and professional development. Replacing the tangle of goals inside schools
today, challenging standards can act as a fixed star to orient every effort.
Parental Involvement
Parents are the most important teachers of their children. Without dedicated help
from parents, good schools will not be enough. Study after study shows that parents who
play an active role in their children's learning boost their children's grades--and their
lifelong commitment to education.
Parents need to be involved in both the education of their children and the life of
their schools. They can talk to children about school, especially homework. They can read
with children and keep books around the house. In addition, parents can take personal
responsibility for their children's attendance at school--while limiting the time kids spend in
front of the television. And finally, parents can get to know their children's teachers and
their schools' administrators, and help to shape the way schools teach children.
The Administration is working to help parents get involved. With the strong support
of the President and the national PTA, the new National Education Goals establish
increased parental participation as one of two new goals. The Improving America's
Schools Act requires schools participating in Title I to develop written compacts with
parents that spell out the goals, expectations, and shared responsibilities of schools and
parents. The Administration is supporting new initiatives designed to help parents act as
teachers for their pre-schoolers (see Family Support and Preservation section). Education
Secretary Riley is leading a national partnership--with an aggressive public campaign--to
encourage parents to become more active. He and his staff have met with more than 125
different parent, religious, education, community-based and business groups to discuss ways
4-13
to promote parental involvement in children's education.
Important as these efforts are. their limits are clear. No law nor initiative can do the
work of a family. In the end, the responsibility for teaching children to learn rests with
every parent.
Teacher Training
If we are going to demand high achievement from students, we have to expect a lot
from teachers, too. Improving student performance means improving teacher training, too.
With Goals 2000, teachers play a crucial part in developing the new standards that students
will pursue. Because teachers are "in on the ground floor," reforms will reflect the needs
that students demonstrate inside the classroom. And under the new legislation, teachers
will also get the improved training they need to help students achieve high standards.
Technology Development
Computers and other advanced technology offer exciting ways for students to learn
traditional subjects. They also provide hands-on training in the work skills that an
Information Age demands. Goals 2000 funds can be used to integrate technology into
school improvement efforts. And the reauthorized ESEA will help more schools get on the
emerging Information Superhighway.
Safe Schools
If schools aren't safe, children aren't going to reach high standards. The Goals 2000:
Educate America Act and the Improving America's Schools Act include provisions to
prevent violence in schools. The programs are flexible, giving schools the power to meet
their unique safety needs. One school might focus on teaching students how to resolve
conflicts without violence. Another might encourage parents and community leaders to
come together and stop school violence. A third school might focus on safe after-school
programs for all students. All three schools could add other efforts to these, including
acquiring metal detectors, hiring security personnel, and developing safe zones around
school.
4-14
Case Study of High Standards: Oceanside High School, Los
Angeles
The Improving America's Schools Act says that all students should aspire to
challenging standards--whatever their backgrounds. Some say that's too much to ask.
The experience at Oceanside High School suggests otherwise.
It wasn't long ago that a proposal at Oceanside to place disadvantaged
underachievers in a college-prep course sparked fierce opposition among some teachers
and administrators. Says teacher Lennie Noordhoorn, "They thought it was a
disservice to the kids--that they couldn't handle" advanced classes. But the AVID
program ("Advancement Via Individual Determination") has students doing better in
their classes--and skeptics becoming believers.
AVID teaches underachievers how to take notes, improve their writing,
participate in class discussions, and develop other skills needed to reach college and
succeed there. "What they're really doing," says University of California-San Diego
Professor of Education Hugh Mehan, "is teaching kids about this culture of the
schools how to study, how to use libraries, the kind of things that middle-income
kids often receive implicitly at home." Today, more than 90 percent of AVID
graduates go on to postsecondary education--50 percent of those at four-year colleges.
4-15
Case Study of Technology: Christopher Columbus Middle
School, Union City, NJ
As part of a comprehensive reform proposal, new computers in the classroom can
transform education--for all students.
In the late 1980s, the Union City school district was in crisis, and on the verge of state
takeover. This densely-populated, poor, urban, predominantly Latino district was having
difficulty meeting New Jersey State education goals. At Christopher Columbus Middle School,
student attendance and scores on standardized tests were well-below state averages, while
dropout and transfer rates were far above the state norm.
All that began to change in the 1989-90 school year. The school developed a
restructuring plan, teachers created an innovative new curriculum, staff were retrained, and
extended periods for core subjects were instituted. With added money from New Jersey's
Quality Education Act, the schools installed 775 computers. That was when Bell Atlantic
offered to institute an intensive "technology trial" at the school. In addition to each classroom
having several computers, Bell placed computers in a new media resource room, the science
laboratory, and the computer laboratory. The company installed high-level computer
equipment with graphics and voice capabilities in the schools and homes of all seventh-grade
students and their teachers. All the computers were tied into local- and wide-area networks.
Computers are now an integral part of the curriculum, helping students learn to
research and work together better. For example, when students study the American
Revolution, they form teams that can conduct research in new ways: by going to the media
center and using the Grolier multimedia encyclopedia; by using the computer to research
George Washington through a CD-ROM information disc; and by using e-mail to access
critical essays now on the network. Teams that don't finish their work in school can continue
working at home, communicating by computer.
Teachers receive support for using the computers from Bell Atlantic and a local
Education Development Center. They, in turn, have helped run workshops that introduce
parents to the new technology.
Today, Union City students in grades K-8 are performing above-average work in math
and other areas. The transfer rate is down dramatically at Christopher Columbus. Students are
using the media resource room during lunch time and after school. They are actually eager to
hand in their homework, neatly typed on the computer. And they're lining up before the
formal school day begins, so they can start learning early.
4-16
Case Study of Safe Schools: James P. Timilty Middle School,
Roxbury, MA
Because they are led by schools, not government, Safe Schools efforts can
transform even the most dangerous schools into safe havens.
Timilty Middle School was once considered one of the weakest schools in
Boston. Violence was rampant, and the quality of education suffered. Then a group of
Timilty students, guided by their teachers, sponsored a forum to discuss ways to stop
the violence. Student councils from eight schools joined and agreed that conflict
resolution should become a part of the curriculum. All students and staff would make
a written commitment to bring the violence under control. And with hard work, the
levels of violence in the school dropped dramatically.
With the guns and gangs under control, Timilty focused on improving academic
achievement. The school implemented "Project Promise," which adds 90 minutes of
reading and math instruction four days a week for all students--more than twice the
time many students spend in these areas. The result of these and other reforms have
been the highest reading and math scores in Boston Middle Schools for the last five
years.
Other innovations are now under way. The school has four clusters of 80 to
100 students, each led by a team of nine teachers who together design and offer
interdisciplinary instruction. Parents serve on Timilty's management council. A staff
member works half-time on parent outreach. Doctors, nurses, and engineers from
Massachusetts General Hospital help students with science projects and career
exploration. Three new summer programs provide continued academic instruction and
community service to the elderly in the area. And an adult literacy program helps
Spanish-only parents learn English.
Once a hotbed of violence, Timilty is now an engine of reform inside the
Boston schools.
4-17
4C. SCHOOL-TO-WORK OPPORTUNITIES
"School-to-work is central to our efforts to guarantee lifetime learning for every
citizen. In a rapidly changing world economy, what you earn increasingly depends on
what you learn."
President Clinton
April 21, 1994
Actions to Date
In 1994, President Clinton's School-to-Work Opportunities Act passed Congress
with bipartisan support, fulfilling his pledge to create a school-to-work system. With
$250 million appropriated in 1995, the new initiative will build on efforts begun in 1994
with $100 million. School-to-Work is:
Allowing states and communities to design diverse programs.
Enabling all participants to develop high-level academic and technical skills,
obtain a high school diploma and an occupational skills certificate, and move
toward further training and first jobs that lead to high-skill, high-wage careers.
Expanding the number of states receiving implementation funding from 8 in
1994 to 28 in 1995 to overhaul their systems to create better and broader school-
to-work opportunities.
Offering support for every state to create school-to-work opportunities by 1997.
Will end in 2001 -- because President Clinton wanted the is program to provide a
catalyst for local initiative and not a new federal bureaucracy.
4-18
Background
Too many American high school students have few options today. Not every young
person wants to go straight to college after high school. The education offered to the vast
majority of young Americans (both "general" and "vocational") provides neither access to
jobs nor solid grounding in academic fundamentals. The wage gap between workers with
and without college degrees has literally doubled. For young people without four-year
degrees, this means frustration and anxiety as good jobs become more scarce. For the
national economy, it means a tragic waste of talent and potential.
In America, many skilled trades have long been passed on from master to youth
through a structured system of apprentices. A range of models for combining meaningful
education and career paths for young people flourishes throughout western Europe and other
industrialized nations. The President's school-to-work legislation not only launches new
innovations in work and learning, but also reaffirms the tradition of "work-based learning."
The Initiative
The culmination of a national dialogue involving leaders from business, labor, and
education as well as students, parents, and Administration officials, the School-to-Work
Opportunities Act will renew for millions of Americans our nation's promise that anyone
who works hard and plays by the rules can enjoy economic security.
During the last two years of high school, and typically for at least one year beyond,
young people participating in school-to-work programs receive classroom instruction and
structured work experience that relates to what they learn in school. They may not know at
any one moment whether they are formally in "schooling," "training," or "higher education"
-- but it doesn't matter. What matters is that they are following well-marked pathways
between school and careers and are developing the confidence, competence and connections
required to succeed in the global economy.
The school-to-work legislation is remarkable for what it contains: the framework for
a national system of community work and learning partnerships. But the legislation is
nearly as remarkable for what it leaves out. Rather than attempting to force change with a
flood of money from Washington, or dictating a single design for all schools to follow, the
Act encourages states and communities to take the lead. The federal role in School-to-
Work is crucial, but limited. A joint enterprise by the Labor and Education Departments
4-19
manages a pool of venture capital that empowers state and local innovators.
The Act builds on a common-sense, three-part consensus: first, young Americans
need paths to prosperity that don't require a conventional four-year degree, but do meet the
need for practical post-secondary training to prepare for new middle-class careers; second.
almost all students, college-bound or not, learn better when their studies are linked to
relevant contexts like the working world; third, no single path suits every student -- there
must be a range of school-to-work opportunities, with plenty of room for local diversity and
experimentation. There are many valid models, including youth apprenticeships, innovative
vocational education programs, career academies, and cooperative education.
The legislation ensures, however, that all school-to-work programs share four key
elements. Every participant receives high-level academic and technical skills; a high school
diploma that keeps the door open to college; an occupational skills certificate reflecting
mastery of an industry skill; and preparation for further education and first jobs that lead to
high-skill, high-wage careers.
A Work-based learning experience;
An integrated curriculum of academic and occupational skills;
A high school diploma that keeps the door open to college;
An occupational skills certificate offering access to a first job with a real
future.
Small planning grants have already gone to every state. Reform is now moving
forward in "waves" as individual states complete their own blueprints for change. Eight
states won implementation grants in the first year, 1994, and in the second year, Congress
approved funding for as many as 20 more states to implement reform plans. By 1997,
every state will have a chance to implement school-to-work reforms. Then, having
achieved its goal of sparking local change and creating new programs, the School-to-Work
Opportunities Act will be phased out by 2001.
In its early stages, the school-to-work movement has yielded impressive results. At
Roosevelt High School in Oregon, students choose from among six "career majors" which
serve as themes for applying academic learning and open opportunities for work-based
learning. The freshman dropout rate has plummeted by 62 percent. At the Rindge School
of Technical Arts in Cambridge, Massachusetts, 85 percent of the youth apprentices are
entering college -- compared with the district's average college placement rate of 67%. In
Boston, all 38 seniors from Project ProTech who graduated at the end of the 1992-93
school year enrolled in postsecondary programs.
But the power and promise of school-to-work programs is best expressed by the
4-20
students themselves, who testify to its impact in changing their lives. Said one graduate of
the Oakland Health and Bioscience Academy, now a professional RN: "The best thing
about this program is learning through high school the hands-on experience that I needed in
terms of focusing on what I really wanted to do in the nursing field. It gave me exposure
and clinical experience and networking with the professionals and I was able to project
myself in five years -- that this was how I wanted to be and who I wanted to associate
with." Or as another school-to-work participant has said, "This program taught me
responsibility -- you can do anything you put your mind to."
Case Study: Siemens Stromberg-Carlson Electronics
Technicians Apprenticeship Program
Siemens Stromberg-Carlson, an international company based in Germany, has
years of experience training young people for high-skill, high-wage jobs. Their
Electronics Technicians project in Florida translates some of the best features of the
famed German youth apprenticeship model -- such as master teachers at the company,
high academic standards, and employer involvement in curriculum -- to create a school-
to-work opportunity that works for young Americans and their communities. The
program is a partnership between local high schools and community colleges, government
and industry.
The results so far have not only equaled, but actually exceeded those of the
German model. For two years in a row, Siemens students in the U.S. have scored the
highest of all Siemens apprentices worldwide. In fact, despite having five months less
training, American Siemens apprentices outscored their German counterparts on the same
exam.
4-21
Case Study: Chris Brady
When Chris Brady decided to drop out of school, it seemed like a logical step.
