I would like for all Americans to know, those who can hear it and those who can read, unless there is restraint now, unless there is voluntary self-discipline by management and labor, then your Government will be compelled by sheer necessity to act in order to protect all of the people. For in a democracy, the interest of all the people is, and should be, always overriding. And it is Government's duty and it is your president's duty, and he will exercise that duty by trying to reason-- come reason together --to protect that interest. But if, after we reason and after we appeal for self-discipline, after we ask for restraint, there are still general excesses, then I pledge you tonight we are going to protect your interests. Now that sums up about all I have to say on the inflation problem. This will end my speaking for this week--at least this Saturday. I have told you the general subjects we have discussed. I just want to conclude by talking about one that we have not discussed. We have been talking about problems. But I want to talk about successes. I want to talk about the day in America when we have 76 million people working, working full 40-hour weeks, some of them drawing good overtime, working at an average factory wage in excess of $112 per week-the highest in the history of this Nation-more people working, getting more pay, than at any time in the history of this Nation. We have the best education and health programs that any government has ever inaugurated. Our citizens are eating more. They are wearing more. Their children are going to better schools. They are driving better automobiles and more of them--some people even have two. They are living in better homes, although all of them do not have good homes. And except for our problems in Vietnam, we have so much to be thankful for. So when you go home tonight after having listened to those whose principal job all day has been complaining, to those who got up on the wrong side of the bed and have been martyrs all day long, feeling that nobody loved them and they had been mistreated, just think about what other country you would like to trade your citizenship in for. Just think about what other flag in the world represents as much to you as that one does.


Just think of what boy and girl that you know who has more constitutional rights, more liberty, more freedom, more educational opportunity, more care of their body and their health, more opportunity for recreation, more opportunity to make individual decisions and be independent of everybody than you have here in America. I think the average American does not ask much, does not expect much, does not have to have much. He wants a church where he can worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience. He wants a home where he and his wife can raise their family in comfort. He wants a job where he can earn enough to meet his responsibilities as a parent. He wants to be able to provide health care for his growing family and security for his old age. And he may want to go to a park or a seashore once in a while, or even a movie, or to sit and listen to television. But outside of that, that is about all he asks for. And most of us have that and we ought to be thankful for it. So if I could leave one thought with you, finally. I have gotten great strength from visiting with you and looking into your faces and giving you my views. I have learned something from you, too, you people in the five States that I have visited. I can go back and listen to the complainers-if there be any in Washington--the commentators, I can hear their individual viewpoints. But I will have enough strength to make my judgments and my decisions, because every man that is ever been President of the United States wants to make the right decision. Their great problem is knowing what is right because most of the decisions that come to a President are balanced just like this. The easy ones are settled by the Congressmen, the Senators, and Governors. Last week or the week before, when we settled the airlines strike the first time, before the machinists had had their vote on it and had a chance to express themselves, I picked up some of the leading journals of this country which really have a good deal of information on a good many subjects. One of the editorials said that I was a dictator, and I had arrogance of power, and I twisted arms, and I had brought about an agreement. That made me sad, because I do not like for people to say ugly things about me and I do not want to be a dictator. And then, the next day they did not ratify the contract.

Remarks at the John F. Kennedy Memorial Park, Lewiston, Maine.


They turned it down and a week went by. Some of the writers had to ride a train from New York to Florida instead of being able to go by airplane. So then they said, not that he was a dictator, but they said, Why does not he show some leadership? So then I was talking to Ed Muskie about it. I said, I am between the devil and the deep blue sea. I do not want to be a dictator; I do want to have some leadership. Now how do I go about it? He said it reminded him of the story about the fellow and the donkey. He said, A man was walking along with a donkey. Someone said, 'Why would a man want to lead a donkey? Why does not he ride it?' Said he got on the donkey and the little boy he had with him was walking along beside him. Someone said, 'Why did that old, big man get on a donkey and let that little boy walk?' So the fellow said, 'OK,' and put the little boy on the donkey. As they went on down the road a little bit, one of these complainers saw the little donkey coming along with the man and the boy both on it and they said, 'Why do those two big men ride that poor little donkey?' Why do not - they carry the donkey?' Now dissent, different viewpoints, different objectives are the strength of America. We do not all see everything alike or we would all belong to the same church, we would all wear the same clothes, we would all drive the same automobile, and we would all want the Same Wife. It is this difference and this right to express it that makes this the most powerful, the most wealthy, the most stable nation in all the world. But while we are exercising all these rights we have, all these liberties we cherish, all these privileges that we claim, let us not ever lose completely our perspective. Let us not start feeling so sorry for ourselves that we fail to be thankful and that we fail to realize really how many blessings we have.


