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
20015383
label
Public Opinion
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
20015383
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Public Opinion
citationUrl
collections
Records of the Office of Speechwriting (Clinton Administration)
James (Terry) Edmonds' Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
20015383
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-7763294-20060462F-051-010-2014
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
988c0d8bc5ba75ed
ocrText
FOIA Number: 2006-0462-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:
Speechwriting
Series/Staff Member:
Terry Edmonds
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
24673
FolderID:
Folder Title:
Public Opinion
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
0
0
0
0
CLOSE HOLD
Survey of Public Opinion
December 7, 2000
Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates
N=700 conducted 12/5-12/6
The mood of the country remains positive a month after the election,
although resolving who will be President is now seen as the most
important issue facing the country in both closed and open-ended
questions. The disputed results have also begun to have some negative
impact on Gore's and Lieberman's favorability numbers, while Bush is up
five points to 58%.
By staying largely above the fray, President Clinton's numbers remain
strong. Similarly, HRC's favorable is moving up significantly nationally.
Mood of the Country
Tracking:
10/12
10/25
10/30
11/9
12/6
Country: Right/Wrong Track
53/31
52/34
56/29
48/37
52/34
Economy: Right/Wrong Track
66/23
71/20
73/20
72/20
66/25
President Clinton
53/46
51/47
55/44
56/41
58/41
AI Gore
62/35
55/43
57/41
58/39
55/42
George W. Bush
57/40
56/41
57/41
53/43
58/39
Joe Lieberman
62/19
60/21
--
60/20
54/27
Dick Cheney
61/23
57/27
-
61/23
58/26
Hillary Clinton
50/45
51/47
--
53/42
56/41
Clinton Job Approval
62/37
65/33
62/36
65/33
I
70/28
Strongly Approve
30
31
31
35
37
Most Important Issue (Open End)
Resolving who will be president - -16%
Education -13%
Morality/Family Values -7%
Health Care-5%
Preserving Social Security and Medicare -4%
Economy/Jobs -3%
Abortion -2%
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
1
Which of the following issues is the most
All
important issue facing the country?
Resolving the presidential election
18
Education
16
Moral Decline
14
Preserving Medicare and Social Security
13
Keeping the economy strong
12
Healthcare
11
Guns and youth violence
7
Taxes
4
Don't know
3
Foreign affairs
2
Who did you vote for?
All
1/9
Gore / Lieberman
39
42
Bush / Cheney
39
42
Nader / LaDuke
4
3
Buchanan / Foster
1
0
Eyou had voted who would have voted for?
All
11/9
Dem
Rep
nd
Gore / Lieberman
43
43
84
0
30
Bush / Cheney
41
34
9
100
45
Nader / LaDuke
4
4
0
0
9
Buchanan / Foster
0
0
0
0
0
As usual, the longer Congress is in effect in recess the better they do. With
Gore and Bush in the spotlight rather than the Congress, ratings for
Republicans and Democrats in Congress are quite high. Congressional
Democrats are beginning to show signs of benefiting from their less
partisan-sounding approach to governing in the split new Congress.
Congressional Approval
9/28
10/12
10/25
10/30
12/6
Congressional Republicans
45/45
47/40
42/44
49/41
50/38
Congressional Democrats
52/37
52/37
47/39
52/38
62/29
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
2
Budget
But the voters are not very concerned about the budget - and they would
just as soon have the decisions made by the next president and spending
kept the same. This is quite different from what we have seen in the past.
Democrats have won over women while Republicans have won over men,
paralleling what came out of the Presidential race.
41/35% trust Democrats in Congress/Republicans in Congress to handle the
budget.
Dem
Rep
nd
Female
Male
81/5
9/82
32/27
47/27
34/43
Parts of the federal budget, which was due at the end of September, have not
been passed. Congress has passed continuing resolutions to keep the
government running since then.
If President Clinton and the Republicans cannot agree on a budget and the
government shuts down, 32/43% would blame President Clinton/Republicans in
Congress.
Dem
Rep
Ind
Female
Male
15/69
55/11
30/44
32/49
31/36
However, Delay's ultimatum does muddy the waters enough to split blame
between President Clinton and the Republicans.
Some Republican leaders say that if President Clinton insists on increased
spending, he will have to shut down the government to get it because they will
only agree to keep spending at current levels.
Given this, if there were a government shutdown, 42/40% would blame President
Clinton/Republicans in Congress.
Dem
Rep
Ind
Female
Male
20/70
66/16
43/32
40/41
45/38
President Clinton says it is important that our budget fund our important national
priorities such as education and healthcare and raise the minimum wage.
Republicans in Congress say the President should agree to keep spending at
current levels and let the next President finish the budget. 44/46% think we
should fund our important national priorities/keep spending at current levels.
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
3
Dem
Rep
Ind
Female
Male
50/44
37/58
43/40
45/41
43/52
Senate Makeup
The Democrats in Congress are positioned to push for a larger role in the
decision making in the Senate. This is a fight worth making for the Senate
Democrats and one that would have considerable public support based on
these finding. The public is looking for bi-partisanship, and Senate
Democrats can appeal to that sentiment with a message that bipartisanship
starts with a fair organization of the Senate that requires Democrats to
work together.
75/23% are aware/not aware that the Senate is evenly divided with 50
Democratic and 50 Republican senators.
Dem
Rep
Ind
Female
Male
50/44
37/58
43/40
45/41
43/52
Given this, 15% think Republicans should control a majority of the seats on
Senate committee, while 75% think they should be evenly split between
Democrats and Republicans.
Dem
Rep
nd
Female
Male
1/98
28/58
19/67
11/80
20/70
Suppose Governor George W. Bush becomes President, thus Dick Cheney
becomes Vice President, serving as President of the Senate. This would give the
Republicans a 51 to 50 advantage. Given this, 23% think Republicans should
control a majority of the seats on Senate committee, while 72% think they should
be evenly split between Democrats and Republicans.
Dem
Rep
nd
Female
Male
12/87
45/48
17/74
17/77
29/66
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
4
Clinton Post-WH
Six in ten credit President Clinton for preparing America for the 21st
century, and overwhelmingly say the area he has helped the most in is the
economy. Given this, it only makes sense that President Clinton give a
speech on the New Economy and the new challenges and opportunities it
presents. It is important for us to summarize the major accomplishments
of the administration in a way that has big implications for the future of the
country - it is not that the administration took a number of incremental
steps in different areas - it is that the administration set whole new
directions for the country. President Clinton returned the presidency to
activism - a presidency that would seek to meet the needs of our changing
society. If FDR stood for the then novel proposition that government must
be involved in the economic direction of the country; and Reagan stood for
the proposition that a good day for the President was one in which he did
nothing; President Clinton stood for the idea that a president needed to get
involved in enabling the country and its citizens to make the most of the
great changes going on - globalization, the spread of technology and its
implications, the crisis in aging, the new needs of our educational system,
and the increasing diversity of its people. Under Reagan/Bush the country
had been falling behind in the modern world; under Clinton, the country
was again established as a leader in all of these areas, and was now
genuinely prepared for the 21st Century.
The voters are lacking a clear sense of this outside of the economy.
60/36% think President Clinton helped prepare America for the 21st Century.
Dem
Rep
nd
Male
Female
86/11
31/66
58/37
57/42
62/31
18 what area did President
All
Dem
Rep
sd
Male
Female
Clinton help the most?