The South Boston native was so turned off by school he rarely made it to any classes.
But he saw that his friends who had dropped out were sweeping floors and stocking
grocery shelves -- and not making enough money to pay the rent. He wanted something
better.
So instead of leaving school for good, Chris found his way into the Project
ProTech school-to-work program in financial services. For the first four months, he
learned the basics of banking and what work was all about. Then he started to work
part-time in the "large currency" department at Fleet Financial Group, one of the nation's
largest banks. The job required him to pay close attention to detail, communicate with
other branch offices, use a computer to enter data and retrieve information. In the
afternoon, he would attend classes that were set up to relate to his job -- learning math
and English with lessons on word processing, data bases, and spreadsheets.
In the process, Chris started to see the connection between work and school and,
as he says, once he "got a taste of the business world, something just clicked" for him.
He is now in college, where he is studying business administration.
4-22
4D. NATIONAL SERVICE
"Beyond the concrete achievements of AmeriCorps. beyond the expanded
educational opportunities those achievements will earn, national service will
help us to strengthen the cords that bind us together as a people--to remember
in the quiet of every night, that what each of us can become is to some extent
determined by whether all of us can become what God meant us to be."
President Clinton
September 21, 1993
Actions to Date
President Clinton promised to enable Americans to earn money for education by
engaging in service to America. On the 100th day of his administration, President
Clinton sent to Congress the National and Community Service Trust Act. With
bipartisan majorities, Congress passed that Act, and on September 21, 1993, President
Clinton signed the legislation and created AmeriCorps. With a $300 million first-year
investment, AmeriCorps fulfills his promise by:
Giving young people the chance to spend a year or more making our people
safer, smarter, and healthier--while earning an award of nearly $5,000 per year
to pay for college or job training.
Engaging 20,000 Americans as AmeriCorps Members in its first year--more
than the Peace Corps at its height.
Combining existing Federal agencies and relying on communities to design
their own initiatives.
4-23
Background
"The lesson of our whole history is that honoring service and rewarding responsibility
is the best investment America can make."
President Clinton
March 1, 1993
"I believe.... that national service will remain throughout the life of America not a
series of promises, but a series of challenges, across all the generations and all walks
of life, to help us to rebuild our troubled but wonderful land."
President Clinton
September 21, 1993
America has a long tradition of civic service. The nation was founded by citizens
who came together in order to build a foundation for freedom. "A debt of service," said
Thomas Jefferson, "is owed by every [citizen] to [our] country." In the 19th century, Alexis
de Tocqueville found that in America as nowhere else, people joined in religious,
educational, and civic organizations in order to solve problems.
Programs of service organized at the national level have built on this rich tradition.
During the Great Depression, Franklin D. Roosevelt created the first major national service
program, the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC). Four million young people joined--
restoring the nation's parks, revitalizing our economy, and supporting their families and
themselves. A generation later, President Kennedy created the Peace Corps as the concrete
embodiment of his most famous words: "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask
what you can do for your country." Responding to that call, thousands of Peace Corps
Volunteers have left the comforts of home and traveled to the poorest corners of the globe,
building schools where none existed, helping farmers feed the hungry, and creating hospitals
to care for the sick.
In developing a program of national service for a new generation, President Clinton
has drawn on two vital principles from these programs. First, service is important because
there is a lot of work to do right now in America. If national service is to meet any other
objective, it first has to meet real needs: ensuring immunizations for infants, teaching
children to read, making neighborhoods safe for families, and keeping the elderly safe in
their homes.
Second, a new program of national service should strengthen the spirit of citizenship.
4-24
Too often today, young people speak about rights, but not about responsibilities. Yet an
ethic of entitlement without obligation doesn't work--and it certainly isn't what has always
made America great. A program of national service shows those who serve and those who
don't that Americans can--and should--give back to their communities and country.
And in return for their contribution to our country, those who make a long-term
commitment to service can get something in return for themselves. This idea is reciprocity:
more opportunity in return for more responsibility. And for young people near the beginning
of their careers, there is no greater source of opportunity than education. The model here is
the GI Bill, passed during World War II to enable returning veterans to get a college
education. Through the GI Bill, millions of Americans contributed to their own future and to
America's productivity at the same time. National service here at home offers a new way
for young people who help others to help themselves.
A final important principle is that national service ought to strengthen the voluntary
associations that have always made America strong. In recent years, social scientists and
community leaders alike have worried that Americans are working together less than we once
did. National service can provide a steady source of new help for America's civic
organizations, helping them to solve community problems from the grassroots up. And those
participating can help to draw other community members back into service. The program
becomes a catalyst for communities to come together, draw new volunteers and support from
the community, and solve problems.
The Initiative
"National service recognizes a simple but powerful truth, that we make progress not
by governmental action alone, but we do best when the people and their government
work at the grassroots in genuine partnership."
President Clinton
March 1, 1993
President Clinton's pledge to create a "domestic Peace Corps" excited as much
interest as any proposal. Young people were especially energized; in the first 100 days of
the Clinton Administration, the White House was flooded with thousands of postcards and
phone calls about the shape of the new program. On the 100th day, President Clinton
detailed his program to fulfill that promise, and a few months later, Congress passed the
National and Community Service Trust Act creating the new program, dubbed
"AmeriCorps." Today, in its first year, more people are participating in AmeriCorps than
4-25
joined the Peace Corps at its height.
Designed with bipartisan support in the Congress and from the Governors,
AmeriCorps is simple enough. Anyone over age 17 may participate, although in practice
most AmeriCorps Members are young people. Members agree to make a significant
commitment to service--either a year or two full-time, or a longer period part-time.
Through their service, they meet important needs in four areas: education, public safety. the
environment, and human needs (including health and housing). Service ranges from
improving our schools, housing the homeless, and making our streets safe and our
environment clean. In return for their service, they earn a small stipend and, at the end of
their service, an education award worth nearly $5,000 per term--nearly the average cost of a
year at a four-year, public university. The education award can be used to repay existing
loans or to pay for current or future expenses at any accredited four-year, two-year, or
vocational institution.
As the first program of its kind in a generation, AmeriCorps had to be on the
cutting-edge of reinventing government. And it is. The Corporation for National Service--
a combination of existing agencies, not a new one--oversees the effort. The idea, as
Corporation Chief Executive Officer Eli Segal says, is to "translate national service from
the poetry to the prose." The Corporation sets broad standards, tracks cost-effectiveness,
and monitors progress toward basic goals. But the real power is in the hands of states and
communities, which design programs to meet their own special needs.
Today, in more than 350 communities around the country, nearly 20,000 Americans
are getting things done right now. They are from every state in the union and every
background under the sun. What they share is a commitment to helping themselves and
improving our country--not with the heavy hand of government, but with the helping hand
of service. In Texas, AmeriCorps Members have helped immunize more than 200,000
infants, saving taxpayers millions of dollars--and saving untold lives. From the floods in
California to the fires in the Pacific Northwest, AmeriCorps Members have helped limit the
toll of natural disaster and helped the displaced get back on their feet. And in Kentucky
today, AmeriCorps Members are raising reading levels from two years behind to one year
ahead of standards.
Beyond these direct results, AmeriCorps helps transform communities. AmeriCorps
Members develop the skills and the spirit to make a lifetime of active citizenship. And
their communities come together again as well. When AmeriCorps Members help a church
set up regular neighborhood cleanups or tutoring programs, neighbors get to know each
other again. And they learn that they don't need to wait for anyone else to help them--that
they can help themselves. AmeriCorps is helping bring America together and move
America ahead--neighborhood by neighborhood, and block by block.
4-26
Case Study: AmeriCorps Cadet Program
A unique partnership among the New York City Police Department (NYPD).
the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, and the Corporation for National Service,
AmeriCorps Cadets enables young people to fight crime in their communities and
become police officers themselves. The Cadet term is similar to the Reserve Officer
Training Corps (and the Police Corps, discussed elsewhere). During the school-year,
Cadets attend classes full-time, including those of the police academy, and serve with
the NYPD part-time. During the summer, they serve full-time in their communities.
On completing both their college education and their AmeriCorps experience, the
Cadets become sworn police officers.
The AmeriCorps Cadets program builds on the existing Cadet program of the
NYPD, but it adds an especially strong commitment to community-based problem-
solving, using insights from the community policing movement. Teams of six to eight
cadets are assigned to 15 of the highest crime precincts in New York City. There, they
work with police officers and community members to address specific problems.
Projects include reducing "quality-of-life crimes" in Lower Manhattan by cutting
loitering and drug and alcohol violations; establishing a "Safe Corridor" for commuting
schoolchildren in mid-Manhattan; taking back a drug-infested block in East Harlem by
recruiting blockwatchers, enlisting landlords, and coordinating patrols; patrolling parks
across Brooklyn to report and reduce crimes; and more.
During the 1994 "Summer Of Safety" (SOS), a pilot for the AmeriCorps
program, the first 100 AmeriCorps Cadets made striking advances against crime in
New York City. The positive accomplishments are many, but the most notable is
something that didn't happen: for the first summer in memory, there were no sexual
assaults reported at New York City's public swimming pools, thanks largely to
AmeriCorps Cadet patrols there. All 100 SOS Cadets, as diverse as New York City
itself, have re-enrolled this year.
4-27
Case Study: David Trevino
When David Trevino sees teachers send children to the corner for bad behavior.
he tells himself, "That was me." After his parents split up in his early childhood, David
struggled. Teachers said David was learning disabled and placed him in special
education classes. In an example of the "tyranny of low expectations," David recalls
teachers telling him he "wasn't going to make it." For a long time, David believed--
them and scored poorly.
One key figure in David Trevino's life was a fourth grade teacher who took a
special interest in him and taught him, for the first time, to enjoy learning and believe in
himself. David graduated from high school and went on to attend Austin Community
College, where he is currently a sophomore. Still inspired by his former teacher's
example, David has become a teacher himself, as part of the AmeriCorps for Math and
Literacy program in Austin, Texas. There, David teaches basic skills like reading,
writing, and mathematics to disadvantaged children--the kinds of children he once was.
David is passionate about giving back the caring and inspiration given him in his
childhood. He says his goal this year is to change as many lives as he can. One life he
is sure to change is his own. David will use his education award next year when he
transfers to the University of Texas to begin pursuing a degree in environmental studies
with a concentration in water quality.
4-28
4E. INDIVIDUAL EDUCATION
ACCOUNTS/COLLEGE LOANS
"We already give Americans looking forward to their retirement the chance to save
in what we call an Individual Retirement Account. Now: we offer people at the
beginning of their careers the chance to pay for college in what we call Individual
Education Accounts."
President Clinton
October 21, 1994
Actions to Date
College has always been a gateway to the American Dream, but in the 1980s,
college costs soared while students dropped out because they couldn't repay their
loans. President Clinton has promised to reform the system--so all Americans could
borrow the money for college and repay it as a percentage of their income over time.
As part of the budget reconciliation passed by Congress and signed by the President in
1993, President Clinton fulfilled his commitment and enacted the biggest change in
student loans ever. The reform is already in place at 104 schools, and will eventually
be available to every student in college, graduate school, or job training nationwide--
over 20 million Americans. Under President Clinton's plan, over the next five years:
Any student can get loans for college or job training, and repay them in one of
four ways, including "pay-as-you-can" repayment as a small percentage of
income over time.
Defaults will decline--they are already down from $2 billion to $1 billion per
year--because borrowers have better service and more flexibility to repay their
loans at a manageable pace.
Borrowers can choose among different repayment schedules and change
schedules over the life of their loan--reducing the burden of debt on the choice
of a career.
Red tape and loan-processing time are cut back dramatically as students can
borrow directly through their schools, not from multiple "middlemen."
Taxpayers are saving more than $6 billion--with another $5 billion in savings
planned in the 1996 budget.
4-29
Background
"I got interested in this because I got tired of hearing young people in my own state
tell me they were going to drop out of college because they couldn't afford to take out
another loan; or tell me that they wouldn't go until they had some money because they
knew they'd never be able to repay the loan. And I think we 've changed all that now."
President Clinton
November 1, 1994
Higher education has enabled millions of Americans to step into the middle class.
And now more than ever, getting a college education is a key to getting ahead in the world
economy. Today's new technologies and global competition make high demands on
workers' skills, driving an economic wedge between those who have more education and
those who don't. In 1994, the average unemployment rate for Americans without a high
school diploma was 12.6 percent; in 1992, the average income, less than $22,000. For
Americans with a four-year college degree, the unemployment rate dropped to 2.9 percent,
while the average income shot up to more than $57,000.
Because nothing is more important to America's economic future than college
opportunity, nothing could be more troubling than key trends in higher education during the
1980s. At a time when middle-class incomes were stagnating, college costs were rising far
faster than inflation--even more rapidly than health care costs. The college dropout rate
climbed to more than twice the high school dropout rate, with many of the casualties
leaving school because they just couldn't afford it any longer. As always, families
struggled and sacrificed to pay for the cost of a single child's higher education. But for
many, the cost was just too great.