Alexander, my good friend Congressman Ralph Metcalfe, Reverend Martin, distinguished graduates which I am now proud partner with you your honored parents and friends, ladies and gentlemen. I am distinctly honored by the action taken by Dr. Alexander, and I will forever remember the opportunity to be an associate with all of you in the class of July 1975, and I thank you very much. It is perfectly obvious that I am delighted with your invitation and the opportunity to be here at the commencement exercises of beautiful Chicago University. You know, that is what I admire so much about Dr. Alexander. He not only tells it like it is but also like it better be. Even during this very brief visit with all of you today, I can see that this graduating class has, excluding myself, talent, vision, ambition, and a sense of humor as well. I asked one of the graduating students here today, What inspired your school symbol, that symbol you have of a black hand and a white hand clasped together. Does it symbolize the brotherhood of learning? He said, No, ENTITY. The clasped hands have an entirely different meaning. After a big rainstorm, that is a black student and a white student helping each other to get from the university center to their classes. I was so deeply moved by the more than 5,000 signatures on the petition inviting me that no rainstorm could have kept me away. I was impressed not only by the great number of signatures but also by the Chicago State University success story. CSU serves the urban needs of a great city. Not long ago, CSU came under heavy attack, but you effectively answered the challenge. Today, CSU is graduating a first-rate and hopeful class of 1975. You can today share a justifiable pride; so can the city of Chicago, the State of Illinois, and the entire United States. I know of the sacrifices of your husbands and wives, your parents, your grandparents, yes, even your great grandparents. Some of your guests here today were denied even the opportunity to complete high school, but none can stand taller in American achievement than they do for the inspiring and encouragement that they have given to today's graduates. You have learned the greatest history lesson that the United States of America can teach. You have learned to nourish hope, to sustain belief in a better life for the next generation, to work toward that goal, and now, to experience the proof that the American dream is possible for all.

Commencement Address at Chicago State University.


You have made your loved ones proud; you have made Chicago State University proud. You have made me proud to be President of a nation where graduates like you strive against heavy odds for self-betterment, for equal opportunity, for constructive change, and for excellence; where graduates build on abilities rather than cop out on disabilities; where graduates believe in themselves and in the contribution they can make to their community; and where graduates provide a living demonstration of how we are going to turn around the problems of our great cities. Chicago State University is a showcase of what can be done by people with determination. You have shown how white and black hands can unite to build a multiracial institution. You have shown academic achievement. And you have responded to the real needs of the community that you serve. Most of today's graduates had to work full or part time on outside jobs, and if I might, I would like to share a personal experience. As a freshman at the University of Michigan, I worked as a busboy in the nurses' cafeteria at the university hospital. I also waited on tables in the interns' dining room. I will say, parenthetically, I liked the first job better. But let me add very quickly that even during the Great Depression it was much easier for me. I was not the victim of racial prejudice nor of a deprived environment. So, I cannot honestly say that my experiences were the same as that of those who are struggling today in Chicago and elsewhere in an effort to make it. But I do say that my own personal experience leads me to care about and to identify with every upward-bound individual in this great Nation. I defy anyone to put down the greatest fraternity of them all the college graduates who learned something about life by dirtying their hands. I am deeply concerned about the unemployment of this recession and those now employed beneath the level of their capacities. A nation that deprives anyone of equal opportunity is itself deprived. A nation that cannot create the conditions for human dignity for all is itself lacking a measure of humanity and dignity. The dignity of the individual is based ultimately on a sense of pride. It does not come from government programs that take over the individual's life and reduce the person to a case file and a claim number. Real aid to the individual is aid that helps the individual to help himself or herself. Federal assistance that helps people achieve higher education and higher qualification is fully justified, because that is the aim and that is the objective.