Economy
48
56
34
51
45
50
Welfare
12
10
14
11
12
11
Education
11
16
7
10
11
12
Technology
8
8
11
6
10
6
Crime
5
5
7
3
6
5
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
5
What do you think was President Clinton's greatest
accomplis hment? OPEN-ENDI
The economy / a stronger / better economy
18
He stayed in office / didn't resign / didn't get impeached
6
Foreign affairs / relations / policies
4
Other specific issues:
4
General Negative: Disgraced the White House / Being impeached
4
The budget / balancing the budget
3
Education / getting more teachers
3
Welfare / getting people off welfare / welfare to work plan
3
General Positive: Good / He did things, etc
3
Job opportunities / unemployment is down
2
Reducing the deficit
2
Middle east
2
Healthcare
2
Getting out of trouble / Not going to jail
2
Others
12
Don't know / no response
23
Part of what the President has uniquely been able to do is to bring together
Democrats and Republicans to solutions to problems like balancing the
budget and they are looking for him to leave his successor a roadmap for
doing the same. They - and the election returns mandate - a new era of bi-
partisanship as the next administration tackles issues like education and
Medicare reform.
When area do you think President
All
Dem
Rep
nd
Male
Female
Clinton cangive America the best
advice 08 for the future?
Republicans and Democrats
23
25
23
20
19
26
working together
The global economy
16
20
14
14
18
14
The economy
14
19
10
11
12
16
Education
13
9
10
17
12
13
Race relations
11
11
12
12
14
9
The spread of technology
5
6
5
4
6
4
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
6
Almost every poll shows that education is where they would like to see
people making charitable contributions to focus their efforts. This certainly
suggests that the President after office should form or join an educational
foundation to keep pressing for the federal, state and local governments to
do what is right. Race is another are which people see the President as
uniquely qualified to keep making a lasting contribution. Overseas, the
issue of world hunger - the basic issue that Bill Gates raised - that so
many people live on $1 dollar a day around the world is something that
people believe that President can do some good. Clearly they want their
ex-presidents to be very much above the fray. They will surely read his
memoirs, but they won't be very happy about that as the President's main
post-office activity.
Now am going to read you a list of
Much
Morel
Dem
Rep
Ind
Male
Em
some issues E President Clinton might
more
Less
focus his efforts on when he leaves
fav
fav
the White House. For each, tell me 11
time kes you more or less favorable
towards President Clinton
Reforming and improving our education
53
77/20
90/6
62/35
78/20
76/21
78/19
system
Improving Race relations
50
83/14
95/3
75/22
80/16
79/17
86/11
World Hunger
48
76/19
85/14
68/23
75/19
73/19
78/19
Expanding health care coverage
47
73/21
92/2
52/43
72/20
70/23
76/18
Creating economic growth in areas that
46
77/18
94/2
67/25
71/27
72/22
83/13
have been left behind by the current
prosperity
Improving the environment
44
75/22
96/3
52/42
75/22
71/26
79/17
International AIDS/HIV
41
74/18
93/7
59/29
72/20
70/23
78/13
Helping solve conflicts abroad
35
63/31
77/19
50/43
63/30
58/37
68/26
Reforming campaign finance
34
59/33
69/25
46/46
61/33
58/36
60/31
Expanding the understanding among
29
68/24
85/8
54/36
63/30
63/28
72/21
nations in the new global world
Working to bring third way politics to
27
62/29
77/16
50/43
59/30
64/28
60/31
democracies around the world
Writing his memoirs about his
18
37/52
56/35
19/69
36/53
39/46
36/58
presidency
Running for a new office like Senator
14
31/61
50/41
20/76
24/66
28/63
34/59
from Arkansas
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
7
Speech
We can give a series of wrap-up speeches, but none of them is likely to
have the same impact as a final State of the Union. If Bush is the President,
1 think that there merits are quite high for us to put everything into a major
State-of-the-Union laying out in broad terms the accomplishments, the
needs of the country in the 21st Century and appealing to unity and bi-
partisanship.
48/45% think President Clinton should give a series of several major speeches
summing up his record as President on key issues and discussing what needs to
be done to further America's progress in these areas. President Eisenhower
gave a similar set of speeches.
Dem
Rep
Ind
Male
Female
65/28
29/66
47/46
47/49
49/42
Some Presidents such as Eisenhower and Johnson have given a State of the
Union address before they leave office. Others like Reagan and Bush have not.
54/43% think that President Clinton should give a State of the Union address
before he leaves office.
Dem
Rep
Ind
Male
Female
75/22
36/60
50/48
52/48
55/40
The top two speech ideas are on the New Economy and the challenges of
taking greater personal and civic responsibility.
Now am going to read you.a list of
Much
More/
Dem
Rep
Ind
Male
Fem
some topics President Glinton
more
Less
address in these spéeches
fav
EV
WE you T it would make you
more 9977 less favorable 4 President
Clinton-gave a speech on the topic
The challenges of the new economy -
45
73/24
93/6
58/37
68/30
67/30
79/19
doing what is needed to make sure no
American worker or community is left
behind and making sure everyone has the
tools they need to succeed
technologically.
At a time when Americans have greater
41
75/23
89/9
61/37
74/25
72/27
79/20
responsibilities at work and at home we
need to remember the responsibilities we
have to our communities and our nation.
We need to encourage our children to be
active in civic endeavors as a part of
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
8
learning and growing and use our
dedication to our communities to
strengthen our ties to each other.
A speech that says America is not only
40
67/30
94/5
48/50
59/36
59/37
74/23
better off economically but that our nation
has become a better place to live and
work. Progress has been made on
moving people from welfare to work,
crime is down, education has become a
national priority and the environment is
stronger even as the economy grows at a
record pace.
The issue of race relations in American
40
69/28
87/9
51/47
69/29
65/30
73/26
society - the progress we have made and
the work that still needs to be done to
ensure that we have racial equality for all
Americans.
A speech outlining the major threats to
38
65/32
83/14
41/58
69/28
61/36
68/28
the environment in the next half-century,
including polluted air and water, the loss
of forests, and global warming, and steps
we should consider to address these
threats
The increasing globalization of the
35
67/30
86/14
50/46
63/33
65/32
69/27
economy, and the need for America's
leadership as a force not only for open
trade, but for labor rights and
environmental protection around the
world.
A review of our security interests in the
34
66/29
79/20
54/39
65/30
64/31
69/26
world, our role as both a peacekeeper
and a peacemaker, our changing
relationships with Russia and China, and
the new challenges to America's security
in a global, information age.
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
9
Race: Death Penalty, Felons right to vote
A majority of Americans recognize that America has yet to eliminate racial
discrimination and achieve true equality. Americans believe society is still
segregated, and that laws against discrimination are not being adequately
enforced. They believe the greatest bias occurs with the police, but the
greatest segregation is in the workplace.
This underscores that a strong statement of the continuing problem of race
in America can have vast resonance. If the Kerner commission's picture of
two Americas stuck such a cord, so today most Americans readily agree
that we have not solved that basic problem in our everyday life - and that
the police and courts system are far from colorblind.
Where do you think the
All
Dem
Rep
Ind
Male
Fem
Black
White
greatest racial bias
exists today?
With the police
29
28
32
25
29
28
30
28
In the justice system
17
22
14
17
18
17
28
15
On the job
15
10
19
17
17
14
26
15
In housing
11
10
10
12
11
10
3
12
In education
10
11
10
9
9
11
7
11
Given that people are satisfied economically, these are surprisingly high
numbers:
38/54% think laws against discrimination are being enforced adequately.