Throughout this period, the student loan system made matters worse. Thousands of
banks, secondary markets, and guaranty agencies formed a maze that made borrowing as
complicated as any college exam. These "middlemen" imposed enormous burdens and
inefficiencies--with billions of dollars in costs passed along to taxpayers. Rigid repayment
schedules and high monthly payments often forced borrowers just out of school to change
their career decisions--forsaking rewarding work in public service for less interesting jobs
that might pay more. Those decisions didn't serve America's young people, and the defaults
didn't help America's economy, either.
President Clinton promised to reform the student loan system so that all Americans
would have the opportunity to borrow for college and pay off their loans on a manageable
4-30
timetable--as a small percentage of their income over time. Rather than make repayments
according to a fixed schedule linked only to the size of their loan, young people fresh from
college could pay less at first, when they were likely at their lowest levels of income, and
more in subsequent years, when they might be earning more. This idea was not new. As
early as 1949, Nobel laureate Milton Friedman advocated such "income-contingent" or "pay-
as-you-can" repayment of student loans.
The second component of Clinton's program called for the Federal government to
lend money directly to students, bypassing "middlemen" and passing along savings to both
students and taxpayers. On a limited scale, the Federal government began "direct lending"
in 1959 through the Perkins Loan Program. And beginning in the 1980s, Senators
Durenberger, Bradley, and Simon, along with Congressman Petri, proposed a much broader
direct-lending program along with income-contingent repayment. In 1992, Congress
established a small demonstration to test the idea; it was superseded by President Clinton's
initiative, introduced in 1993 and passed as part of the budget reconciliation act of that year.
The Initiative
Under the new program, students set up Individual Education Accounts to pay for
education. These enable borrowers to pay off their loans in one of four ways--and to switch
plans as their financial situations change. With the new options, borrowers have greater
freedom to take risks and pursue personal interests that eventually benefit us all. They can
start their own businesses. They can accept lower-paying public service jobs--as teachers,
nurses, or police officers. Or they can take time off to care for a child or sick relative. The
new options promise to bring defaults down while dramatically expanding opportunities for
young people to pursue their dreams.
With Individual Education Accounts, standard, fixed payments over ten years are
still available. But in addition, borrowers can choose two other repayment plans that allow
them to extend payments over 12 to 30 years. (One requires fixed payments, the other
offers lower payments at first that increase over time.) And borrowers can also choose the
"pay-as-you-can plan" that links a borrower's monthly payment to his or her annual income
and loan amount.
Individual Education Accounts are part of the new Direct Student Loan program that
offers a variety of other benefits to students and taxpayers. The system eliminates seas of
red tape and enables borrowers to obtain loans directly through schools. This way, students
need only deal with one institution--"one-stop shopping" for student loans. Borrowers will
4-31
pay only one loan servicer and receive one monthly statement throughout the life of their
loans.
Because of its simpler structure, the new program will save more than $6 billion by
the year 2000. Savings are already being passed along to students through lower fees and
interest rates. And that means millions of Americans will have an easier time paying for
college.
Already, 104 colleges and schools are participating in the Direct Loan Program, with
more than 300,000 students receiving loans totalling $1.2 billion. By Fall 1995, about 40
percent of new student loan volume will be in the new program. Individuals also are now
able to consolidate their federal student loans in Individual Education Accounts. Over the
next five years, every post-secondary student -- over 20 million Americans -- will have the
opportunity to participate in the Direct Loan program.
Early reports on the effort are very positive. Colleges and universities--and the U.S.
Department of Education--have implemented the program by reassigning staff, needing little
or no new hiring. The President of the University of Michigan has reported that loans are
up 43 percent on his campus. "With one-stop shopping," he says, "students have been able
to obtain their loans in record time." And the American Council on Education says the
reforms "will benefit millions of American students and their families for years to come. In
the final analysis, they will help ensure that the United States has a more highly-educated
citizenry and a work force better prepared for the challenges the nation will face in the next
century."
Comments from Students
On November 1, 1994, at the University of Michigan's Dearborn campus, a group of
students (including Stacy Tenderson, Alex Vincent, and Charles Tisdale) discussed the new
program with President Clinton. Here are selections from their comments.
"The new system is much easier. It works out great. I particularly appreciate the income
contingency of repayments. I'm going into the library profession, and as everybody knows,
it's not as lucrative as some of the other fields. I'd like to start out by repaying my loans
that way, and the move to a more standardized payment plan as my salary potential
increases."
"Plans change, and in order to move with the things that happen in your life, having the
options is always a plus."
4-32
"It's less cumbersome. as far as getting your checks."
"From my perspective, it's what allowed me to dedicate my life to education and
community service within higher education."
"One of the nice things about this new process and this new procedure is that there's a lot
less paperwork. In the years before, we had a lot of paperwork; we had a lot of things to
fill out -- a lot of forms. It was very cumbersome With less paperwork, I can manage
my own time. I'm able to take more classes. I have a part-time job now."
"It has really made a difference in my life and I've seen it made a difference in a lot of
other young Americans lives."
Four Repayment Options
Pay-As-You-Can Plan: A borrower's monthly payment is based on his or her
annual income and loan amount. Since repayment is a fixed percentage,
repayments rise when income goes up and decline when income decreases.
Standard Repayment Plan: Borrowers can still choose the standard fixed
payments over ten years.
Extended Repayment Plan: Borrowers can extend their repayments over 12-30
years depending on loan amounts.
Graduated Repayment Plan: Borrowers have lower monthly payments initially,
with payments increased every two years over a period of 12-30 years.
4-33
Composite Borrowers with Better Options under IEA
1. Entrepreneur. Jane Smith. a recent graduate with a degree in computer science and
$25,000 in loans. wants to start her own business. Jane realizes that she will have high start-up
costs for the first few years, and chooses to draw a minimal salary of $12,500.
Without IEA under the standard repayment plan, Jane would face monthly payments of about
$300--nearly 30 percent of her income.
With IEA, she can still choose standard repayment, but also has three additional options:
Pay-as-you-can. with monthly payments around $85, which is a little more than 8 percent of her
income.
Graduated payments, with initial monthly payments that are less than $160, but gradually
increase to almost $300 near the end of the 20-year repayment period.
Extended repayment, with monthly payments of about $200 for 20 years.
2. Teacher. David Blackwell, a teacher, graduates from a private university. He borrowed
$35,000 to finance his undergraduate and graduate degrees, and his starting salary as a teacher is
$30,000.
Without IEA under the standard repayment plan, David's monthly payment would be $415 over
ten years, or almost 17 percent of his initial income.
With IEA, he can still choose standard repayment, but also has these other choices:
Pay-as-you-can, with initial monthly payments of about $270 (less than 11 percent of his initial
income) would retire his loan in about 13 years.
Extended repayments with monthly payments of about $280 for a 20-year term.
Graduated payments with initial payments of about $220 that gradually increase to a little more
than $400 per month near the end of the 20-year term.
3. Professional with Temporary Hardship. A lawyer, Shirley Anderson, borrowed $60,000
to finance her undergraduate and law degrees. She easily managed her $700+ + monthly payment
while working at a law firm. After several years, she chooses to work part-time for $20,000
annually in order to care for an ailing relative.
Without IEA, Shirley would have to continue the high monthly payments.
With IEA, she can change to a pay-as-you-can plan requiring monthly payments of only $250.
Shirley would pay more when her income rose again, and she could change plans again to
accommodate a new job situation.
4-34
4F. NEW SKILLS FOR NEW ECONOMY
"We do not need all of these separate government programs telling people what to
do. We ought to just give you the money if you're eligible for it and let you bring
it and get a good education."
President Clinton
Remarks at Sandburg Community College
January 10, 1995
4-35
Actions to Date
President Clinton has aggressively deployed existing authority and resources to
begin building a reemployment system. Reemployment reforms already achieved
include:
About half of the states -- empowered with federal grants -- are planning or
assembling networks of one-stop career centers.
Funding for reemployment services has increased 150 percent from 1993 to $1.3
billion this year. increasing the number of workers who receive support to find
new jobs from 297,000 in 1993 to 679,000 in 1995.
Workers applying for unemployment insurance are getting individual
assessments of their skills, so that each can quickly find the kind of help they
need for rapid reemployment.
Administration-sponsored changes in unemployment insurance are encouraging
laid-off workers to start their own businesses.
Building on this progress, President Clinton has proposed a plan to provide every
American worker who is willing to learn and work with the tools to build a better
future. Specifically, the President is proposing:
creating individual skill grants of $2,620 for unemployed and low-income
workers to enable individuals to take responsibility, acquire skills, select
services, and find rewarding work;
consolidating some 70 federal programs for dislocated and low-income workers,
and empowering states to create tailored, flexible systems for job search and
training;
offering tax deductions so that working Americans can afford the training they
need to acquire new skills;
making sure that Individual Education Accounts are available to every working
American to borrow money to finance new learning and repay the loan as they
are able from future earnings;
making readily available better information on skills, jobs, and the quality of
training providers--so that all workers can learn new skills and find good jobs.
4-36
Background
In the closing years of the 20th century, America's workforce is riding a roller-
coaster of economic change. New technologies and global competition are changing the
growth centers on the industrial landscape, from muscle-driven mass production plants
producing uniform goods, to brain-driven flexible firms producing customized goods and
services. This is mostly good for America: overall, we are well-equipped to prosper in a
fast-paced, increasingly integrated world economy.
But the unfortunate truth is that America's workforce is increasingly divided
according to skills. Just 15 years ago, a male college graduate earned less than 40 percent
more than a man with only a high-school diploma; today, he outearns the high-school
graduate by 80 percent. That's the story: for the most part, well-educated and skilled
workers are prospering, with the American dream of upward mobility still within their grasp.
But those whose skills don't match the changing economy contemplate their prospects with
anxiety. And Americans without education or skills drift further and further away from the
economic mainstream. Partly because so many Americans are unprepared for the new
economy, between 1973 and 1993 the average hourly wages of all workers actually fell.
In today's economy, America's central challenge is to enable workers to get the skills
they need for rewarding work. The good news is that those skills can be learned, not just in
our school years, but throughout our lives. Every year of education or training beyond high
school -- whenever it occurs in a person's life -- increases future earnings by 6 to 12 percent.
We have many resources to offer new training. Our country is blessed with a rich
array of learning institutions to deliver the skills that workers want. And more and more
firms are finding that the surest path to competitive advantage is embedding learning in the
workplace.
But the current patchwork of Federal reemployment and retraining programs isn't
doing the job. They're fragmented, full of conflicting rules that confuse the people they're
supposed to help. Many programs empower bureaucracies instead of working people to
choose who gets what training. They don't provide adequate information to those who want
it. And many aren't held accountable for what matters most--equipping America's workers
to find rewarding work.
It's time to change the system and make sure that every American worker has access
to the training and information they need. If we do, America's workers and families will
reap the reward: for all who continue to learn and work, a sure path to higher wages and
rising living standards.
4-37
The Initiatives
Already, President Clinton has aggressively deployed existing resources to begin
building a reemployment system.
About half of the states--empowered with federal grants--are planning or assembling
networks of one-stop career centers to offer efficient, customer-driven access to
counseling, job listings, training, education, and other reemployment services.
Funding for dislocated worker training and reemployment services has increased 150
percent from 1993 to $1.3 billion this year, giving hundreds of thousands of
additional workers support to find new jobs.
Workers applying for unemployment insurance, because of plant closings or defense
conversions, are getting individual assessments of their skills and risks of long-term
unemployment, so that each can quickly find the help they need to get new work.
Changes the Administration sponsored in unemployment insurance laws encourage
laid-off workers to start their own businesses.
But these accomplishments are only a beginning. President Clinton has called upon
Congress to join with him and transform the nation's employment and training systems, root
and branch. His plan will take money out of bureaucracies and empower workers by putting
resources and information in their hands. And it will replace the disorganized welter of
education, training, and job search assistance with an efficient, effective system.
Principles of reinventing government inspire President Clinton's initiative. It will
dramatically consolidate Federal programs and hold them newly accountable, and offer new
flexibility to states to tailor their employment systems. The effort will empower the workers
who know better than any bureaucracy just what they need. And it will make business and
labor full partners in the reform program.
The first part of President Clinton's initiative aims to put the resources to obtain
training and find jobs in the hands of America's workers. His initiative will create individual
Skill Grants for dislocated and low-income workers and job seekers. Valued at up to $2,620
per year, these grants will be payable toward whatever certified training that America's
workers believe they need. And the grants will be supplemented with the right to student
loans guaranteed through President Clinton's already enacted Individual Education Account
program. Together with the skill grants, Individual Education Accounts ensure that workers
4-38
can get the training they need--and repay their loans on an flexible, affordable schedule.
While President Clinton's reform puts new money in the hands of workers, it will
consolidate some 70 Federal programs. In place of the old bureaucracies, the proposal
empowers states to redesign training programs and delivery systems. Cumbersome
regulations will disappear. and states that eliminate bureaucracies will be able to plow the
money back into training. Within five years, every State is expected to have completed its
reform plan and begun implementation of an efficient, effective system.
The new systems will make sure workers have the information about training and jobs
that they need to make smart choices. The proposal speeds implementation of the One-Stop
Career Centers that will provide comprehensive data about jobs and training. And it will
offer workers new ways to gather this information to make intelligent job and training
decisions, such as interactive computers.