I am told that one of your graduates here today receiving a degree in education is a 45-year-old woman who worked as a teacher's aide. With nine children one severely handicapped it was obviously not easy. But her perseverance is typical of this entire graduating class. So is the spirit of your Vietnam veterans and others who caught up to win degrees today. The Federal Government can provide financial aid to education, but it cannot give individuals the determination that you have displayed in earning your degrees. As President, I am deeply concerned about the attitude of government toward individuals. But I am also concerned about the attitude of individuals toward the national community and toward themselves in terms of personal self-respect. I cannot and I do not say that we are all in the same boat. Some people, unfortunately, are outside the boat, so to speak, struggling in stormy waters. We, the fortunate, are in the boat and can throw out for illustrative purposes, I say a life preserver. But those in the water must not just hang on indefinitely to their life preservers, but must swim toward rescue . Real assistance is to help people to help themselves. We cannot do everything for everybody, but there is room for all who try to make it. Many of the problems, for example, of cities remain unsolved. And I should say with great emphasis, I am dedicated to turning around the trend of deterioration and despair, of crime and unemployment, of pollution and bad housing, and of drugs and premature death. But I am also dedicated to the conviction that local problems must, in the final analysis, be solved by local people. Frankly, that is why I came to Chicago today to meet you. We in Washington can learn a great deal from you. Many of you have overcome a deprived environment and economic limitations. You succeeded because you are rich in human capacities and have the love of families who care. This auditorium is filled with individual success stories. I do not see any reason whatsoever to worry about the class of 1975 at CSU. But I am concerned about the future of some other young Americans who are today neither in school nor working at jobs. Tragically, they are on the streets. Some have lost hope and motivation to the extent that they no longer are even looking for work or education. Some, tragically, have police records. Society has begun to think of them as records and public enemies rather than as human beings in trouble.


Some are sick with addiction to drugs because they are so empty inside, so devoid of hope that they fill themselves with artificial illusions of contentment. So, I challenge today's graduates to use your new skills to help the people who are not in this hall today. I challenge the graduates in education to teach young people how to read and how to write. I challenge the graduates in the liberal arts to stimulate the mind and to inspire the spirit. I challenge the graduates in corrections and law enforcement to counsel and to motivate individuals from the path or paths of destruction of themselves and others. I challenge the business and administration graduates to conceive of new jobs that are more interesting, challenging, and rewarding. I challenge all graduates to set an example that gives hope to the millions who have not yet made it. You have demonstrated by your own achievements and accomplishments that your determination can make a significant difference. You might have been part of the problem, but now you are part of the pride, and I congratulate you. CSU has shown that a new tradition can emerge from problem areas. Your president, Dr. Alexander, made CSU a school that demands performance of its students. I agree with the CSU philosophy. You kill pride if students are passed merely because they come from disadvantaged backgrounds. You sacrifice for an education, and consequently, you are entitled to a fair chance to learn. CSU is not a school where the student can coast blithefully through for 4 years and emerge with a degree but without competence. The pursuit of excellence makes more valid the diplomas you are receiving today. It is a service to the university, to. the students, and to the community. You welcomed the challenge, and you made the grade. A united America requires opportunities for all citizens and the cooperation of all races and all groups in our society. That is why I draw such encouragement from the achievements of this graduating class, and I am delighted to be a part of it even though I am not sure I earned it. You are the individuals who will provide new energy, new ideas, and new leadership to help resolve the plight of the cities. If I can go once more to the days when I was going through high school and college, there was a poem by a Victorian Englishman that was a favorite of commencement orators at that time. Frankly, I heard it recited so many times that I think I still may know it by heart.