Dem
Rep
Ind
Male
Female
Blacks
White
31/59
53/40
35/58
42/52
35/56
13/82
43/49
39/53% believe society today is basically desegregated/is it still very segregated.
Dem
Reg
Ind
Male
Female
Blacks
White
33/61
44/49
43/47
38/54
40/52
19/72
42/50
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
10
has what areas is.it.stil segregated? OPEN-END]
Employment / jobs / workplace / getting work
14
Housing
10
Education / schools / colleges
10
Everywhere / every day
6
In people / society / in people's minds
5
South / southern states
5
Nowhere / there is none
5
Communities / neighborhoods
3
Justice system
3
Economy
2
Cities / big cities
2
Between races
2
Other
16
Don't know / no response
17
32/59% think police and the justice system are basically fair to people of all 1 they
treat people differently based on race.
Dem
Rep
Ind
Male
Female
Blacks
Whites
22/69
42/48
34/57
37/56
27/62
11/87
35/54
Seven in ten think leaving the Presidency with a strong message on living
with diversity would be the right thing for President Clinton to do.
70/24% think it would be right/wrong for the president to focus on the need for us
to learn to live with greater diversity as an important message to leave us with at
the end of his presidency.
Dem
Rep
the
Male
Female
Blacks
Whites
82/13
55/38
69/24
67/27
72/22
94/3
73/17
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
11
There is strong support for many of President Clinton's potential messages
on race, including the necessity of re-learning how to be a successful
melting pot and the fact that certain new minorities - not just blacks - - still
lag far behind the rest of us.
Foreach of these tell me if you
Very
Imp/
DEW
Rep
(nd
Black
White
think it is important for the
Imp
Not
President to stress in his race
Imp.
teport "In not important
That today we have so many growing
60
83/15
88/10
73/24
86/13
91/6
81/17
different races that we have to learn
again how to be a successful melting
pot in the 21st century
That minorities like the American
58
81/16
87/11
76/21
79/17
88/10
81/16
Indian are still way behind others in
terms of education, health, and
poverty
That our justice system is not as color
50
78/18
86/11
61/34
84/12
98/2
75/20
blind as it needs to be
That we are still very much a
46
78/20
91/8
60/36
80/19
98/0
75/23
segregated society even after we
have torn down the legal barriers to
segregation
That blacks still are behind whites in
45
78/18
90/6
66/30
77/17
97/3
76/20
terms of education and income
That we still need to continue
39
67/31
85/14
47/51
68/29
94/3
63/35
affirmative action in some form until
the differences in races are overcome
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
12
Specific Proposals: There is also clear support for a series of proposals
from the cop on the beat to earning the vote to take the racial tinge out of
the justice system.
Have Pre some specifics that the
Dam
Rep
Ind
Black
Hisp
President could propose in the race
Fell me for each one ti you
Strong
updons
FROM OF oppose them
Support
Oppose
New rules on the death penalty to make
68
88/9
90/7
82/13
90/8
92/8
90/10
sure that everyone has proper legal
representation, DNA testing at their
disposal and that it is not used in a
discriminatory fashion
Restructuring our justice system from
48
76/19
83/11
64/30
79/18
93/5
95/0
top to bottom to be fairer and more color
blind - starting with banning racial
profiling by the police and ending with
fairer sentencing guidelines and
safeguards on the death penalty.
National law to ban racial profiling
46
67/24
77/11
53/39
69/24
88/8
86/9
A legal process for convicted felons who
28
54/41
70/25
39/59
49/43
82/16
54/36
have served their time to regain their
vote
A majority support restoring voting rights for felons once they are out of
jail, and seven in ten support some sort of legal process for felons to
regain the right to vote.
55/38% support/oppose allowing convicted felons the right to vote once they are
out of jail.
55% support (30% strongly, 25% somewhat)
38% oppose (25% strongly, 13% somewhat)
Dem
Rep
Ind
Female
Male
Blacks
Whites
66/26
40/56
55/38
57/34
53/43
81/17
51/42
Suppose people who had served their time in jail could then petition the court to
regain their right to vote, or take a citizenship type to restore their right to vote.
70/25% would support/oppose this plan.
70% support (36% strongly, 34% somewhat)
25% oppose (15% strongly, 10% somewhat)
Dem
Rep
Ind
Femal ie
Male
Blacks
Whites
79/15
57/38
73/23
72/23
69/27
91/9
67/27
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
13
With argumentation, six in ten support restoring voting rights.
32% say that once you have committed a felony, it is only fair that you forfeit your
right to vote as one cost of violating the law. 60% say once felons have done
time, they already have enough challenges facing them in re-entering society,
and should be allowed the right to vote like other American citizens.
Dem
Rep
Ind
Female
Male
Blacks
Whites
22/71
47/48
31/59
29/63
36/58
10/88
35/56
Six in ten support the death penalty, but nearly seven in ten support the
temporary hold on federal executions.
61/29% favor/oppose the death penalty.
Dem
Rep
Ind
Female
Male
Blacks
Whites
50/38
77/17
61/27
55/31
67/26
27/58
67/24
There is currently a temporary hold on all federal executions while a national
commission can determine whether the death penalty is being imposed fairly.
67/27% favor/oppose this temporary hold.
Dem
Rep
nd
Female
Male
Blac
Whites
74/21
54/39
69/25
74/18
60/36
80/15
65/29
Election
Half of Americans have been following the Presidential election very
closely in Florida, and 84% overall say they have been following it. Nearly
six in ten, including 61% of Independents, and 29% of Democrats, think AI
Gore should concede.
AI Gore's communications strategy the last two weeks has been
fundamentally flawed - the public doesn't want to hear him say how he
won the election - - they would have wanted him to 1) stay in the
background like Bush or 2) do things related to them and their problems.
Less would have been better than the hour by hour comments on how he
won. This could all change with some favorable rulings, but unlike the
President in the impeachment fight, Gore has been losing the battle of
public opinion here.
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
14
84/15% have/ have not been closely following the situation with the Presidential
election in Florida.
84% have been following (49% very, 35% somewhat)
15% have not been following (10% not very, 5% not at all)
Dem
Rep
Ind
Female
Male
86/12
89/11
79/18
82/16
85/13
58/38% think AI Gore should concede the election to George W. Bush, or should
he not concede yet.
Dem
Rep
Ind
Female
Male
29/66
88/10
61/35
53/43
63/33
A majority think Bush is reacting better - a large shift in public opinion
from the week after the election when it was nearly evenly split.
29/52% think Al Gore/George W. Bush is reacting better to the difficult situation.
(35/39% on 11/11)
Dem
Rep
Ind
Female
Male
55/24
8/82
22/53
33/50
24/55
Approval of President Clinton's handling of the situation is 70%, up from
55% immediately after the election.
70/16% approve/disapprove of the way President Clinton has handled the
situation so far. (55/17% on 11/11)
70% approve (40% strongly, 30% somewhat)
16% disapprove (9% strongly, 7% somewhat)
Dem
Rep
Ind
Female
Male
81/11
55/27
72/13
70/16
69/16
Half of Americans think Gore should be speaking more or the same amount
as he is now, and 45% think he should be speaking less.
11/45/39% think that AI Gore should be speaking more/less/same as now about
his challenge to the election.