The President's reforms break down the artificial lines dividing different types of
training programs. The new system will link adult training opportunities to school-to-work
initiatives that are already underway. States will be able to eliminate duplication, use funds
more flexibly, and build cross-cutting partnerships with businesses, higher-education
institutions, and community services.
The system brings the best practices of the private sector to government. The
business and labor communities will help each state to design its strategic plan and ensure the
highest level of quality. Private firms will be encouraged to form consortia to provide
training, and companies that upgrade worker skills in innovative ways will receive special
awards to highlight their successes.
This is not a traditional federal program. Because workers will get "consumer
reports" on the quality and track records of training programs, institutions that don't work
won't survive. States will develop standards of excellence that their programs must meet,
and Federal standards will ensure that unqualified institutions and programs are not
approved, and unsuccessful ones are not continued.
The President's initiative will arm every American worker with the tools to learn new
skills, find good jobs, and earn higher wages at more rewarding work. It will be up to
individual Americans to make the most of this opportunity--in their own way, to build a
better life for themselves and their families. In every generation, Americans have risen to
that challenge, and we will do so again. With new skills for a new economy, Americans will
take responsibility for restoring the tradition of middle-class prosperity--and for passing it on
for generations to come.
4-39
Case Study: Deb Woodbury
Deb Woodbury of Bangor, Maine dropped out of high school in the tenth grade
to get married. When her marriage ended a few years later, she found herself
responsible for supporting her three children. She worked first as a cook and next in a
textile factory. But then her company's fortunes soured and Deb was laid off. And
finding a new job was difficult. She didn't have a high school diploma, and most of her
skills were fit for an industry that was losing jobs. So Deb enrolled in a local job
training program, where she earned her GED -- which gave her the momentum to then
earn a certificate in office and computer skills from a local college. Now Deb is a sales
and service representative for a railroad, responsible for pricing nearly half of all
commodities the railroad hauls. Her current salary is four times what she earned in her
first job. Deb says that when she finishes putting her final two children through college,
she'll return to college herself to pursue an Associates Degree.
Case Study: Antonio Dodero
Antonio Dodero was a 30-year veteran of the defense industry when--like many
of his colleagues in southern California--he lost his job and knew it was gone for good.
"I did a little soul searching," Mr Dodero wrote in a letter to the President, "and
decided it was time for a change. I'm at what you could call a difficult age, too young
to retire but too old to start all over."
He enrolled in a new-skills program that was part of our emerging reemployment
system. He chose courses in refrigeration, heating, and air conditioning repair that
allowed him to apply some of the skills he already had. And he supplemented his
experience with extensive classroom training in this new line of work.
Mr. Dodero graduated from his program with honors -- and thanks to job search
assistance provided by his reemployment program, he quickly landed a good job as a
service technician at a local heating and air conditioning company, then an even better
job at a similar firm.
4-40
Clinton Presidential Records
Digital Records Marker
This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative
marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff.
This marker identifies the place of a tabbed divider. Given our
digitization capabilities, we are sometimes unable to adequately
scan such dividers. The title from the original document is
indicated below.
5
Divider Title:
5. INTERNATIONAL TRADE
Introduction
"The truth of our age is this -- and must be this: open and competitive
commerce will enrich us as a nation. And so I say to you in the face of all the
pressures to do the reverse, we must compete, not retreat.'
President Clinton
American University
February 26, 1993
We live in a new global economy in which people, products, money and ideas criss-
cross the world with blinding speed, disregarding national boundaries. More than ever
before, the growth of the American economy and the quantity and quality of the jobs it
produces are tied to our ability to compete in this new economy.
Every day, the lives of most Americans are touched by the flows of commerce.
Forty years ago, imports and exports accounted for about $1 in every $10 of our Gross
National Product. Now they represent $1 in every $5 of GNP. Nearly three-quarters of
what we produce in America is subject to competition at home or abroad from foreign
producers. And some 7 million Americans work in export-related jobs.
In recent years, American companies have reemerged as the most competitive in the
world. Once again, we are the world's largest automobile producer and the leading seller
of computers and telecommunications. From movies to microchips, beef to biotechnology,
the world wants to buy the goods and services we produce. Given the opportunity,
American companies can succeed in the global economy.
But to have that opportunity, our companies must be allowed to compete freely and
fairly. That basic assumption lies at the heart of President Clinton's international trade
agenda. During its first two years in office, the Clinton Administration conceived and
implemented a dynamic trade strategy. That strategy has two parts: first, tearing down the
barriers that deny our companies the opportunity to compete fairly while enforcing our
trade laws which ensure that American firms are not disadvantaged by foreign practices;
and second, helping our companies take advantage of these opportunities through a
vigorous National Export Strategy.
The United States already has the most open markets in the world. Foreign
companies have great opportunities in our country, but American firms face more limited
opportunities abroad. In just two years, the Clinton Administration radically leveled the
5-1
playing field. It reduced worldwide trade barriers by completing the Uruguay Round of the
General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade -- the largest, most comprehensive trade
agreement ever. It opened markets in our own hemisphere by winning passage of the North
American Free Trade Agreement -- which already has increased American exports to
Mexico 20% and created more than 100,000 jobs. And the Administration secured
commitments to make trade more free in Asia and Latin America -- the world's fastest
growing regions -- at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum and the Summit of the
Americas.
To take advantage of these new openings, the Administration also launched a
National Export Strategy. At the heart of this strategy lies a coordinated effort by all of the
government's economic agencies to advocate aggressively on behalf of American business.
The Administration assisted firms with 100 major contracts worth more than $20 billion in
exports -- from a multi-billion dollar Saudi Arabian telecommunications procurement to a
major contract to build an Indonesian power plant. These exports are expected to support
over 300,000 American jobs. Many of these jobs are in small and medium sized
companies, who act as suppliers for major overseas projects. The Administration also acted
aggressively and effectively to provide loans and financial guarantees to U.S. exporters. It
streamlined the export licensing system, eliminating over $30 billion of outmoded controls
that handcuffed American business without benefiting our national security. And it
reorganized the way we provide our services to make them more readily accessible to small
and medium sized businesses.
Two years ago, the United States stood at a crossroads on how we were going to
deal with the risks and uncertainties of the new global economy. Many Americans wanted
to go backward on the issue of free and open trade. But the Clinton Administration chose
to reach out, not retreat. As a result, we are creating new high paying jobs in the United
States for millions of Americans and making our workers stronger for the century ahead.
5-2
5A. TEARING DOWN TRADE BARRIERS
Actions to Date
For forty years, the United States has had the most open economy in the world, while
facing unfair trade barriers in foreign markets. The status quo gave foreign countries
and companies the freedom to compete freely and fairly with American business in the
United States, while limiting opportunities for our companies abroad. In two years,
President Clinton led the most successful market opening effort ever. As a result of
these efforts, the Administration:
Successfully concluded the Uruguay Round of global trade negotiations under the
General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade round after seven years of negotiations.
The largest, most comprehensive trade agreement ever signed, GATT will level the
playing field between the U.S. and its major trading partners by slashing tariffs and
taking down barriers to trade that had unfairly penalized American business. GATT
creates the largest tax cut in the history of the world through its tariff reductions.
Put into effect the North American Free Trade Agreement, which has allowed
American companies to increase sales of U.S. goods and services to the emerging
Mexican market. In just one year, American exports to Mexico increased by 20%,
and exports to Mexico and Canada created more than 100,000 new jobs.
Secured a commitment to achieve free trade in the fastest growing regions of the
world, Asia and Latin America, at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum
and at the Summit of the Americas.
5-3
1. OPENING WORLD MARKETS -- GATT
"No country can escape the global economy, and the greatest, largest, most
powerful country in the world cannot escape the global economy. We must lead it
in a direction that is consistent with our values, consistent with our interests,
consistent with what is necessary to keep the American Dream alive. That's really
what GATT is all about."
President Clinton
December 8, 1994
Signing of the Uruguay
Round Agreement Act
Background
In the aftermath of the First World War, there were strong pressures in the United
States to withdraw from the world -- politically and economically. The United States raised
barriers and ushered in an era of economic isolationism and protectionism which
exacerbated the Great Depression and helped provoke worldwide economic collapse. The
United States and the other major trading nations learned their lesson and, at the end of the
Second World War, took a the first bold step to establish an open, liberal trading regime:
The General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade ("GATT").
Through successive "rounds" -- a series of negotiations among all its members -- the
GATT has reduced tariffs worldwide by 85 percent. Nonetheless, the U.S. historically has
maintained the most open markets in the world while other nations were allowed to
preserve higher barriers to trade or to play by different rules. The average U.S. tariff was 4
percent; other countries maintained tariffs as much as ten times higher. U.S. products --
some of the most competitive products in the world -- faced an unfair disadvantage, an
extra tax, when exported to another country.
President Clinton was determined to complete the GATT and at long last make the
playing field more level for American business.
The Initiative
The new GATT agreement will make trade more free and more fair for American business.
GATT will:
5-4
Cut foreign tariffs on manufactured products by more than one-third -- a $744 billion
worldwide reduction in tariffs, the largest international tax cut in history;
Protect from piracy the patents, trademarks and copyrights of some of our most
competitive industries, including pharmaceuticals, entertainment and software;
Tear down barriers to aid U.S. companies that export services such as accounting,
advertising, architecture, engineering and construction;
Greatly expand export opportunities for U.S. farmers by limiting the ability of foreign
governments to distort agricultural trade through tariffs, quotas, subsidies and other
domestic policies and regulations.
Ensure that the fast-growing economies in the developing world live by the same trade
rules as the advanced industrialized countries.
Under the agreement, all quantitative restrictions will be converted to tariffs and
capped -- preventing other countries from further raising their barriers to U.S. exports. This
will provide about $43 billion in increased export opportunities each year in sectors ranging
from computers to furniture, pharmaceuticals to paper. For example, Japan and Korea are
opening their rice markets for the first time ever.
Taken together, the increased export opportunities generated by this agreement will
create hundreds of thousands of high-paying jobs -- jobs that pay 13%-17% more on
average than non-export related jobs. When fully implemented, it will add $100-200 billion
to the U.S. economy each year.
5-5
Case Studies
For American workers who produce farm machinery, GATT is a giant step
forward. Right now, farm machinery imported into the U.S. faces a "zero" tariff
-- no extra taxes. However, tariffs on U.S. farm machinery exports to Europe
range from 3.5 to 9 percent, resulting in an almost two-to-one trade deficit in
favor of European manufacturers. GATT eliminates all tariffs on farm machinery,
saving American exporters tens of millions of dollars and allowing them to
compete more effectively in the world marketplace.
The U.S. exports crops grown on about 1 out of every 3 acres of our cropland.
Because domestic demand for farm products does not grow as fast as farm
productivity, expanding export markets is vital to our farmers' livelihoods. In
1993, U.S. agricultural exports totaled $42.5 billion. Twenty percent of these
exports went to markets that impose some form of non-tariff trade barrier.
Almost 60 percent were commodities that face subsidized export competition.
And many markets were almost totally inaccessible to U.S. exports. Now, for
the first time, agricultural trade will be brought under GATT rules. Subsidized
exports must be reduced by 21 percent in volume and 36 percent in value over 6
years. Since the European Union subsidizes its exports much more than the
United States, it will have to cut back its subsidies much further than we do.
GATT's successor, the World Trade Organization, will now turn its attention to fully
implementing the GATT obligations, resolving issues not adequately addressed by the
GATT -- for example, financial services -- and taking up new issues on the international
trade agenda.
5-6
2. OPENING MARKETS NEXT DOOR -- THE NORTH AMERICAN
FREE TRADE AGREEMENT (NAFTA)
"In a fundamental sense, this debate about NAFTA is a debate about whether we
will embrace these changes and create the jobs of tomorrow, or try to resist these
changes, hoping we can preserve the economic structures of yesterday."
President Clinton
September 14, 1993
Washington, D.C.
Background
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) went into effect on January 1,
1994. But the potential for developing new markets and free trade with Mexico and
Canada has been increasingly apparent for years.
Under the 1988 bilateral free trade agreement with Canada, our largest trading
partner, U.S. merchandise exports have increased by nearly 60 percent.
In 1986, Mexico undertook a revolutionary program to open its economy. It
privatized industry after industry, cut its budget deficit, and slashed inflation. And it began
-- unilaterally -- to reduce its trade barriers. By 1992, our exports to Mexico -- more than
$40 billion -- and the jobs they supported -- some 700,000 -- had tripled.
But despite Mexico's more open economy, barriers to many U.S. goods and services
remained high. For example, Mexico's average tariff rate was 10% -- a ten cent tax on
every dollar of U.S. exports. The average U.S. tariff on Mexican exports was only 4% and
'half of Mexico's exports to the U.S. came in duty-free. And U.S. exporters of services --
including telecommunications, insurance, banking and advertising -- were not allowed to
compete on equal terms with their Mexican competitors.
Republicans and Democrats alike saw Mexico's potential. President George Bush
began NAFTA negotiations with Mexico and Canada in 1991, and completed negotiations
on trade provisions in August of 1992. President Clinton pledged to support NAFTA -- so
long as it provided adequate protections for workers, farmers and the environment. The
Clinton Administration proceeded to negotiate path-breaking side agreements on labor, the
environment and sudden surges in imported goods. Working with a bipartisan coalition,
President Clinton won approval for NAFTA in November, 1993.