At the very beginning, let me apologize for being late. We have had just unbelievable crowds beginning in Keene and running all the way across the State, west to east. I just appreciate, beyond any words that I can express, my gratitude for your patience, your understanding, and your warm and hospitable reaction to our coming in at this time. This trip to New Hampshire has been a great lift, and it has been a lift because I am convinced that the people of New Hampshire are interested in having their election decided by them and not by the politicians in Washington, D.C. It was my privilege to come to your State Capitol in April and to urge at that time that the right answer was by the people and the wrong answer was by the politicians in the Nation's Capital. You have that opportunity now. You have probably the greatest opportunity to make a decisive decision next Tuesday. I am proud to be here on behalf of a friend of mine, Louis Wyman, but I am equally proud to be in the great State of New Hampshire because I am here representing, along with others, a unified party, a party that is working together on behalf of Louis Wyman's election. Governor Thomson, last night Governor Reagan, earlier today and he may be here now Senator Norris Cotton, Congressman Jim Cleveland was with us all I am trying to say is we have presented a unified front because we think it is a crucial election. I am delighted to see Ruth Griffin here who so ably represents your area, and she, like all of us, is standing steadfast on behalf of Louis Wyman. Let me ask you or tell you, if I might, why we stand together. Why are we interested in the election of Louis Wyman? Louis Wyman believes in a strong national defense with the ENTITY, the Navy, the Air Force, and the Marines first and not second best, and that is important to the maintenance of peace throughout the world. Secondly, related to that, you have got a great naval installation here in Portsmouth one that is very significant from the national security point of view, one that is a very vital part of the economy of this part of New Hampshire. Let me speak very strongly that Louis Wyman in 1964 and again in 1972 almost single-handedly kept the Portsmouth Navy Yard open so we could have that' facility here defending or helping to defend the peace throughout the world.

Remarks in Portsmouth, New Hampshire


Let me add, you elect Louis and he will have an opportunity to continue that strong support for this great navy installation which is such an integral part of our national security forces. I do not have to tell all of you in New Hampshire that Louis, by actions, by words, is working hard to keep control of government at the local level. He knows and I know that we cannot run the city of Portsmouth nearly as well from Washington as your elected officials can do it right here in Portsmouth. So, if you want local control with locally elected officials and the backup given to Lou that is necessary, then you ought to elect Louis Wyman on next Tuesday. I would like to conclude a wonderful day, and it started early and it is ending late, but it has been an inspiration to me to meet so many old friends, to make so many new acquaintances. Fortunately, a long time ago I used to come to New Hampshire then to vacation and ski, and I met some wonderful people who have been my friends over the years, and the characteristics of those people I have found in my opportunity to see others in New Hampshire today are independence, dedicated, with great conviction. You have the kind of characteristics which I think are reflected in Louis Wyman. If you want an independent guy, a man of dedication with deep convictions, I urge you to make that extra step to get to the polls on Tuesday. All of you have close friends who you would stand up for, who you would urge to be appointed or elected. Louis Wyman is that kind of a friend of mine. I am here spending this wonderful day because I want to go the last mile supporting a person who I respected as a legislator, who I admire as a person, who I know will do the job best for the State of New Hampshire, and I know will help me the most as we face the critical, crucial problems of energy, the economy, jobs, inflation, and all the other things. Louis, I want to urge you to make the maximum effort, and I want your literal thousands of friends here in New Hampshire to join in supporting me in supporting you.