Dem
Rep
Ind
Female
Male
19/21/56
6/71/20
8/47/38
11/44/40
11/47/39
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
15
Nearly eight in ten were aware of the court rulings, and a description of the
rulings increased the number who think Gore should concede slightly, to
60%.
77/21% heard about yesterday's court rulings.
Dem
Rep
nd
Female
Male
74/23
78/21
79/19
75/22
79/21
There has been a dramatic shift in public opinion over the past month. On
Nov. 11, 75% agreed that we needed to recount to achieve fairness. 43%
now hold that view, and a majority think Gore should concede.
51% say Gore should concede the election now rather than fighting over the
results. They say we need a sense of finality for George W. Bush to be able to
start forming his administration. 43% say it is most important that we achieve
fairness, ensure that every vote was counted properly, and take whatever time is
necessary to do so, since the inauguration of the next President is not until
January, (19/75% on 11/11)
Dem
Rep
nd
Female
Male
24/72
82/13
51/41
48/47
54/40
Voters say the effects of the election are likely to balance out in the end,
with neither party gaining a substantial advantage based on it.
The situation with the Presidential election makes 20% more likely, 18% less
likely, and 58% say it has no impact on whether to vote for a Democrat in the
future.
Dem
Rep
nd
Female
Male
46/2/49
6/44/45
9/13/73
22/15/60
18/22/55
The situation with the Presidential election makes 17% more likely, 17% less
likely, and 61% say it has no impact on whether to vote for a Republican in the
future.
Dem
Rep
nd
Female
Male
5/38/54
40/4/54
12/11/71
15/19/63
20/15/59
Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates
16
VSC SELFAST;
32514;
Dec-13-00 2:19AM;
Page 1/12
December 12, 2000
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
JEFF SHESOL
TOM MALINOWSKI
SUBJECT:
UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK ADDRESS
Attached is a draft of your Thursday speech. It reflects significant input at every stage
from Sandy Berger, John Podesta and Gene Sperling.
We have coined the phrase "closing the globalization gap" to describe your development
agenda, and to act as a sort of mission statement, We point this out because there is, as yet, no
consensus on the best term to use: Gene, for example, prefers "global gap" or "global divide,"
lest you imply that "globalization" is inherently a divisive force. We will keep working to find a
better phrase, if there is one, to encompass your agenda.
Thank you. We look forward to hearing your thoughts on the speech.
nothingtoday-
D.
32514;
Dec-13-00 2:19AM;
Page 2/12
Draft 12/12/00 11:30pm
Shesol/ Malinowski
PRESIDENT WILLIAM J. CLINTON
REMARKS ON CLOSING THE GLOBALIZATION GAP
WARWICK UNIVERSITY
COVENTRY, UNITED KINGDOM
December 14, 2000
Acknowledgments: PM Tony Blair, Sir Shridath Ramphal, Chancellor, Warwick U.; Sir
Brian Follett, Vice Chancellor, & Lady Follett; Lord Skidelsky; Caitlin McKenzie, Pres., Student
Union; Ambassadors & others TK
I have come to Warwick to talk about a central reality of our time - the revolution that is
transforming my nation, your nation, and the entire world. It is transforming our lives; tearing
down barriers; building new networks among nations, peoples, and cultures.
We have a simple term for this sweeping process: globalization. Economies are growing
more integrated, nations becoming more interdependent. What happens anywhere is felt, in a
flash, everywhere, from Coventry to Kansas to Cambodia. Today, farmers in Nebraska
understand that a currency crisis in Asia has a very real effect on their own livelihoods. Famine
in Africa and images of suffering are instantly seen by the rest of the world. Trade,
telecommunications, information technology - - they are bringing us closer, and making the world
smaller, than ever before.
That, I believe, is a good thing. For most people in countries like the United States and
Britain, it is helping to create almost unprecedented prosperity; and, along with it, the chance to
meet some of the fundamental, long-term challenges we face. In developing countries, too, it
brings the promise of a better future. More people have been lifted out of poverty in the past few
decades than at any time in world history. Life expectancy in developing countries is up; infant
mortality is down; and according to the United Nations' Human Development Index - which
I
Sent By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Dec-13-00 2:20AM;
Page 3/12
measures a decent standard of living, a good education, and a long and healthy life - the gap
between rich and poor countries actually has declined since 1970.
And yet: there is a globalization gap that remains far too wide. As we begin the 21st
Century, half of the world's people struggle to survive on less than two dollars a day. Nearly one
billion live in chronic hunger... almost a billion of the world's adults cannot read.. and half the
children in the poorest countries are not in school. While some of us walk on the cutting edge of
the global economy, others live on the razor's edge of survival. And one of the consequences is
a rapidly growing population - expected to increase by [50 percent] by the middle of this
century - concentrated in the countries least capable of sustaining it.
We must embrace a grand vision: to close the globalization gap. It is among the central
challenges of the new century and a moral imperative of the highest order. At the core of our
national characters is a belief in the inherent dignity and equality of all humankind. We know
perfectly well how children live and die in the poorest countries, and how little it would take to
make a difference in their lives. In a global, information age, we no longer have the excuse of
ignorance. We can still choose not to act. But we can no longer choose not to know.
The Cold War is no longer a preoccupation. We face an array of serious challenges to
our security and well-being; but no overriding struggle for survival diverts us from aiding the
survival of hundreds of millions of people in the developing world. Nor do we have the old
excuse that harsh realities a world away are without real consequence for our own people. We
have seen how abject poverty accelerates turmoil and conflict; how it creates recruits for
terrorists and those who incite ethnic and religious haured; how it fuels a violent rejection of the
economic and social order on which our future depends.
2
Sent By: NSC SELFAST;
32514;
Dec- 13-00 2:20AM;
Page 4/12
It's not just that nations crippled by debt or disease or inadequate education cannot
compete - they can combust. To dismiss global development as 8 "soft" issue is to be blind to
hard truths. In a world that's increasingly connected, the vast disparities between rich and poor
are unsustainable. Global poverty is a powder keg. and could be ignited by our indifference.
Fortunately, the opposite is also true. I've just come from Ireland, and 1 think it's no
surprise that Ireland is making progress toward peace just as it's becoming the fastest growing
economy in Europé.
How shall we meet this challenge? Too often, we are presented with a false choice.
Some maintain that free markets, alone, will close whatever gap might exist; that the forces of
change should be left completely unfettered. Others believe we should build walls, insisting that
we can isolate our nations from the forces - the instabilities and inequalities - many people fear.
This is a choice between two extremes; and we are right to reject it. Open markets,
however essential, are insufficient: they can help reduce poverty, but will not end it. And as the
city of Coventry knows, there was a time when walls stood strong against would-be invaders; but
they never really kept the world locked out. And that, on measure, has been a good thing.
So let us reject this false choice. Let us work to embrace the forces of global change so
that they can benefit all peoples in all nations - so that they spur growth and lift lives everywhere
in the world. Through trade and the new tools of technology, and by investing in people through
education and health care, prosperity can he shared more widely. potential realized more fully,
and opportunities created and seized in every country on the globe.