5-7
The Initiative
NAFTA went into effect on January 1, 1994, and Mexico began to sweep away
decades of protection and over-regulation. Half of all U.S. exports to Mexico were
immediately made tariff-free. This included some of our most competitive products:
semiconductors; machine tools; aerospace equipment; telecommunications equipment; and
medical devices. Within five years, two-thirds of U.S. industrial exports will enter Mexico
duty-free. After ten years, almost all goods traded between the U.S. and Mexico will be
duty-free.
NAFTA also requires Mexico to open its market to U.S. service exports. And it
rolls away layers of red tape in Mexico, removing licensing requirements that hampered
U.S. exporters. U.S. services exporters will now be able to provide most services cross-
border, without having to establish operations in Mexico or Canada, as in the past.
A year after NAFTA entered into force, the results speak for themselves. U.S.
exports to Mexico are up 22% compared to 1993 -- an average of $1 billion a week.
NAFTA has created tens of thousands of U.S. jobs. Exports to Mexico and Canada now
support 2.7 million U.S. jobs. More than 100,000 of those jobs have been created since
NAFTA went into effect.
NAFTA sets a long-term course for our relations with Mexico. Despite its recent
financial difficulties, the Mexican economy remains fundamentally sound and will continue
to grow as a major market for our goods and services. Mexico's 90 million citizens spent
70 cents of every import dollar on goods made in the U.S. -- even before NAFTA gave
Americans a leg up on our European and Asian competition. NAFTA locks in place
important reforms, including the elimination of tariff taxes on U.S. exports.
Recognizing Mexico's growing importance to the United States, President Clinton
took decisive action to help Mexico overcome its financial crisis before it deepened and
spread to other countries that also buy billions of dollars worth of our goods and services.
The President's plan helped stabilize Mexico in a moment of difficulty -- preserving a huge
export market for American business, securing American jobs, protecting our borders from
an increase in illegal immigration and preventing the crisis from spreading to other
emerging economies.
5-8
Case Studies
In Toledo, Ohio, auto workers are producing thousands of Jeeps for export to
Mexico. In fact, Chrysler sold more vehicles to Mexico in the first three months
of 1994 than in all of 1993. Because of NAFTA, Ford is shifting production of
its Mexico-bound Thunderbirds and Cougars from Mexico to Lorain, Ohio. The
Big Three anticipated sales of 55,000 vehicles to Mexico in 1994, compared to
9,479 in 1993.
In Washington State, apple farmers are benefiting from NAFTA's elimination of
tariffs and import licenses. They exported 4.1 million boxes of apples to Mexico
in the first four months of 1994, compared to only 2.7 million for all of 1993.
NAFTA's success has spread far beyond the borders of the United States,
Canada and Mexico. At the Summit of the Americas in December 1994, Chile -- the
fastest growing economy in Latin America over the past decade -- began the process of
joining NAFTA. Throughout the hemisphere, NAFTA has motivated other countries to
liberalize their own trade regimes. In fact, all of the democratic nations of the
hemisphere have agreed to negotiate a hemispheric free trade area by 2005. In a very
real sense, NAFTA is a gateway to a continent of opportunity.
5-9
3. OPENING REGIONAL MARKETS -- THE SUMMIT OF THE
AMERICAS AND APEC
"The United States has concluded agreements to push for regional free trade in the two
fastest growing areas of the world -- first, at Bogor in Indonesia with the Asian Pacific
economies, and [then] with the free trade agreement at the Summit of the Americas.
These things, along with the implementation of GATT and the expansion of the NAFTA
agreement, will set the agenda for world trade for years to come, in ways that benefit
ordinary American families, that generate more high-wage jobs in this country and
more opportunity in the countries of our trading partners.
President Clinton
December 12, 1994
Miami, Florida
Background
As we approach a new century, we must rethink our traditional notions about trade
priorities. While markets in Europe and Japan will continue to be important, the future lies
in the developing economies of Latin America and Asia. The Western Hemisphere already
is our most important export market, with 1994 exports totaling $207 billion, one third of
our world-wide total. And nearly another third of our exports now go to Asia, supporting
more than two million jobs. As the countries in these regions develop, their demand for
U.S. goods and services will rise dramatically, which will support millions of jobs
throughout the United States.
But our competitors in Europe and Japan also seek to develop these markets. And
significant barriers to free trade remain. One of the greatest challenges we. face in the trade
arena is opening the door for U.S. exporters to these emerging markets of the future.
The Initiative
Two major U.S. initiatives demonstrate the Administration's commitment to opening the
markets of tomorrow.
The Summit of the Americas
"This is more than words; this is a commitment to deeds. Free trade in our
5-10
hemisphere has been talked about for years, but because of this process we 've
launched this weekend it will now become a reality. Free trade will yield dramatic
benefits in terms of growth and jobs and higher incomes
and reaffirm our
commitment to promote the rights and interests of our workers so that all our people
have the chance to benefit from free trade."
President Clinton
December 11, 1994
Miami, Florida
Over the next decade, American companies have exceptional opportunities in Latin
America. In preliminary studies, the World Bank estimates that Latin America will need
infrastructure investment on the order of $24 billion for power generation, $14 billion for
transport, $12 billion for water and sewerage, and $12 billion for telecommunications in
each year for the rest of the decade. Adding investments in natural gas, flood control and
other urban infrastructure brings the total of needed investment to more than $60 billion per
year. And Latin America is a region where the U.S. has a leg up on the competition. The
countries of Latin America already import 43% of their goods from the U.S., compared to
13% from Asia and 20% from Europe. By the year 2000, it is likely that Latin America
alone will be a larger customer for U.S. exports than Western Europe.
Over the past few years, Latin America has embarked on a historic effort to
liberalize its economies. Despite great strides, much of the region's potential remains
locked behind the walls of tariffs and other barriers. For example, Chile's average tariff --
the border tax it applies to U.S. goods -- is around 11%. That's more than 250% higher
than the average U.S. tariff. Argentina maintains average tariffs of 10%; Brazil 14%.
These are major markets, but U.S. access is disadvantaged compared to local producers.
New trade agreements could bring down barriers to U.S. exporters.
Trade topped the agenda in December 1994, when President Clinton hosted the
democratically elected leaders of the Western Hemisphere at the "Summit of the Americas"
-- the first meeting of hemispheric leaders in three decades. At the Summit, the President
secured agreement from all 34 nations to negotiate a "Free Trade Area of the Americas" by
2005. Hemispheric integration would create the world's largest free trade area -- a $13
trillion market with more than 850 million consumers by 2003. The nations of the
hemisphere used the Summit to adopt an action plan for achieving this goal. Trade
ministers from each of the participating countries will meet in June to discuss and adopt
concrete steps for moving forward.
As a first step toward integration, the United States, Mexico, Canada and Chile at
the Summit of the Americas announced their intention to extend NAFTA's benefits to
Chile. With its high economic growth, low inflation and commitment to high labor and
environmental standards, Chile represents a valuable opportunity to U.S. exporters. In
5-11
addition to opening a key emerging market, successfully completing a free trade agreement
with Chile would send an important signal to the hemisphere that economic and political
liberalization pays real dividends.
The Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC)
"We want the Pacific Ocean to unite us, not to divide us
We sought to give this
incredibly diverse Asian Pacific region a common identity rooted in a common
purpose, committed to free trade and investment."
President Clinton
November 16, 1994
Jakarta, Indonesia
Asia boasts the fastest growing economies in the world. Between now and the year
2000, Asia will account for one-third of the global growth in imports. U.S. workers and
farmers are particularly well-positioned to take advantage of this growth. Already, the
region absorbs $135 billion, or nearly one-third, of all U.S. merchandise exports and
supports more than 2 million U.S. jobs. Increasing our market share by just 1% in Asia
would create more than 100,000 new U.S. jobs.
That's why President Clinton -- through the Asia Pacific Economic Forum -- has
made Asia a top priority for our economic engagement. At the 1993 APEC meeting hosted
by the President in Seattle, the leaders of the 15 APEC member economies sought to give
this extraordinarily diverse region a common purpose: that of a community committed to
free trade and investment. At the 1994 APEC summit in Indonesia, President Clinton led
the effort to transform the vision set out in Seattle into reality by securing a commitment to
achieve free trade and investment in the Asia Pacific region by 2020.
Two examples among many underscore the importance of President Clinton's initiative.
By the year 2020, auto sales in Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and the Philippines will
equal the current market in Canada and Mexico combined and exceed the current
market in the UK. However, tariffs on autos being imported into these countries range
as high as 60%. The APEC initiative -- by eliminating these tariffs -- will allow
American companies to compete fairly for their share of this huge market.
Between now and 2020, APEC countries have plans to construct $1.1 trillion in
infrastructure projects -- or the entire annual Gross Domestic Products of Greece,
Portugal and Ireland combined. Once completed, the APEC agreement will reduce the
barriers facing U.S. exporters of products that are essential to building these projects.
5-12
In the months ahead, APEC members will develop a blueprint for achieving free and open
trade and investment throughout the region. The Leaders will review this blueprint at their
next meeting in November 1995 in Osaka, Japan.
5-13
5B. HELPING AMERICAN BUSINESS DO BUSINESS
"I have long believed that America has a bright future in this rapidly changing
global economy. We are now positioning ourselves to compete for new markets
and the jobs they will create at home as never before. The implementation of
NAFTA and the passage of the GATT are critical to opening markets abroad.
The National Export Strategy is essential to make sure that we do in fact take
advantage of those openings."
President Clinton,
October 1994
National Export Strategy Report to Congress
Actions to Date
Opening new markets for American business around the world is only half the
story of the Clinton Administration's international trade initiative. Through its National
Export Strategy, the Administration has also done more than any of its predecessors to
help American business take advantage of these new opportunities.
The Clinton Administration's National Export Strategy:
Supports U.S. bidders in global competition through a coordinated government
advocacy program. The program ensures that U.S. companies receive a full and fair
hearing as they compete for contracts around the world.
Improves trade finance by facilitating our companies' access to loans, loan
guarantees, and feasibility study funding while successfully fighting foreign "tied aid"
that unfairly handicaps U.S. business.
Reduces and eliminates counterproductive export control regulations -- freeing more
than $32 billion of high technology exports from restrictive and outdated controls.
Establishes U.S. Export Assistance Centers which provide comprehensive export
financing and marketing information to small and medium sized firms in "one-stop
shops" throughout the U.S.
5-14
1. SUPPORTING U.S. BIDDERS IN GLOBAL COMPETITION
"[We are] changing the culture of our [government] and getting [it] in country after
country much more involved in trying to promote commercial activities. We will
continue to work hard at home and abroad to help our people thrive in the global
economy. "
President Clinton
February 16, 1994
Background
The competition for major contracts by foreign countries is fierce. Most of our major
trading partners -- including Japan, Germany, France and many others -- aggressively help
their firms expand exports, especially by using high level officials as advocates to close a
deal. Until the Clinton Administration took office, the United States was the exception to
this rule. As a result, American business was losing billions of dollars in sales every year,
largely because U.S. government advocacy efforts were not as effective as those of foreign
governments.
The Initiative
Recognizing the crucial role government can play in helping American business reap
the many benefits of the new world economy, the Clinton Administration launched a
comprehensive advocacy program to give American bidders a full and fair opportunity in
global competition. Since November, 1993, this program assisted American firms
competing for over 120 major contracts -- contracts that are worth over $24 billion in U.S.
exports and support more than 360,000 jobs in the United States.
None of these deals would have advanced if the companies in question did not offer
top quality products and services, and without their hard work and skillful marketing. But
the American government was able to play an important -- and sometimes crucial --
supporting role in helping these companies close their deals or move them forward despite
strong competition.
The advocacy program coordinates resources from across the U.S. government in a
full court press on behalf of American business. American ambassadors, commercial
attaches and visiting officials go to bat for our companies with foreign governments and
businesses. A new Advocacy Center established at the Department of Commerce works
5-15
closely with U.S. bidders. Its computer database tracks pending projects around the world.
When assistance on a particular project is needed, interagency teams are quickly mobilized
to develop project-specific strategies.
All of the government's economic agencies -- including the Departments of
Commerce, Treasury and State and the Export/Import Bank, the Overseas Private
Investment Corporation, and the Trade and Development Agency -- meet on a regular basis
to develop and coordinate strategies for American companies seeking help. And top
Administration officials, starting with the President and his Cabinet, have demonstrated an
unprecedented willingness to lend their support -- including face-to-face meetings with
foreign decision-makers both here and abroad -- American exporters competing for major
overseas contracts.
Case Studies
With the help of the Trade and Development Agency, last May, Hughes Space &
Communications Company signed a multi-million dollar deal with Malaysia for the
East Asia Satellite. The project supports jobs for about 400 people at Hughes'
facilities in El Segundo, California.
With strong personal support from President Clinton, Secretary of State Christopher
and Secretary of Commerce Brown, AT&T won a $4 billion contract to modernize
Saudi Arabia's telecommunications system -- beating out major competitors from
Germany, France, Canada and Sweden. The majority of manufacturing for the
project will take place at AT&T's plants in Oklahoma City, OK, Andover, MA and
Columbus, OH. Software for the system will be created at facilities in Illinois and
New Jersey.