Remarks in Portsmouth, New Hampshire


Laura and I are pleased to have you all here, and we are so honored to be a part of this annual tradition. We especially welcome the 2003 Kennedy Center honorees and their family and their friends. Every year, the Kennedy Center pays tribute to five outstanding artists. Each group of honorees is an interesting mix. This year, for example, we have a director whose best films are known to all. We have an actress who has created characters we all remember, who, I am told, still does a mighty good Tarzan yell. And the three musicians with us are among the most recognized in the world. They are not known to have performed together but the sight of all three on the same stage is a picture to remember. The Kennedy Center Honors recognize great contributions to American culture. Each of the honorees is here because of their hard effort and superior performance through an entire career. Only one honoree was born in Texas. That person is Carol Burnett, who spent her early years in San Antonio. Young Carol went off into the world, and the world took a liking to her from the start. She is today one of the most recognized and warmly regarded entertainers in America. For her first performance in acting class at UCLA, the teacher gave Carol Burnett a D- . But Carol found, as have I that one bad grade or two is not the end of the road. By the end of her freshman year, she was named Most Outstanding Newcomer. Within a few years, she became a star on Broadway and a television favorite on the Winchell-Mahoney Show and the Garry Moore Show. In the sixties and seventies, Carol's own variety show ran 11 years and received more than 20 Emmys. Every week, Carol performed one of the most difficult feats in all of show business, playing it straight with Tim Conway. To this day, millions of Americans can instantly recall sketches and characters from the Carol Burnett Show. Whether she was playing Eunice or the Scrub Woman or Starlett O'Hara in Went With The Wind viewers could always sense the person behind the character, the sweetness, the sincerity, and the wonderful spirit of Carol Burnett. Through the years in such performances as Same Time Next Year, Carol has also shown the depth and range of her talent. In her good life, she has been a beloved entertainer, a devoted mom, and a faithful friend. She is a cheerful and graceful presence in American life, and America honors Carol Burnett.

Remarks at the Kennedy Center Honors Reception


All great performances in front of a camera involve an artistic vision behind the camera, and few have spent more years at the top of the directing profession than Mike Nichols. His name on a production signifies quality, intelligence, and high artistic standards. His credits include some of the most memorable films of the last two generations. The Graduate was a hit movie and a triumph that has held up over time. The best directors are always extending themselves, and Mike Nichols has turned his gifts to films as varied as Catch-22, Who is Afraid of Virginia Woolf? and Working Girl. He is equally respected for his career on Broadway, first as a performer, then as director of the original Odd Couple and Barefoot in the Park. The medal Mike Nichols wears this evening is the latest in a collection of other well-deserved honors, including the Oscar, the Emmy, the Tony, and the Grammy. A movie critic once said that Mike Nichols' greatest talent may be his ability to bring out the best in performers, and that is another reason why Mike Nichols is among the finest. I have been in love with movies all my life. Directing them is like getting to marry this girl you followed around for years and years. I do not know how long he followed around Diane Sawyer but she is here to share in this very proud moment. And Mike's parents, who brought their little boy to America from Nazi Germany, would also be proud of their son. And tonight we are really proud to honor this fine man, Mike Nichols. During this evening's reception, we will hear music from the Marine Band. I suspect that these fine musicians are thrilled to be in the presence of one of the greatest violinists of his age or any other. As it happens, Laura and I were guests in this very room when Itzhak Perlman performed for President and Mrs. Reagan. That audience, like every audience to hear this man, was captivated by his music and charmed by his presence. According to a review of a recent concert in Minneapolis, Perlman maintained an intimate rapport with the audience. For instance, he kept them updated on the score of the World Series between pieces. He was clearly having fun, and so was his audience. The sound of a violin first called to him over the radio when he was just 3 years old. The Perlmans gave their boy a toy fiddle. He soon exhausted the possibilities of that instrument.