1 have worked hard, and so has Prime Minister Blair, to raise these tough issues to the top
of the global agenda. They have been a serious part of the dialogue at the most recent G-8
3
I
Sent By: NSC BELFAST;
Dec-13-00 2:21AM;
Page 5/12
summits. Together, we are building a new development agenda for a new century. Today, I
want to explore and expand that vision. 1 want to be clear-eyed about the challenges before us;
and equally candid about the solutions. Underlying them all is this basic belief: if we want the
global economy to embody shared values, then our efforts must reflect shared responsibility.
That means all nations - - from the richest to the poorest - must unlock more of our
resources and our untapped reservoirs of national will. That goes for governments and for
businesses, for multilateral and non-governmental organizations, for religious leaders and civil
society. We all must work together, more fully and comprehensively than before, and must
make the tough choices we have not always been willing to make.
Trade
We must first make clear that open markets and rules-based trade are proven engines of
economic growth. We know that countries that have opened their economies to the world have
also opened their doors to opportunity and hope for their people. From the carly 1970s to the
early 1990s. developing countries that chose growth through trade grew at least twice as fast as
those who kept their doors closed and their tariffs high.
Consider this: if the wealthiest countries ended our agricultural subsidies, leveling the
playing field for the world's farmers, that act alone could increase the income of developing
countries by $20 billion a year. That's why I disagree with some of the anti-globalization
protestors. When they say we should expand our economies without trampling on our values,
they're right, But when they suggest that poor countries should somehow be "saved" from
development by keeping the doors of trade closed, that's a recipe for perpetuating poverty, not
ending it.
4
Sent By: NSC BELFAST;
Dec-13-00 2:21AM;
Page 6/12
Our imperative is clear. We need to open our markets if we're going to give the world's
poorest workers the chance to grow and prosper. Still, none of us should underestimate the size
of this challenge. We have to build a new consensus on trade. We have to answer those who
fear that the burden of opening markets will fall mainly on them, whether farmers in Europe or
textile workers in America, whose concerns fuel powerful political resistance to the idea of open
trade. Leaders like myself have to do better in making the case not just how exports create jobs,
but how imports increase innovation and competition, as well as savings for hard pressed
families. And we must work to improve education and job training so that all our people have
the skills and confidence to compete in the global economy.
We must also ask developing countries to be less resistant to our concern for human
rights, labor, and the environment - to our goal that spirited economic competition that does not
become a race to the bottom. At the same time, we must work harder to convince developing
countries that our concerns are honorable, and not a pretext for protectionism.
Both the United States and Europe have to work harder to build that consensus for trade.
In America, for example, we devote too little of our wealth to development assistance. But on a
per capita basis, America also spends nearly 40 percent more than Europeans on imports from
developing countries. Recently, we passed landmark trade agreements with Africa and the
Caríbbean Basin that will make a real difference in those countries. If America matches your
generosity, and Europe matches our openness, think how much growth we could spur. Think
how many lives we could lift from despair.
Debt Relief
At the same time, we must acknowledge that trade alone cannot lift nations from poverty.
Many of the poorest developing countries are crippled by the burden of crushing debt - draining
5
ent By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Dec-13-00 2:21AM;
Page 7/12
resources that could be used to meet the most basic human needs, from clean water to schools to
shelter. For too long, the world was paralyzed by this problem - divided between those who felt
that any debt forgiveness would hurt the credit-worthiness of developing countries, and those
who demanded outright cancellation of debt with no conditions.
Last year, at the G-7 Summit in Cologne, the world's wealthiest nations began to build a
new consensus - responding to a remarkable coalition among religious faiths, businesses and
non-governmental groups, and political parties in all our countries. We acknowledged that debt
relief was critical; but also that relief without reform was of little help at all. And so we have
struck a global social contract. We pledged enhanced debt relief to countries that put forward
plans to spend their savings where they ought to be spent- - on reducing poverty.
This, we know, can make a dramatic difference. Uganda, for example, has already used
its savings to double primary school enrollment. With America paying its fair share, Bolivia will
now save $77 million and use it on health and education. Honduras will offer its children nine
years of schooling instead of six.
The question before us is how to move forward. I believe we must strengthen this global
social contract. The developed world must make greater efforts - as we did in the United States
when we called for 100 percent bilateral debt relief for the least developed countries - and take
steps to include more countries in our initiative.
But let me be clear: we are not going to make progress by lowering our standards to add
more countries to the list. The best way to build support is to show success. That starts with
good governance. Democracy is not just about elections; it is also about what happens after an
election. Developing countries have to root out corruption... open their budget process... and
show their people an honest accounting of where resources are being spent. If we have a moral
6
Sent By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Doc-13-00 2:22AM;
Page 8/12
obligation to provide debt relief, then we have a further moral obligation to make sure our
resources reach the people who need them most - the very poorest people on this planet.
Health & HIV/AIDS
The poorer they are, of course, the less healthy they are. The obstacles to good health in
the developing world are many and of great magnitude. There is the obvious fact of
malnutrition, and the fact that so many women still lack access to family planning and basic
health services -- around the world, one woman dies every minute of every day from
complications due to childbirth. There is the fact that 1.5 billion people lack access to safc, clean
drinking water. There is also the growing danger of a changing climate. What does that have to
do with health and poverty? If temperatures keep rising, developing countries in tropical regions
will be hurt most as discase spreads and crops are devastated.
Today, infectious diseases are responsible for one in four deaths in the world. Diseases
like malaria, tuberculosis, and diarrheal diseases kill 8 million children a year. Already, in South
Africa, Botswana, and Zímbabwe, half of all 15-year olds are expected to die of AIDS. That is
the human cost. The economic toll is also staggering: over the next decade, AIDS will cut the
GDP of some African countries by 20 percent. And the epidemic has no natural boundaries --
the fastest growing rate of infection today is in Russia and the former Sovies Union.
We need to attack AIDS in the United States and Britain; we need to stop the disease
from spreading in places like Russia and India where it can still be contained. But let us not
forget that the number one health crisis in the world today is AIDS in Africa. And if the world
doesn't do more about it, it will be our collective shame.
7
By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Page 9/12
Developing countries themselves hold a critical part of the answer. However limited
their resources, they must make treatment and prevention a priority, And whatever their cultural
beliefs, they must be honest about the ways AIDS spreads and how it can be prevented. Talking
about AIDS is tough, but it is far easier to tell your children the facts of life than to watch them
learn the facts of death. In China - a country with enough resources to teach all its children to
read - only 4 percent of adults know how AIDS is transmitted. Uganda, on the other hand, has
cut the rate of infection by half.
But the bulk of new investment will have to come from the developed world. In the last
few years, Britain and the United States have gotten off to a good start. And yet the difference
between what the world provides and what the world needs for treatment and prevention of
AIDS, malaria and TB is $6 billion a year. That sounds like a lot of money. But think about
this: America's fair share, about $1.5 billion more than what we already spend, would be about
the same as what our government spends each year on office supplies. It's about what the people
of Britain spend each year buying blue jeans.
Government alone can't meet these health needs; but thus far, neither has the market.
Drug companies have little incentive to develop medicines for people who can't pay for them
Only 10 percent of all biomedical research is devoted to diseases that overwhelmingly affect the
poorest countries. That's why America has sharply increased its investment in vaccine research;
boosted funding for buying vaccines, so that companies know there will be a guaranteed market;
and proposed a tax credit to help provide for future vaccines. We should expand that approach to
the development of drugs; and keep pressing pharmaceutical companies to make life-saving
treatments affordable to all.