Following a trade mission to Brazil, Argentina and Chile led by Secretary Brown
and 20 American CEOs, contracts and deal memos worth more than $1.7 billion
were signed -- including a $1.4 billion Amazon rain forest protection program
contract awarded to Raytheon Corp., a defense contractor moving into non-defense
related activity. The Commerce Department's International Trade Administration
and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration provided technical and
scientific expertise and critical links to Brazilian agencies to help Raytheon win the
contract, and the U.S. Export-Import Bank provided a critically important
competitive financing package for the deal.
With the help of sustained advocacy by the Clinton Administration, in the six
months from March to August 1994, American firms won 34 major contracts in Asia
-- from turbine generators in China to waste incinerator technology in Taiwan.
These contracts will generate $5.3 billion in U.S. exports and support 85,000 jobs
across the United States.
5-16
In addition to these advocacy efforts, we are targeting our export promotion efforts
on those regions with the greatest growth potential for American exporters. We will focus
on the big emerging markets -- Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, the Chinese Economic Area,
India, Indonesia, South Korea, Poland, Turkey and South Africa -- that are expected to
account for over 40 percent of total global imports over the next 20 years. To improve our
competitive position in these markets, we will establish bilateral forums to discuss
commercial cooperation; open new U.S. Commercial Centers to provide U.S. exporters easy
access to the full array of government export promotion and financial services for small to
medium sized exporters and larger companies as well; expand cabinet and sub-cabinet
travel to these markets to strengthen commercial ties; and craft long term export strategies
for each country, to be directed by interagency teams.
2. IMPROVING TRADE FINANCE
Background
The availability and terms of trade financing often play a decisive role in securing
export contracts. Foreign governments give their companies a leg up through subsidies,
loans and loan guarantees. They also provide "tied aid" -- loans or grants that are only
available to recipient governments if they buy goods and services for the project in question
from the donor country. In 1994, tied aid totaled $7 billion worldwide and seriously
handicapped American companies bidding for foreign capital projects.
Working together through the National Export Strategy, the Clinton
Administration's trade and economic agencies have responded to this challenge. As a
result, companies have easier access to more capital. And the Administration has taken
effective action to counter financing practices by other countries that make trade unfair.
The Initiative
The Administration increased the Overseas Private Investment Corporation's project
financing limit from $50 million to $200 million and doubled its per project insurance limit
to $200 million. The higher limits have already made support available for 15 major
projects -- in power, energy, telecommunications and transportation -- that OPIC might not
otherwise have been able to support. All told, these and other projects OPIC supported in
1994 are expected to produce more than $3 billion in U.S. exports over the first five years
of the lives of those projects.
The Administration also initiated innovative cooperative ventures with state and
5-17
local governments to take advantage of new opportunities. Last year, four U.S. Export
Assistance Centers were opened in Baltimore, Miami, Chicago, and Long Beach to co-
locate the marketing, counseling and trade finance services of Commerce, the Small
Business Administration, and the Export/Import Bank. Eleven more "one-stop shops" will
open in 1995, creating a comprehensive national network. The Small Business
Administration now co-guarantees export loans with state and local governments. These
arrangements leverage both SBA and the local finance entities' guaranty capacity and allow
the SBA to benefit from local expertise and loan-packaging capabilities. The Export/Import
Bank's City/State Program assists small and less experienced exporters through the entire
export financing process: from counseling to drafting proposals to securing commercial
bank loans and guaranties. In FY 1993, the program supported $75 million in U.S. exports.
By reinvigorating and consolidating funding for feasibility studies in the Trade and
Development Agency, the U.S. government has enabled American business to become more
easily involved in the planning stage of infrastructure projects. The studies include advice to
a host country about the availability of appropriate U.S. equipment and services -- advice
that often leads to follow-up contracts for the feasibility contractor and to U.S. exports
during the project's implementation.
In tandem with its efforts to improve access to capital, the Administration worked
within the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development to adopt new tied aid
guidelines. As a result, tied aid has decreased dramatically -- from $15.5 billion in 1992 to
$7 billion in 1994. To eliminate trade distortions arising from the use of tied aid credits,
the Administration established the Tied Aid Capital Projects Fund. The Fund, managed by
the Export/Import Bank, does not initiate tied aid credits -- indeed, Export/Import seeks to
convince foreign countries not to provide trade distorting tied aid. Nonetheless, the Fund
is available to counter tied aid used by foreign competitors which disadvantages American
competitors.
5-18
Case Studies
OPIC supported dozens of projects in Central Europe, including the International
Paper Company's acquisition of a major mill in Poland and U.S. West's venture to
bring cellular telephones to Hungary. These two deals will each generate about $30
million in U.S. exports and support hundreds of jobs in America.
With the support of a joint SBA/State of California loan guaranty, Laub Engineering,
a 15-employee producer of liquid filling systems, secured a contract to supply its
technology to a major motor oil plant in Indonesia. As a result, the company
doubled its work force, and all the new employees will stay on after the contract is
completed.
Armed with $300,000 from the Trade and Development Agency to help fund a
feasibility study on health care in the Republic of Tatarstan, Russia, HCR, a
Rochester, NY company, generated orders to purchase medical equipment from
several U.S. suppliers and is pursuing several spin-off projects as a result of the
study.
This year, the Administration will concentrate on a new initiative with the potential
to help increase exports. Project finance, a type of financing where repayment is based
on the revenue flow of the project rather than external guarantees, is becoming a
significant method of funding major projects, especially in emerging markets where
infrastructure investment is a priority. OPIC and Export/Import Bank are arranging new
ways to provide project finance to support U.S. exporters.
3. REMOVING OBSTACLES TO EXPORTING
"We have on too many occasions, for too many years, not had a coordinated, effective
[export control] strategy... Streamlining unnecessary controls will make the rest of the
system more responsive and more efficient."
President Clinton
September 29, 1993
Remarks announcing a National
Export Strategy
5-19
Background
Over the course of the Cold War, the United States imposed export prohibitions and
licensing requirements on thousands of products that could be of strategic value to
communist countries. Successive administrations sought to balance national security
concerns against the burden these restrictions placed on American business.
While our security interests require that we maintain some export controls -- for
example, to prevent the proliferation of nuclear materials -- with the end of the Cold War,
many licensing restrictions became obsolete and counter-productive. They imposed
additional costs on American companies and hindered their ability to fill orders as rapidly
as their competitors, without benefit to America's national security.
The Initiative
In just one year, the Clinton Administration has made major progress in eliminating
unnecessary and ineffective export controls and in streamlining the licensing process for
those products that still require an export permit. As a result, the value of goods requiring
an individual export license already has dropped from $6 billion per quarter to $2 billion --
an annualized reduction of more than $16 billion.
The computer industry was one of the major beneficiaries of the liberalization of
export controls. The United States had required a license to sell computers operating at a
processing speed of over 12.5 MTOPS. This covered virtually every computer above the
level of a desktop personal computer and even restricted the export of some desktop models
that are available in most electronics stores. The Administration raised the MTOP ceiling
to 1000 -- this will free some $30 billion of American computer exports per year from
licensing requirements.
Reducing the number of licenses required has had the added benefit of eliminating
gridlock for those products that still require export permits. To further streamline the
licensing process, the Administration will continue to simplify regulations and further
improve interagency coordination, which would speed decision making at all levels of
review and reduce the maximum processing time by 25 percent.
5-20
Case Study
Before the liberalization of export controls that began in 1993, the licensing lead
time for exports by Silicon Graphics, a computer software maker, averaged 150
days. Within a year, the lead time dropped to less than thirty days, enabling the
company to double its volume shipped.
5-21
Clinton Presidential Records
Digital Records Marker
This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative
marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff.
This marker identifies the place of a tabbed divider. Given our
digitization capabilities, we are sometimes unable to adequately
scan such dividers. The title from the original document is
indicated below.
6
Divider Title:
6. BUILDING SAFER COMMUNITIES
Introduction
100,000 New Police Officers
President Clinton's landmark Crime Bill, signed on September 13, 1994, is putting
100,000 new police officers on our streets, funded by savings realized through
reducing federal employment by 272,900. Already, the President's plan has helped
half the nation's law enforcement agencies hire nearly 17,000 new officers.
The Brady Act
President Clinton supported and signed the Brady Act, an historic piece of
legislation, which requires a five-day waiting period during which all potential
purchasers are required to submit to a background check. A one-year progress
report on the Brady Act estimates that approximately 41,000 fugitives, felons and
other prohibited purchasers have been stopped from buying a handgun.
The President also won passage of the Brady Act Implementation Program to
upgrade state criminal history records. This will ensure that states can comply the
Act, that sales are not made to ineligible purchasers, and that the national instant
check system can become a reality. $100 million dollars has been appropriated in
FY 1995, and another $50 million is authorized for the next fiscal year. Already,
5 states with few or no automated criminal history records have received up to
$1 million each.
Assault Weapons Ban
The President successfully fought for the historic Assault Weapons Ban, which was
included in the Crime Bill. The law prohibits the manufacture, transfer, or
possession of semiautomatic assault weapons not lawfully possessed under federal
law on the date of enactment. The ban covers 19 military-style assault weapons,
assault weapons with specific combat features, and "copy-cat" models. The Act
specifically exempts over 600 firearm models used for hunting and sporting
purposes.
6-1
Stiffer Penalties for Violent Offenders
The President's program for imposing stiffer penalties on violent criminals was also
embodied in the Crime Bill. It:
Imposes the death penalty for more than 60 federal offenses, making it
available for most homicides prosecuted in federal court;
Makes "three strikes and you're out" the law of the land, requiring this
punishment for repeat violent offenders;
Authorizes $10 billion for new state and local prisons to house violent
criminals -- with half the funding reserved for states that work towards tough.
"truth in sentencing" guidelines.
Violence Against Women Act
Finally, the President won passage of the Violence Against Women Act as part of
the Crime Bill. The act includes four key components:
Safe Streets for Women -- Funding more prosecutions and police patrols to
combat sexual assaults against women, and increasing penalties for such
crimes;
Safe Homes for Women -- Launching programs to combat domestic violence,
and to give battered women a safe place to go;
Civil Rights for Women -- Giving women who are the victims of gender-
based attacks the right to sue their attackers;
Safe Schools for Women -- Promoting sex assault prevention on college
campuses, and making campuses safer with common-sense answers like more
and better lighting.
On March 21st, the Justice Department awarded $26 million -- up to $426,000 for
each state -- to bolster law enforcement, prosecution and victims' services related to
violence against women.
6-2
National Police Corps
The Crime Bill also includes the Police Corps Act, setting up a national Police
Corps program which offers a maximum grant of $30,000 to each student, with an
average of $7,500 per year. Students who receive the scholarships must commit to
four years of service with their state or local police.
6-3
6A. 100,000 NEW POLICE ENGAGED
IN COMMUNITY POLICING
"When I signed this crime bill, we [took] a big step toward bringing the
laws of our land back into line with the values of our people."
President Clinton
Signing of the Crime Bill
September 13, 1994
Actions to Date
President Clinton fought for and won passage of the Violent Crime and Law
Enforcement Act, the "Crime Bill," which he signed on September 13, 1994.
The Crime Bill will put 100,000 new police officers on our streets, funded by
savings realized through reducing federal employment by 272,900.
Already the program is under way: awards for more than 16,000 new police
officers have already been granted. Smaller towns are allowed to file one page
applications for their new police officers; bigger cities are being given grants to
get officers out of headquarters and back on the streets.
On December 19, 1994, President Clinton named a 20-year police veteran, Police
Chief Joe Brann of Heyward, California, as the Director of the Community
Oriented Policing program -- the COPS program. Under Chief Brann's
leadership, plans to put the 100,000 police on our streets will be implemented
with efficiency and intelligence.
6-4
Background
In the 1950s. there were three times the number of police as there were violent
offenses. But today. the ratio is reversed: in 1993, there were four violent crimes for each
officer.
Notwithstanding this fact, the federal government did nothing during the 1980s to
reverse these two terrible trends. In fact, in 1981, the Reagan administration cut all federal
aid to local police departments by more than 80%. While the Congress gradually upped such
aid (now known as the Byrne Grant program) over the course of the 1980s, these funds were
not used to hire more police officers. Thus, at the start of the Clinton Administration, there
was no federal effort in place to do anything to reverse the dramatic erosion of our effective
police strength in America's cities. Nor was there any substantial effort to expand or
promote community policing around the country.
While Washington ignored the problem, local officials did not have the same luxury.
They stretched their resources where possible to put more police on the streets, and
developed innovative ways to deploy the limited number of police on their forces. One of
the innovations, started by creative police leaders like Chief Rueben Greenberg in Columbia,
South Carolina, and Chief Lee Brown in New York, became known as "community
policing." The idea was to have cops "walk the beat:" patrol local communities, get to know
the residents, and get involved with the neighborhood. An old-fashioned idea whose time
had come again, community policing helped prevent crimes by finding trouble spots -- and
trouble makers -- before they got worse.