Armed with a real violin, he was onstage with orchestras in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and by the age 10 had given his first solo recital. America first came to know him 3 years later, when in 1958 he played Flight of the Bumblebee on the Ed Sullivan show. From that day to this, Itzhak Perlman has had a unique hold on the respect and affection of all who love classical music. He has played with every major orchestra in the world. He is collected more than a dozen Grammys, enthralled listeners with a repertoire stretching from baroque to contemporary, and touched millions of filmgoers with the pure and haunting solos in Schindler's List. Critics have written of Perlman's technical mastery, the rich tone and faultless intonation. And all who have seen him play are struck by the apparent ease with which he plays the most demanding of instruments. This good soul has been given a singular talent, and in sharing it he has brought much beauty into the world. For that, we are all honored to be in the presence of Maestro Itzhak Perlman. Speaking of soul James Butane Brown is in the house. Of course, he goes by other titles. Some men are too cool to only have one nickname. James Brown has been called Mr. Dynamite, Soul Brother Number One, and of course, The Godfather of Soul. Many names fit him, but there is no one else like him. And in a career of more than 50 years, he has earned the reputation as a live performer with no equal and as an institution of rock and roll. He grew up in Georgia, knowing many of the toils and struggles of an earlier time. He worked hard and took his own path. He received guidance along the way from many sources, from his Aunt Honey, who raised him, to the first preachers and gospel musicians he heard. He joined a band that called itself The Famous Flames. It took only a short while before the name was changed, by general agreement, to James Brown and the Famous Flames. I Feel Good, Please, Please, Please, Papa's Got a Brand New Bag, Living in America. Since he first achieved fame in the 1950s, James has posted 98 entries on Billboard's Top 40 R&B Singles Chart, more than any other performer. Bonnie Raitt has described James Brown's place in music history this way, You could not even list how many people have been influenced by him.


In the Mount Rushmore of musical figures, he definitely would be on it. Of course, on that Mount Rushmore of music, the sculptor would have to pay particular attention to the hair. James is the first to tell you that the look is important to his success. Here is what he says, Hair is the first thing, and teeth are the second. Hair and teeth, a man got these two things, he is got it all. Along with the look, this man is blessed with incredible talent, undeniable stage presence, and the discipline of a true professional. He is still on the road and living it up-living up to that other nickname, the hardest working man in show business. We are delighted to welcome our final honoree to the White House. Loretta Lynn even mentioned the White House in one of her songs. The White House social season should be glittering and gay, but here in Topeka the rain is a-falling, the faucet is a-dripping, and the kids are a-bawling -- one of them a-toddling, and one is a-crawling, and one's on the way. Many of Loretta Lynn's songs are about the challenges, the dreams, and the joys of everyday life. She is known them all, and she has sung about them with style and feeling. More than four decades after she first sang at the Grand Ole Opry, there is no better known voice in country music and no lady more admired than Loretta Lynn. Her song and the film Coal Miner's Daughter tell a true story that began in Butcher Hollow, Kentucky. Loretta grew up believing, in her words, that from the Holler down to the mine was the whole world. Her world changed when she met a soldier named Mooney Lynn. He made a strong impression on people. See, Mooney was the kind of man who wore a cowboy hat with a label inside that said, Like hell it is yours. But as Loretta remembers, I was not scared of Mooney. I was scared because I had never seen a car before. They married and moved away and were living in the State of Washington when Mooney got an idea. He knew that the voice singing lullabies to their children was better than any he had ever heard from a jukebox or in a saloon. And just maybe if Loretta cut a record, radio stations might play it.


My subject today is the conversation around abortion. It is a sensitive topic that deserves our attention. It is one that too many politicians either demagogue or hide from. I will not demagogue or hide from it. I am here to speak about it directly and openly. I will not address every possible question or angle. Rather, I aim to start a constructive conversation about where we go from here in our divided country. Abortion is a deeply personal topic for both women and men. The issue should be addressed with sensitivity and respect, not judgment and hate. Most people have a story that has brought them to their views about abortion. It could be a trauma that a family member or friend endured. It could be our concerns for our daughters and their future. I am unapologetic and unhesitant about it. Not because the Republican Party tells me to be. My husband was adopted, and I am reminded of that blessing every day. Michael's birth parents lived in poverty. His father was an alcoholic and in and out of prison. His mother suffered a traumatic brain injury. When he was just a few years old, Michael and his siblings were taken from their home. Later, they were put in foster care. It was a rough experience for him. Thankfully, when he was four, a loving family adopted Michael and his younger sister. It changed their lives. Adoption literally saved them. Every day is a blessing because someone gave him life. Every day is a blessing because a family loved and raised him under difficult circumstances. The world is better because of Michael Haley. He is a combat veteran who served our country in war. He continues to help adoption and at-risk youth causes because he wants to help others who were born in his situation. I often think about what would have happened if Michael had not been so blessed if his biological mother had chosen a different path. My husband is reason number one that I stand for life. Every day I get to spend with the love of my life reminds me that I am blessed that someone saved his life. The second reason is that Michael and I struggled to have children of our own. I had many challenges as a teenager into my college years. I went through numerous surgeries. But what happened so easily for many of my friends was not my path. We went through countless sessions of fertility treatments. Every day I wake up and see or speak to my two children I feel blessed.