8
Sent By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Dec-13-00 2:23AM;
Fage 10/12
Universal Basic Education
One of the best health programs, the best economic development plans, the best anti-
poverty strategies, is a good education. Each additional year spent in school increases wages by
10 to 20 percent. A primary education boosts a farmer's output by about 8 percent. And the
education of girls is especially critical. Studies show that literate girls have significantly smaller
and healthier families. More than that, imagine if all children, on every continent, had the tools
to fulfill their God-given potential. Imagine the prospects for peace and democracy in a world
that is more literate and better skilled.
We are making progress. In the past decade, primary enrollments have increased at twice
the rate of the 1980s. Still, unfortunately, more than 100 million children receive no schooling at
all. Sixty percent are girls. Almost half of all African children and one-quarter of those in South
and West Asia are being denied this fundamental right, this basic root of all opportunity.
Just this year, [180] nations joined to set a goal of providing basic education to every
child - - to girls and boys alike- in every country by 2015. Few of our other efforts will be
successful if we fail to reach this goal. What it will take is now known to us all. It's going to
take a commitment by developing countries to propose specific plans and realistic budgets.. to
get their children out of the fields and factories and to remove the fees and other obstacles that
keep them out of the classrooms.
It's going to take a similar effort by the wealthier nations. One promising example is
America's $300 million global school lunch initiative - using a nutritious meal as an incentive
for parents to send their kids to school. But all of us- from the U.S. to the World Bank to the
developing world - need to do more. No strong national plan should ever be allowed to fail for
lack of resources.
9
By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Dec-13-00 2:23AM;
Page 11/12
Digital Divide
Finally, we must close the global digital divide. Today, a person in South Asia is 700
times less likely to have access to the Internet as a person in the United States. It's estimated that
in 2010, in the Asia-Pacific, the top eight economies will have 72 percent of their population on
line, while the bottom eleven will have less than 4 percent. If that happens, the global economy
really will resemble a world-wide web - a bunch of interlocking strands with great big holes in-
between.
Now, it's fair to ask: Are computers really an answer for people who are starving or
cannot read? Is e-commerce is an answer for villages that lack e-lectricity? Of course not - the
fight against poverty begins with the basics. But we seek far more than basic survival. There
shouldn't be a choice between Pentium and penicillin. That's another false debate. We shouldn't
patronize poor people by saying they don't need 21st Century tools and skills.
Last March, I visited a village in one of the poorest states in India. A women's co-op
there has set up one computer that provides them with life-saving information on child and
maternal health. Meanwhile, in mountain villages in Bolivia, some are selling rugs to New York
department stores OVCT the Internet instead of growing coca for the drug trade. Some of the
greatest innovations of the digital age are coming from centers of excellence in South Asia like
Hyderabad, which is becoming known as Cyberabad. Imagine the innovations that would enrich
all our lives if there were a thousand more Cyberabads in the developing world - - if we unleashed
the potential of half of humanity.
This is just the beginning. Developing countries need to pass laws and regulations that
permit the greatest possible access at the least possible cost. And in the developed world,
governments need to work with corporations and NGO9 to provide equipment and expertise.
10
By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Dec-13-00 2:24AM;
Page 12/12
That's the goal of the new Digital Opportunity Task Force, or DOT Force, which America
proposed and the G-8 has embraced.
Conclusion
I said earlier that our shared values will only be realized by stepping up to our shared
responsibility. Leaders - - who set national priorities - have to face these problems, not deny
them, or delegate them entirely to the World Bank or the United Nations. NGOs- - who deserve
credit for raising the world's awareness, need to show they can also find practical paths to
progress. And multi-national corporations - - who have done much to create jobs and generate
growth - - have an enlightened self-interest in being partners for a cleaner environment, for a
healthier workforce, for the freedom of association and the rights of workers to organize.
We know that the struggle for basic human dignity is as old as humanity itself. But the
persistence of poverty and suffering in the world is not proof that this struggle is futile. It is
merely proof that the struggle is difficult. I am enough of a realist to know that it will always be
hard to close this divide. But I am enough of an optimist to believe we have an opportunity to
succeed today as never before in human history. There is no great debate about the solutions -
we know what must be done. Many of us are enjoying extraordinary good fortune - we can
afford to do what is required. Surely, we can use the new opportunities of this global age to
defeat the age-old scourge of human deprivation. And we must, if "globalism" is to have any
meaning for most of humanity.
If we make these tough choices - as nations, as businesses, as international institutions -
then we can build a global economy that leaves no one behind, carrying all countries into a
century that, we hope, will be marked by peace and prosperity. We have before us as great an
opportunity as the world has seen. Let us work together to seize it. Thank you.
11
lent By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Dec 13-00 2:17PM;
Page 1
December 12, 2000
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
JEFF SHESOL
TOM MALINOWSKI
SUBJECT: UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK ADDRESS
Attached is a draft of your Thursday speech. It reflects significant input at every stage
from Sandy Berger, John Podesta and Gene Sperling.
We have coined the phrase "closing the globalization gap" to describe your development
agenda, and to act as a sort of mission statement. We point this out because there is, as yet, no
consensus on the best term to use: Gene, for example, prefers "global gap" or "global divide,"
lest you imply that "globalization" is inherently a divisive force. We will keep working to find a
better phrase, if there is one, to encompass your agenda.
Thank you. We look forward to hearing your thoughts on the speech.
Sent By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Dec-13-00 2:17PM;
Page 2
Draft 12/12/00 11:30pm
Shesol/ Malinowski
PRESIDENT WILLIAM J. CLINTON
REMARKS ON CLOSING THE GLOBALIZATION GAP
WARWICK UNIVERSITY
COVENTRY, UNITED KINGDOM
December 14, 2000
Acknowledgments: PM Tony Blair; Sir Shridath Ramphal, Chancellor, Warwick U.; Sir
Brian Follett, Vice Chancellor, & Lady Follett; Lord Skidelsky; Caitlin McKenzie, Pres., Student
Union: Ambassadors & others TK
I have come to Warwick to talk about a central reality of our time - the revolution that is
transforming my nation, your nation, and the entire world. It is transforming our lives; tearing
down barriers; building new networks among nations, peoples, and cultures.
We have a simple term for this sweeping process: globalization. Economies are growing
more integrated, nations becoming more interdependent. What happens anywhere is felt, in a
flash, everywhere, from Coventry to Kansas to Cambodia. Today, farmers in Nebraska
understand that a currency crisis in Asia has a very real effect on their own livelihoods. Famine
in Africa and images of suffering are instantly seen by the rest of the world. Trade,
telecommunications, information technology - they are bringing us closer, and making the world
smaller, than ever before.
That, I believe, is a good thing. For most people in countries like the United States and
Britain, it is helping to create almost unprecedented prosperity; and, along with it, the chance to
meet some of the fundamental, long-term challenges we face. In developing countries, too, it
brings the promise of a better future. More people have been lifted out of poverty in the past few
decades than at any time in world history. Life expectancy in developing countries is up; infant
mortality is down; and according to the United Nations' Human Development Index - which
1
SenthBy:\NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Dec-13-00 2:18PM;
Page 3
measurcs a decent standard of living, a good education, and a long and healthy life - the gap
between rich and poor countries actually has declined since 1970.