President Clinton articulated a clear vision for reversing these trends. In a speech in
March of 1992, he noted the declining ratio of police to crimes in our country, and offered a
clear answer: the federal government should put 100,000 more police on our nation's streets.
Moreover, in his speech at the Democratic National Convention in July, he linked it to
another promise: his pledge to cut the federal bureaucracy by 100,000 workers. Why not,
Clinton asked, cut 100,000 bureaucrats in Washington, and use the savings to put 100,000
more police on the streets? The idea, which won popular support, was doubted by the cynics
who thought that as President, Clinton would never deliver on the pledge.
But President Clinton's vision did not end there. As he stressed time and again, the
100,000 new police would be engaged in community policing -- not stuck behind desks or in
squad cars. As a result, these 100,000 new officers would represent almost a one-fifth
increase in the number of street level cops in this country.
6-5
The Initiative
We must take serious steps to reduce violence and prevent crime, beginning
with more police officers and more community policing. We know right now
that police who work the streets, know the folks, have the respect of the
neighborhood kids, focus on high crime areas, we know that they are more
likely to prevent crime as well as catch criminals.
President Clinton
State of the Union Address, 1/25/94
Shortly after taking office, in March of 1993, the President had an unexpected
opportunity to launch a small beginning to his plan: he won funding in a Supplemental
Appropriations bill for a program to begin hiring 2,000 new police officers. By November,
the first round of grants -- for the first new police officers hired with federal assistance in
more than 15 years -- where on their way.
Winning Congressional passage of the larger program was more difficult, of course.
The President offered an initial plan to hire 50,000 new police officers over five years in a
comprehensive anti-crime bill in August of 1993; it passed the House a month later. Still,
the program provided only one-half the promised officers -- and its funding was uncertain.
Following Vice President Gore's Reinventing Government report, and passage of
Congressional legislation to implement the President's recommendation that government
employment be cut by 250,000, the opportunity to make the President's original vision a
reality reemerged. In November of 1993, Senate Democrats and Republicans jointly
approved a plan to take the savings from the 250,000 reduction in government employment
and put it in a Trust Fund to fund a comprehensive Crime Bill -- including the President's
plan to put 100,000 new community police officers on the street.
It took almost another year of wrangling to get the Bill finally passed by Congress.
Some wanted the money shifted to other purposes; others wanted to strip away assurances
that more police would be hired. But in the end, in September of 1994, President Clinton
signed the landmark Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act, which embodied his pledge
to put 100,000 more police on the streets, in community policing, paid for by cuts in the
federal workforce over the next six years.
6-6
The commitment was now law. But much work was left to be done to implement
that promise. Just one month later, the first grants of 2.800 new police officers were made.
In December of 1994. 4.700 more police were awarded -- the program was well on its way.
Smaller towns were allowed to file one page applications for their new police officers;
bigger cities were given grants to get officers out of headquarters and back on the streets.
In February of 1995. additional awards were announced which will enable smaller cities
and towns to add 7,100 officers.
And on December 19, 1994, President Clinton named a 20-year police veteran,
Police Chief Joe Brann of Heyward, California, as the Director of the Community Oriented
Policing program -- the COPS program. Under Chief Brann's leadership, plans to put the
100,000 police on our streets will be implemented with efficiency and intelligence.
Case Study: Ocean City, Maryland
One of the first cities to win a police hiring grant from the Clinton Administration
was Ocean City, Maryland -- a small resort town with a population that ballooned during
summer months. Just a few weeks after the first of the three new officers given to that
town were on the job, the results were clear.
On an early July day, one of the police on patrol as a result of the grant, Officer
Bill Stamps, was on bike patrol in Ocean City. Hearing a noise, he rushed to the scene of
an assault on a young woman. The man Officer Stamps arrested in the attack turned out
to be a serial rapist, wanted in a large number of sex crimes in the area.
6-7
Case Study: Albany, Georgia
Another early winner of a police hiring grant was the mid-sized town of Albany,
Georgia. Albany, like many smaller cities, was experiencing serious crime problems: the
emergence of gangs, a growth in youth violence, more burglaries -- problems that needed
to be attacked before they got worse.
Albany got a police hiring grant in November 1993, and had 12 new officers on
patrol by early the next year. Albany's new cops proved to be heroes beyond just
fighting crime. After just a few months on the job, Albany found itself with another
deluge -- the terrible 1994 floods that decimated many cities and towns in the South.
Albany's new community police officers pitched in, fighting the floods with sandbags,
and helping to save much of the small city's beleaguered downtown.
6-8
6B. THE BRADY ACT
This is the only country, the only advanced country in the world, the only
country I know of where we would permit children access to weapons that
make them better armed than police forces. So I'll tell you what we
ought to do. I've asked the Congress to pass the Brady Bill, which would
give us a national system, a waiting period to check the backgrounds of
people for age, criminal records, and mental health before we sell them
weapons.
President Clinton
October 3, 1993
Actions to Date
After stalling for several years in Congress, the Brady Bill became law under the
leadership of President Clinton.
Signed by the President on November 30, 1993, the Brady Act requires a five-
day waiting period during which potential handgun purchasers are required to
submit to a background check.
The Brady Act also provides funding to upgrade state criminal history records.
$100 million dollars has been appropriated in FY 1995, and another $50 million
is authorized for the next fiscal year to upgrade and automate state criminal
history records.
6-9
Background
On March 3, 1981, during an assassination attempt against President Reagan, Press
Secretary James Brady was tragically and critically shot in the head. His arduous road to
recovery brought well wishes and support from all Americans. But Jim Brady and his wife
Sarah felt that there was more to be won than just one man's survival, or one family's
recovery. At stake was nothing less than a national commitment to conquer the unreasonable
and unimaginable proliferation of violence in America. And so they set out to seek
Congressional passage of a five-day waiting period and background check for the purchase of
handguns, so that guns would not be put in the hands of criminals and mentally unstable
individuals. On February 4, 1987, Congressman Ed Feighan of Ohio introduced the Brady
Bill.
The Brady Bill became a lightning rod for organized gun lobbies and others who
opposed any meaningful anti-crime legislation. And in 1988, 1991 and 1992, the Brady Bill
could not muster enough votes for passage because of the powerful chilling effect gun lobbies
and others had on the Congress and the President.
The challenge was to build the sort of coalition required to overcome the special
interests and obstructionists. The coalition took shape when President Clinton assumed the
mantle of leadership and announced during his campaign his commitment to a partnership
with law enforcement to "make the people of this country safer, and to make our policies
saner, and to bring us closer to the kind of country we ought to have by supporting law
enforcement, and doing the things we know will work" -- such as the Brady Bill.
The President told the American people the hard facts about violence in our nation.
He made clear that it was simply unacceptable that one person is gunned down every 20
minutes by gunfire; and that it was unacceptable that in the seven years that Sarah and Jim
Brady had fought for reform, more than 150,000 Americans had been killed with handguns,
and countless others wounded.
The coalition gained momentum when states and law enforcement began to see the
clear difference a waiting period and background check could make. Under the existing gun
control statute there were several categories of persons who were prohibited from purchasing
or owning firearms. However, there was no way to determine whether a prospective
handgun purchaser fell within one of the prohibited categories. Sales were made on the
honor system. By the time the Brady Bill had finally been passed, four states who had
already enacted versions of the Bill, had in four years, prevented some 50,000 people from
buying a handgun because they were legally forbidden to purchase such weapons.
6-10
Congress finally passed, and the President triumphantly signed into law the Brady Bill
on November 30, 1993. Efforts were already underway to improve the Act by upgrading the
criminal history record keeping systems and expanding the categories of persons prohibited
from possessing firearms to include those convicted of domestic violence or subject to a
restraining order for alleged acts of domestic violence. This was accomplished in the 1994
Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act.
The Initiative
The Brady Law, an historic piece of legislation, requires a five-day waiting period
during which potential hand gun purchasers are required to submit to a background check.
And it works. A recently-completed Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms' ("ATF")
survey of 30 law enforcement authorities reveals that from March 1994 through
January 1995, more than 15,500 persons in the surveyed jurisdictions who applied to
purchase handguns had their applications denied. The officials polled constitute a cross
section of the national law enforcement scene. Drawn from every region of the country,
they represent communities large and small, rural and urban.
The "bad guys" blocked by the Brady Act from obtaining handguns included:
4,365 convicted felons;
945 fugitives;
97 persons under indictment;
649 illegal drug users;
two juveniles; and
63 persons under restraining order for alleged stalking, harassment or other
forms of domestic threats or intimidation.
The more than 15,500 Brady applications denied represent only 3.5 percent of the
total number of applications submitted in the surveyed jurisdictions (more than 440,000).
Further, ATF has confirmed through discussions with the firearms industry that the overall
volume of handgun sales remained relatively constant during that time. This suggests that
the Brady Law is doing what it was designed to do -- keeping handguns out of the reach
of that small percentage of persons who use handguns criminally, while not unduly
6-11
infringing on the rights of legitimate handgun owners.
National estimates of the number of prohibited persons who were prevented by the
Brady Act from purchasing a handgun in states affected -- based on information supplied by
the FBI's criminal history data base was approximately 41,000 from March 1, 1994
through January 31, 1995. This estimate was corroborated generally by a CBS News public
polling unit which estimated that more than 44,000, or approximately two percent, of the
applications to purchase handguns submitted during the one year period following the Brady
Law's effective date were denied.
The Brady Law also provided funding to upgrade state criminal history records.
This will ensure that states can comply with Brady, that sales are not made to ineligible
purchasers, and that the national instant check system can become a reality. $100 million
dollars has been appropriated in FY 1995, and another $50 million is authorized for the next
fiscal year.
This grant program gives preference to states with the lowest level of automated
complete records. The reality is that under half of all states have fully automated records
systems, and four state systems are not even partially automated. The success of the Brady
Law and other crime fighting provisions such as the "Three Strikes" law depend upon quick
access to criminal history records.
Guidelines have been published and states may now apply for these grants and for the
National Criminal History Improvement Program (NCHIP), which will help states speed up
their connections with the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System. This
will permit firearm dealers to obtain immediate information about potential handgun
purchasers to see if they are disqualified by law. Already, 5 states with few or no automated
criminal history records have received up to $1 million each.
The categories to limit those eligible to purchase a handgun under the Brady Law
have also been expanded to include persons under restraining orders stemming from domestic
abuse situations.
6-12
Case Studies: Prairie Village, Kansas and San Antonio, Texas
In March 1994. the Brady Law prevented an accused stalker in Prairie Village,
Kansas, from purchasing a handgun. The attempted handgun purchase was stopped by
the Prairie Village Police Department when a Brady background check revealed that the
prospective purchaser, who was the subject of a restraining order for allegedly stalking
his wife and threatening to kill her, was a resident of Missouri, not Kansas, as he had
represented in his Brady form.
In April 1994. a suspected drug dealer was arrested in San Antonio, Texas after a
Brady background check performed by the Uvalde County Sheriff's Office indicated
that the alleged dealer was the subject of outstanding warrants for possession of cocaine
with intent to distribute, possession of heroin with intent to distribute and failure to
appear in court.
6-13
6C. ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN
Hunters must always be free to hunt. Law-abiding adults should always
be free to own guns and protect their homes. I respect that part of our
culture; I grew up on it. But I want to ask the sportsmen and others who
lawfully own guns to join us in this campaign to reduce gun violence. I
say to you, I know you didn't create this problem, but we need your help
to solve it. There is no sporting purpose on Earth that should stop the
United States Congress from banishing assault weapons that out-gun
police and cut down children.
President Clinton
State of the Union Address, 1/25/94
Actions to Date
President Clinton fought for and won passage of the Violent Crime Control and
Law Enforcement Act, the "Crime Bill," which he signed on September 13, 1994.
Included in the Crime Bill, the Assault Weapons Ban:
prohibits the manufacture, transfer, or possession of semiautomatic assault
weapons and large capacity feeding devices not lawfully possessed under federal
law on the date of enactment;
covers 19 military-style assault weapons, assault weapons with specific combat
features, and "copy-cat" models; and
specifically exempts over 600 firearm models used for hunting and sporting
purposes.
6-14
Background
America enjoys a rich tradition of sportsmanship and appreciation for the great
outdoors. Part of that tradition includes the freedom to enjoy hunting and gaming at parks
and reserves throughout the country. President Clinton, like so many Americans. has
memories from his boyhood of taking his first shot at a can on a fencepost and learning the
responsible way to use hunting and recreational weapons.
Before the Assault Weapons Ban, however, highly-dangerous weapons with no
legitimate civilian use were available to the public. Along with hunting rifles, gun dealers
sold uzis, street sweepers, and other assault weapons designed for rapid fire, close quarter
shooting of human targets. Because of their inaccuracy, assault weapons are of no value
for hunting or target practice. Their firepower and military features, though, make them of
great value to criminals. Assault weapons represent only one percent of privately owned
firearms in this country, yet account for eight percent of firearms traced to crime.
Assault weapons, then, pose a grave threat to public safety. Police risk being
outgunned and citizens face exposure to the random spray of gunfire in America's streets.