Nikki Haley Remarks Delivering a Policy Speech on Abortion in Arlington, Virginia


I will never forget the day she was born and then seeing her walk down the wedding aisle with her dad. I felt what countless parents feel. I believe every life is a blessing from God. My heart hurts when someone decides not to go through with a pregnancy. My record on abortion is long and clear. As a state legislator, I voted for every pro-life bill that came before me. We made it easier for women to get ultrasounds. We required a 24-hour wait before abortions. As Governor, we passed the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, protecting babies born during botched abortions. I signed a law protecting unborn babies from the moment they can feel pain. We also launched initiatives that paired thousands of vulnerable first-time moms with nurses who had specialized training in maternal and child health. I kept up the fight as ambassador to the United Nations. My goal as president will be the same as when I was Governor and Ambassador. I want to save as many lives and help as many moms as possible. This mission has become more urgent in the past year. With the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision, we entered a new era. It is really a return to the way this issue was decided in our country for nearly two centuries. Until 1973, abortion was not a federal issue. Many had restrictive laws. Some had more permissive laws. Yes, the issue was controversial, but the citizens of each state reached a consensus that reflected their values. Then, in 1973, the Supreme Court changed that. It declared the entire nation must follow one standard. And that standard was among the most liberal in the world. State-level consensus was replaced with a national mandate that much of the country found deeply offensive. Last year, the Court returned power to the American people. We are now free to forge consensus once again. In the past year, we have started to see what that looks like. Some states have passed laws protecting life. I commend them for it. Other states have doubled down on abortion. Different people in different places are taking different paths. That is what the founders of our country envisioned. It is the reality of living in a democracy. But it is equally true that in a democracy, things can change. Tomorrow can be better than today. And I believe we will make even more progress in the cause of life. That is the challenge we face as pro-life advocates - to move America toward life.


I said I want to save as many lives and help as many moms as possible. To do that at the federal level, the next president must find national consensus. That might sound strange to many people. Under Roe, consensus was replaced by demonization. most in the media promote demonization. They stoke division pitting Americans against each other. No one talks about finding consensus. Everyone goes to the barricades and attacks the other side. They have turned a sensitive issue that has long divided people into a kind of gotcha bidding war. How many weeks are you for? How many exceptions are you for? But these questions miss the point if the goal is saving as many lives as possible. You do not save any lives if you cannot enact your position into law. And you cannot do that unless you find consensus. Just like I have my story, I respect everyone who has their story. I do not judge someone who is pro-choice any more than I want them to judge me for being pro-life. Today, each state is finding its own consensus, as they should. As a practical matter, you only achieve consensus when you have a House majority, a 60-vote Senate majority, and a president who are all in alignment. We are nowhere close to reaching that point. Today, there are around 45 pro-life senators, depending on how you count them. But it has not happened in over a hundred years, and it is unlikely to happen soon. We have to face this reality. The pro-life laws that have passed in strongly Republican states will not be approved at the federal level. That is just a fact, notwithstanding what the Democrat fearmongers say. They say Republicans are about to ban all abortions nationwide and send women to prison. These wildly false claims, amplified by a sympathetic media, are not designed to do anything other than score political points. They know as well as anyone that no Republican president will have the ability to ban abortion nationwide, just as no Democratic president can override the laws of all fifty states. But that does not mean we cannot save as many lives as possible. I do believe there is a federal role on abortion. Whether we can save more lives nationally depends entirely on doing what no one has done to date - finding consensus. That is what I will strive to do. In fact, I believe common ground already exists. There is broad public agreement that babies born during a failed abortion deserve to live.