And yet: there is a globalization gap that remains far too wide. As We begin the 21st
Century, half of the world's people struggle to survive on less than two dollars a day. Nearly one
billion live in chronic hunger... almost a billion of the world's adults cannot read.. and half the
children in the poorest countries are not in school. While some of us walk on the cutting edge of
the global economy, others live on the razor's edge of survival. And one of the consequences is
a rapidly growing population -- expected to increase by [50 percent] by the middle of this
century - concentrated in the countries least capable of sustaining it.
We must embrace a grand vision: to close the globalization gap. It is among the central
challenges of the new century and a moral imperative of the highest order. At the core of our
national characters is a belief in the inherent dignity and equality of all humankind. We know
perfectly well how children live and die in the poorest countries, and how little it would take to
make a difference in their lives. In a global, information age, we no longer have the excuse of
ignorance. We can still choose not to act. But we can no longer choose not to know.
The Cold War is no longer a preoccupation. We face an array of serious challenges to
our security and well-being; but no overriding struggle for survival diverts us from aiding the
survival of hundreds of millions of people in the developing world. Nor do we have the old
excuse that harsh realities a world away are without real consequence for our own people. We
have seen how abject poverty accelerates turmoil and conflict; how it creates recruits for
terrorists and those who incite ethnic and religious hatred; how it fuels a violent rejection of the
economic and social order on which our future depends.
2
Sent By: NGC BELFAST:
32514;
Dec-13-00 2:18PM;
Page 4/12
It's not just that nations crippled by debt or discase or inadequate education cannot
compete - they can combust. To dismiss global development as a "soft" issue is to be blind to
hard truths. In a world that's increasingly connected, the vast disparities between rich and poor
are unsustainable. Global poverty is a powder keg - and could be ignited by our indifference.
Fortunately, the opposite is also true. I'vc just come from Ireland, and I think it's no
surprise that Ireland is making progress toward peace just as it's becoming the fastest growing
economy in Europe.
How shall we meet this challenge? Too often, we are presented with a false choice.
Some maintain that free markets, alone, will close whatever gap might exist; that the forces of
change should be left completely unfettered. Others believe we should build walls, insisting that
we can isolate our nations from the forces - the instabilities and inequalities - many people fear.
This is a choice between two extremes; and we are right to reject it. Open markets,
however essential, are insufficient: they can help reduce poverty, but will not end it. And as the
city of Coventry knows, there was a time when walls stood strong against would-be invaders; but
they never really kept the world locked out. And that, on measure, has been a good thing.
So let us reject this false choice. Let us work to embrace the forces of global change so
that they can benefit all peoples in all nations - so that they spur growth and lift lives everywhere
in the world. Through trade and the new tools of technology, and by investing in people through
education and health care, prosperity can be shared more widely, potential realized more fully,
and opportunities created and seized in every country on the globe.
I have worked hard, and so has Prime Minister Blair, to raise these tough issues to the top
of the global agenda. They have been a serious part of the dialogue at the most recent G-8
3
Sent By: NSC BELFAST;
Dec-13-00 2:19PM;
Page 5/12
summits. Together, we are building a new development agenda for a new century. Today, I
want to explore and expand that vision. I want to be clear-eyed about the challenges before us;
and equally candid about the solutions. Underlying them all is this basic belief: if we want the
global economy to embody shared values, then our efforts must reflect shared responsibility.
That means all nations - from the richest to the poorest - must unlock more of our
resources and our untapped reservoirs of national will. That goes for governments and for
businesses, for multilateral and non-governmental organizations, for religious leaders and civil
society. We all must work together, more fully and comprehensively than before, and must
make the tough choices we have not always been willing to make.
Trade
We must first make clear that open markets and rules-based trade are proven engines of
economic growth. We know that countries that have opened their economies to the world have
also opened their doors to opportunity and hope for their people. From the early 1970s to the
early 1990s, developing countries that chose growth through trade grew at least twice as fast as
those who kept their doors closed and their tariffs high.
Consider this: if the wealthiest countries ended our agricultural subsidies, leveling the
playing field for the world's farmers, that act alone could increase the income of developing
countries by $20 billion a year. That's why I disagree with some of the anti-globalization
protestors. When they say we should expand our economies without trampling on our values,
they're right. But when they suggest that poor countrics should somehow be "saved" from
development by keeping the doors of trade closed, that's a recipe for perpetuating poverty, not
ending it.
4
Sent By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Dec-13-00 2:19PM;
Page 6/12
Our imperative is clear. We need to open our markets if we're going to give the world's
poorcst workers the chance to grow and prosper. Still, none of us should underestimate the size
of this challenge. We have to build a new consensus on trade. We have to answer those who
fear that the burden of opening markets will fall mainly on them, whether farmers in Europe or
textile workers in America, whose concerns fuel powerful political resistance to the idea of open
trade. Leaders like myself have to do better in making the case not just how exports create jobs,
but how imports increase innovation and competition, as well as savings for hard pressed
families. And we must work to improve education and job training so that all our people have
the skills and confidence to compete in the global economy.
We must also ask developing countries to be less resistant to our concern for human
rights, labor, and the environment - to our goal that spirited economic competition that does not
become a race to the bottom. At the same time, we must work harder to convince developing
countries that our concerns are honorable, and not a pretext for protectionism.
Both the United States and Europe have to work harder to build that consensus for trade.
In America, for example, we devote too little of our wealth to development assistance. But on a
per capita basis, America also spends nearly 40 percent more than Europeans on imports from
developing countries. Recently, we passed landmark trade agreements with Africa and the
Caribbean Basin that will make a real difference in those countries. If America matches your
generosity, and Europe matches our openness, think how much growth we could spur. Think
how many lives we could lift from despair.
Debt Relief
At the same time, we must acknowledge that trade alone cannot lift nations from poverty.
Many of the poorest developing countries are crippled by the burden of crushing debt - draining
5
Sent By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Dec-13-00 2:20PM;
Page 7/12
resources that could be used to meet the most basic human needs, from clean water to schools to
shelter. For too long, the world was paralyzed by this problem - divided between those who felt
that any debt forgiveness would hurt the credit-worthiness of developing countries, and those
who demanded outright cancellation of debt with no conditions.
Last year, at the G-7 Summit in Cologne, the world's wealthiest nations began to build a
new consensus - responding to a remarkable coalition among religious faiths, businesses and
non-governmental groups, and political parties in all our countries. We acknowledged that debt
relief was critical; but also that rclief without reform was of little help at all. And so we have
struck a global social contract. We pledged enhanced debt relief to countries that put forward
plans to spend their savings where they ought to be spent - on reducing poverty.
This, we know, can make a dramatic difference. Uganda, for example, has already used
its savings to double primary school enrollment. With America paying its fair share, Bolivia will
now savc $77 million and use it on health and education. Honduras will offer its children nine
years of schooling instead of six.
The question before us is how to move forward. T believe we must strengthen this global
social contract. The developed world must make greater efforts - as we did in the United States
when we called for 100 percent bilateral debt relief for the least developed countries - and take
steps to include more countries in our initiative.
But let me be clear: we are not going to make progress by lowering our standards to add
more countries to the list. The best way to build support is to show success. That starts with
good governance. Democracy is not just about elections; it is also about what happens after an
election. Developing countries have to root out corruption. open their budget process. and
show their people an honest accounting of where resources are being spent. If we have a moral
6
Sent By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
010-13-00
2:20PM;
Page 8/12
obligation to provide debt relief, then we have a further moral obligation to make sure our
resources reach the pcople who need them most - the very poorest people on this planet.