On January 17, 1989, a deranged man wandered into a school yard in Stockton,
California and opened fire with an AK-47. In just a matter of seconds Patrick Purdy had
killed five children and wounded 29 others. This horrific event galvanized public opinion
and inspired action. In 1989 Congress banned the importation of semiautomatic assault
weapons.
Yet, the law did not effect American-made assault style weapons or copy cat
versions of the foreign models. And soon after the imposition of the ban, the status quo
returned, with law makers unable to overcome the gun lobby and advance the effort to get
assault weapons off the gun store shelves and streets of America. A House Bill in 1991 to
ban assault weapons was defeated by a 70 vote margin, even though 70 percent of
Americans indicated they were in favor of gun control.
President Clinton stated unequivocally during the 1992 campaign that he favored an
assault weapons ban. "We ought not to have assault weapons whose only purpose is to kill
when the police don't have a chance. It's wrong
And
it's
time
we
took
the
side
of
people in law enforcement." President Clinton drew upon the unified support of law
enforcement. He knew full well that it was wrong to ask them to risk their lives in the
fight against crime -- and then deny them the help they need.
6-15
The Initiative
The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, signed into law by President
Clinton in September 1994, prohibits the manufacture, transfer, and possession of
semiautomatic assault weapons not lawfully possessed under federal law on the date of
enactment. The ban covers 19 named assault weapons, copies and duplicates of such
weapons, and semiautomatic rifles, semiautomatic pistols, and semiautomatic shotguns with
specified features. The Act specifically exempts over 600 firearm models used for hunting
and sporting purposes.
The Act also prohibits the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding
devices not lawfully possessed on the date of enactment. Such devices are defined to include
a magazine, feed strip, or similar device that can accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition
or can be readily restored or converted to accept more than 10 rounds.
The ban on both semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition
feeding devices is subject to a sunset provision that will cause its repeal in ten years. In
addition, semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices
lawfully possessed on the date of enactment may be lawfully transferred to another
individual.
Case Study: Stephen Sposato
In July 1993, a man entered a downtown San Francisco office building, and went
to the 34th floor law offices of Pettit & Martin. He was carrying two 9mm Intratec
TEC-9 pistols, a .45 caliber semiautomatic handgun and hundreds of rounds of
ammunition. Gunman Gian Luigi Ferri, apparently motivated by a disagreement with the
firm, opened fire randomly shooting at employees, and murdered eight people. One
victim was Jodie Sposato, wife of Steven and mother of 10-month-old Meghan.
In the wake of this inexpressible tragedy, Steven Sposato channeled his own
personal loss and worked tirelessly to fight for a ban on the type of weapon that had
taken the life of his wife. "Murders like this could have been prevented," said Steven
Sposato, last August in Washington. "The killer had no prior record. His first crime
was his last crime, and then he killed himself In 1991, if Congress had passed an
assault weapons ban, this terrible tragedy would have been prevented."
6-16
6D. STIFF PENALTIES FOR VIOLENT OFFENDERS
"We must recognize that most violent crimes are committed by a small
percentage of criminals who too often break the laws even when they are
on parole. Now those who commit crimes should be punished. And those
who commit repeated, violent crimes should be told, 'When you commit a
third violent crime, you will be put away, and put away, and put away for
good. Three strikes and you are out."
President Clinton
State of the Union Address, 1/25/94
Actions to Date
President Clinton fought for and won passage of the Violent Crime and Law
Enforcement Act, the "Crime Bill," which he signed on September 13, 1994. The
President's program for imposing stiffer penalties on violent criminals was embodied in
his anti-crime legislation which:
imposes the death penalty for more than 60 federal offenses, making it available
for most homicides prosecuted in federal court;
makes "three strikes and you're out" the law of the land, requiring this
punishment for repeat violent offenders; and
authorizes $10 billion for new state and local prisons to house violent criminals -
- with half the funding reserved for states that work towards tough, "truth in
sentencing" guidelines.
6-17
Background
While a wide variety of tools are needed to combat crime -- more police. more
prevention programs. more efforts to help young people before they become violent -- stiff
punishments for violent offenders is a vital part of the solution.
Over twenty years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the ultimate penalty --
the death penalty -- as then-existing under state and federal law. While most states
responded with modified death penalty laws to permit them to reinstitute that penalty,
Congress was unable to reach agreement on any such legislation.
Even many state criminal justice systems with a death penalty found themselves faced
with the "revolving door" syndrome: violent criminals sentenced to apparently long terms,
only to be let back out again -- and only to commit more crimes once released. Complex
and ambiguous sentencing schemes accounted for some of this; a lack of adequate prison
space was another factor.
As a former Attorney General, President Clinton knew how important stiff
punishments for violent offenders are, as part of a comprehensive attack on this critical
problem. And President Clinton had authorized the imposition of the death penalty in four
cases during his tenure as Governor of Arkansas.
Consequently, President Clinton endorsed a renewed federal death penalty as part of a
comprehensive anti-crime package. He also backed additional, stiff penalties for violent
criminals.
Another part of this plan came into focus when, in 1993, a young girl named Polly
Klass was kidnapped from her home in California, and killed by a repeat violent offender
who had been released. The Klass family vowed to make sure such incidents would not be
repeated, and Polly's father, Mark Klass, led a movement in California to pass the nation's
first "three strikes and you're out" law -- a law to insure that three-time violent offenders
serve real life in prison.
President Clinton met with Mark Klass in December of 1993, and the next month, in
his State of the Union address, called on Congress to pass a federal version of that law.
Early in February of 1994, the President submitted a legislative proposal to make "three
strikes and you're out" the law of the land.
President Clinton fought hard to end 20 years of inaction, and six years of gridlock,
to get the federal death penalty reinstated. Though four Presidents -- Nixon, Ford, Reagan,
and Bush -- had proposed legislation to have a federal death penalty, none had been able to
6-18
win passage of that legislation by the Congress.
The Initiative
The President's program for imposing stiffer penalties on violent criminals was
embodied in his anti-crime legislation, that he fought hard to get passed by the Congress. As
signed by the President in September 1994, this Violent Crime Bill:
Imposed the death penalty for more than 60 federal offenses, making it available for
most homicides prosecuted in federal court;
Made "three strikes and you're out" the law of the land, requiring this punishment
for repeat violent offenders;
Authorized $10 billion for new state and local prisons to house violent criminals --
with half the funding reserved for states that have tough, "truth in sentencing"
guidelines.
Taken as a whole, the Crime Bill signed by the President in September contains the
toughest package of penalties for violent offenders in our nation's history.
6-19
6E. VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
Actions to Date
President Clinton fought for and won passage of the Violent Crime Control and
Law Enforcement Act, the "Crime Bill," which he signed on September 13, 1994.
Included as part of the Crime Bill, the Violence Against Women Act includes four key
components:
Safe Streets for Women -- Funding more prosecutions and police patrols to
combat sexual assaults against women -- and increasing penalties for such
crimes;
Safe Homes for Women -- Launching programs to combat domestic violence,
and to give battered women a safe place to go;
Civil Rights for Women -- Giving women who are the victims of gender-based
attacks the right to sue their attackers;
Safe Schools for Women -- Promoting sex assault prevention on college
campuses, and making campuses safer with common-sense answers like more
and better lighting.
Background
Since 1970, an unheralded but dramatic trend in American society has been a sharp
increase in violent crimes against women. Violent crimes against women have risen at four
times the rate of increase of such crimes against men -- an increase fueled by growing rates
of sexual assault and domestic violence.
During the 1980s, an increasing number of women said "enough is enough." On
college campuses around the country, "Take Back the Night" rallies were held to demand
an end to the violence against women, and to demand action. Local governments formed
special sex crimes prosecution units; others tackled the problem of domestic violence with
special training for police and pro-arrest policies in such cases.
6-20
Still. the toll of these crimes continued to mount. Highly publicized instances of
stalking of women. assaults against women. and even misogynistic slayings of women
spurred some action -- but no comprehensive response.
Domestic violence, too. was escalating. Many women found that they were stuck in
abusive homes because they had nowhere to go -- America had three animal shelters for
each one battered women's shelter. Fewer than 10 cities had specialized domestic violence
prosecution units.
On college campuses, a 1988 study found that rape was the number one reason that
freshmen women dropped out of college not to return. And in the workplace, a 1990 study
found that homicide was the number one cause of death among women on the job.
As usual, Washington was sluggish to respond. The Reagan and Bush Justice
Departments offered little or nothing in the way of reaction to these developments.
In 1990, Senator Joseph Biden and then-Representative Barbara Boxer proposed the
first "Violence Against Women" Act. Despite broad, bi-partisan support for the legislation,
President Bush refused to endorse the bill. As a result, the bill languished for more than
two years.
By contrast, President Clinton endorsed the Violence Against Women Act, and
pledged to sign it as President. In August of 1993, President Clinton called on Congress to
include the Act in any Crime Bill it passed -- and continued to speak out for this important
law.
The Initiative
Finally in August of 1994, Congress passed an administration backed proposal that
contained elements drafted by Senator Biden, Senator Dole, and the Justice Department.
The President signed the legislation as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law
Enforcement Act in September 1994.
The Violence Against Women Act includes four key components originally included
in the Biden-Boxer proposal:
Safe Streets for Women -- Funding more prosecutions and police patrols to combat
sexual assaults against women -- and increasing penalties for such crimes;
6-21
Safe Homes for Women -- Launching programs to combat domestic violence. and to
give battered women a safe place to go;
Civil Rights for Women -- Giving women who are the victims of gender-based
attacks the right to sue their attackers;
Safe Schools for Women -- Promoting sex assault prevention on college campuses,
and making campuses safer with common-sense answers like more and better
lighting.
In addition, the Act includes provisions that will insure HIV-testing of accused
rapists and permit expanded use of prior crimes evidence against sex criminals.
On March 21, 1995, the Justice Department awarded $26 million -- or up to
$426,000 for each state -- to bolster law enforcement, prosecution, and victims' services
related to violence against women.
6-22
6F. NATIONAL POLICE CORPS
"In our toughest neighborhoods, on our meanest streets, in our poorest
rural areas, we have seen a stunning and simultaneous breakdown of
community, family, and work, the heart and soul of civilized society. This
has created a vast vacuum which has been filled by violence and drugs and
gangs. So I ask you to remember that even as we say 'no' to crime, we
must give people, especially our young people, something to say 'yes' to."
President Clinton
State of the Union Address, 1/25/94
Actions to Date
President Clinton fought for and won passage of the Violent Crime and Law
Enforcement Act, the "Crime Bill," which he signed on September 13, 1994. Included
in the Crime Bill, the Police Corps Act:
offers a maximum grant of $30,000 to each student in the Police Corps Program,
for an average of $7,500 per year;
grants each state or locality that employs members of the Police Corps $10,000
each year per hire for the life of the grant to help defray the cost of the new
officers; and
includes $20 million per year in funding due to begin in FY 1996 and to
continue for the following five years.
Background
The idea for a National Police Corps existed for many years and enjoyed broad
bipartisan support, but it was not until President Clinton pushed the proposal to the front of
the national agenda that its legislative fate resulted in law. Over ten years ago, a former
6-23
aide to Robert Kennedy first proposed the idea for a Police Corps. drawing upon the same
motivations that created the Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC). There was and is a
burning desire among young Americans to contribute to their country while. at the same
time. improving their lives through higher education.
The need for an increasing number of smart, tough law enforcement officers has
never been greater.
President Clinton embraced this proposal when he was still Governor of Arkansas.
The idea was first expressed by him in his bid for reelection in 1990, and, in 1992,
Arkansas awarded the first scholarships under its newly created State Police Corps.
The President has said many times that the American people do not only expect our
police officers to shoot straight, but to think straight, too. This philosophy is also in
keeping with President Clinton's long held belief that the key to America's future lies in
the education and well-being of young Americans. It was in that spirit that he proposed the
revamping of the student loan program and the establishment of AmeriCorps, in which
young Americans serve their country in return for a college education.
This same commitment to encouraging public service and creating a highly educated
and highly motivated generation of Americans is what prompted the President to identify
the National Police Corps as a means of offering college scholarships if students serve as
police officers in their communities. In addition to the obvious benefit of education, this
program helps to facilitate the promise of 100,000 police officers on the streets of America,
and communities benefit from the increased police presence in their neighborhoods.
The Initiative
On August 11, 1993, the President announced the parameters of a comprehensive
anti-crime package that included the Police Corps Program. The Police Corps Act offers a
maximum of $30,000 to each student, with an average of $7,500 per year. Those states and
localities that employ members of the Police Corps will receive, for the life of the grant,
$10,000 each year per hire to help defray the cost of the new officers.
Just over a year later, Congress passed -- and President Clinton signed -- the Police
Corps Act (as part of the Omnibus Violent Crime and Control Act). Funding is due to
begin in FY 1996, with $20 million designated for each of the next five years.
6-24
In return for the scholarship money, the Police Corp student must complete. in good
standing, an undergraduate course or receive credit for one or more graduate courses. The
student must also complete 16 weeks of a rigorous Federal law enforcement training
program. And, upon receipt of an undergraduate degree, the student must commit to four
years of service on his state or local police force. The Police Corps will develop a new
group of well-educated police officers annually available for recruitment by police
departments across the country.
6-25