Health & HIV/AIDS
The poorer they are, of course, the less healthy they are. The obstacles to good health in
the developing world are many and of great magnitude. There is the obvious fact of
malnutrition, and the fact that so many women still lack access to family planning and basic
health services around the world, one woman dies every minute of every day from
complications due to childbirth. There is the fact that 1.5 billion people lack access to safe, clean
drinking water. There is also the growing danger of a changing climate. What does that have to
do with health and poverty? If temperatures keep rising, developing countries in tropical regions
will be hurt most as disease spreads and crops are devastated.
Today, infectious diseases are responsible for one in four deaths in the world. Diseases
like malaria, tuberculosis, and diarrheal diseases kill 8 million children a year. Already, in South
Africa, Botswana, and Zimbabwe, half of all 15-year olds are expected to die of AIDS. That is
the human cost. The economic toll is also staggering: over the next decade, AIDS will cut the
GDP of some African countries by 20 percent. And the epidemic has no natural boundaries --
the fastest growing rate of infection today is in Russia and the former Soviet Union.
We need to attack AIDS in the United States and Britain; we need to stop the disease
from spreading in places like Russia and India where it can still be contained. But let us not
forget that the number one health crisis in the world today is AIDS in Africa. And if the world
doesn't do more about it, it will be our collective shame.
7
Sent By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Page 9/12
Developing countries themselves hold a critical part of the answer. However limited
their resources, they must make treatment and prevention a priority. And whatever their cultural
beliefs, they must be honest about the ways AIDS spreads and how it can be prevented. Talking
about AIDS is tough, but it is far easier to tell your children the facts of life than to watch them
learn the facts of death. In China - a country with enough resources to teach all its children to
read - only 4 percent of adults know how AIDS is transmitted. Uganda, on the other hand, has
cut the rate of infection by half.
But the bulk of new investment will have to come from the developed world. In the last
few years, Britain and the United States have gotten off to a good start. And yet the difference
between what the world provides and what the world needs for treatment and prevention of
AIDS, malaria and TB is $6 billion a year. That sounds like a lot of money. But think about
this: America's fair share, about $1.5 billion more than what we already spend, would be about
the same as what our government spends each year on office supplies. It's about what the people
of Britain spend each year buying blue jeans.
Government alone can't meet these health needs; but thus far, neither has the market.
Drug companies have little incentive to develop medicines for people who can't pay for them.
Only 10 percent of all biomedical research is devoted 10 diseases that overwhelmingly affect the
poorest countries. That's why America has sharply increased its investment in vaccine research;
boosted funding for buying vaccines, so that companies know there will be a guaranteed market;
and proposed a tax credit to help provide for future vaccines. We should expand that approach to
the development of drugs; and keep pressing pharmaceutical companies to make life-saving
treatments affordable to all.
8
Sent By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Dec-13-00 2:21PM;
Page 10/12
Universal Basic Education
One of the best health programs, the best economic development plans, the best anti-
poverty strategies, is a good education. Each additional year spent in school increases wages by
10 to 20 percent. A primary education boosts a farmer's output by about 8 percent. And the
education of girls is especially critical. Studies show that literate girls have significantly smaller
and healthier families. More than that, imagine if all children, on every continent, had the tools
to fulfill their God-given potential. Imagine the prospects for peace and democracy in a world
that is more literate and better skilled.
We are making progress. In the past decade, primary enrollments have increased at twice
the rate of the 1980s. Still, unfortunately, more than 100 million children receive no schooling at
all. Sixty percent are girls. Almost half of all African children and one-quarter of those in South
and West Asia are being denied this fundamental right, this basic root of all opportunity.
Just this year, [180] nations joined to set a goal of providing basic education to every
child - to girls and boys alike - in every country by 2015. Few of our other efforts will be
successful if we fail to reach this goal. What it will take is now known to us all. It's going to
take a commitment by developing countries to propose specific plans and realistic budgets.. to
get their children out of the fields and factories.. and to remove the fees and other obstacles that
keep them out of the classrooms.
It's going to take a similar effort by the wealthier nations. One promising example is
America's $300 million global school lunch initiative - using a nutritious meal as an incentive
for parents to send their kids to school. But all of us - from the U.S. to the World Bank to the
developing world - need to do more. No strong national plan should ever be allowed to fail for
lack of resources.
9
Sent By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Dec-13-00 2:22PM;
Page 11/12
Digital Divide
Finally, we must close the global digital divide. Today, a person in South Asia is 700
times less likely to have access to the Internet as a person in the United States. It's estimated that
in 2010, in the Asia-Pacific, the top eight economies will have 72 percent of their population on
line, while the bottom eleven will have less than 4 percent. If that happens, the global economy
really will resemble a world-wide web - a bunch of interlocking strands with great big holes in-
between.
Now, it's fair to ask: Are computers really an answer for people who are starving or
cannot read? Is e-commerce is an answer for villages that lack e-lectricity? Of course not - the
fight against poverty begins with the basics. But we seek far more than basic survival. There
shouldn't be a choice between Pentium and penicillin. That's another false debate. We shouldn't
patronize poor people by saying they don't need 21st Century tools and skills.
Last March, I visited a village in one of the poorest states in India. A women's co-op
there has set up one computer that provides them with life-saving information on child and
maternal health. Meanwhile, in mountain villages in Bolivia, some are selling rugs to New York
department stores over the Internet instead of growing coca for the drug trade. Some of the
greatest innovations of the digital age are coming from centers of excellence in South Asia like
Hyderabad, which is becoming known as Cyberabad. Imagine the innovations that would enrich
all our lives if there were a thousand more Cyberabads in the developing world- if we unleashed
the potential of half of humanity.
This is just the beginning. Developing countries need to pass laws and regulations that
permit the greatest possible access at the least possible cost. And in the developed world,
governments need to work with corporations and NGOs to provide equipment and expertise.
10
-
Sent By: NSC BELFAST;
32514;
Dec- 13-00 2:22PM;
Page 12/12
That's the goal of the new Digital Opportunity Task Force, or DOT Force, which America
proposed and the G-8 has cmbraced.
Conclusion
I said earlier that our shared values will only be realized by stepping up to our shared
responsibility. Leaders - who set national priorities - have to face these problems, not deny
them, or delegate them entirely to the World Bank or the United Nations. NGOs - - who deserve
credit for raising the world's awareness, need to show they can also find practical paths to
progress. And multi-national corporations - who have done much to create jobs and generate
growth - have an enlightened self-interest in being partners for a cleaner environment, for a
healthier workforce, for the freedom of association and the rights of workers to organize.
We know that the struggle for basic human dignity is as old as humanity itself. But the
persistence of poverty and suffering in the world is not proof that this struggle is futile. It is
merely proof that the struggle is difficult. T am enough of a realist to know that it will always be
hard to close this divide. But I am enough of an optimist to believe we have an opportunity to
succeed today as never before in human history. There is no great debate about the solutions - -
we know what must be done. Many of us are enjoying extraordinary good fortune - we can
afford to do what is required. Surely, we can use the new opportunities of this global age to
defeat the age-old scourge of human deprivation. And we must, if "globalism" is to have any
meaning for most of humanity.
If we make these tough choices - as nations, as businesses, as international institutions -
then we can build a global economy that leaves no one behind, carrying all countries into a
century that, we hope, will be marked by peace and prosperity. We have before us as great an
opportunity as the world has seen. Let us work together to seize it. Thank you.
11