They need medical care and the full protection of the law, just like every other baby. There is broad public agreement that we should never pressure moms into having an abortion. They should get support to carry their baby to term. They should be able to get information from pregnancy resource centers - and especially about adoption. We must do better when it comes to adoption, to make it easier for adoptive parents, and to avoid children growing up in a government system with too little love. We can broadly agree that pro-life doctors and nurses should never be forced to violate their beliefs. The right of conscience matters just as much as the right to life. Surely, we can all agree that abortion up until the time of birth is a bridge too far. Only seven countries on earth allow elective late-term abortions. We are talking brutal regimes like Communist China and North Korea. And we can all agree that women who get abortions should not be jailed. A few have even called for the death penalty. Those are just some areas where national consensus is already within reach. There are others too, and we should do the hard work to find them through heartfelt dialogue. Conflict makes for good fundraising copy and scary TV ads. Consensus does not get a lot of ratings or clicks. I would remind those on the Left who demonize anyone who is pro-life, that it was not too long ago when President Bill Clinton said he wanted abortion to be safe, legal, and rare. Many want legal abortion anytime, for any reason, at any stage of pregnancy, in every state and town in America. Some radical activists are even lighting pregnancy resource centers on fire. These are not the voices of consensus. They are acts of division and hatred. President Biden has done nothing to discourage it. In fact, he promotes it. It is more partisanship of the worst kind. We should call out the extremism of the Left. We do not need a president who endangers lives while dividing our country even more. We need a president who unites Americans and brings out the best in them, even on the toughest of subjects. That will be my approach as president. I believe in conversation. I believe in compassion. I believe in empathy, not anger. We are not just talking about policy here. We are talking about people. That is often lost in this debate, on the left and the right. But it is front of mind for me.


I acknowledge the humanity of both the unborn baby and the pregnant mom. Some days, you are so sick you cannot get out of bed. You worry if you are really up for raising a baby. And you know you are going to need a lot of help. That is what I felt during my pregnancies. Many women have it much harder. I desperately wanted a child. I had a loving family eager to help out. Some are single with no one to help - with no idea how to raise a baby while keeping a job. I had a friend who was raped. I know the anguish she went through worrying that she would have an unwanted pregnancy. It was an anguish I would not wish on anyone. We cannot ignore the fears those women face. I will never downplay these difficulties as I fight for life. And I will not demonize those who disagree with me. We cannot give into outrage culture and accuse our opponents of being evil. If we want to protect more moms and save more babies, we need more Americans to join with us. We must persuade people and find consensus, not push them further away. I know we can do it. I have done it before. Eight years ago, when I was governor, I encountered the most difficult challenge of my life. A sick and twisted young man walked into Mother Emanuel Church, in Charleston. He joined a bible study of African Americans, sat and prayed with them for over an hour, then opened fire. He murdered nine amazing souls. He openly said he did it because of the color of their skin. In the awful days that followed, photos emerged of the killer posing with the Confederate Flag. Amid our grief, a massive debate broke out. It centered on the Confederate Flag that flew on the grounds of the South Carolina statehouse. Our state had been bitterly divided on the flag for decades. On one side were those who wanted to tear it down. On the other side were those who wanted to keep the flag. Both were united in sadness over the Mother Emanuel murders. But they were divided about what the flag meant, and what taking it down would mean. People wondered if South Carolina would break out in violence and destruction like what we had recently seen in Ferguson, Missouri and other places. In that fraught moment, I gave a speech.


For many people in our state, the flag stands for traditions that are noble - traditions of history, of heritage and of ancestry At the same time, for many others in South Carolina, the flag is a deeply offensive symbol of a brutally oppressive past. As a state, we can survive, as we have done, while still being home to both of those viewpoints. We do not need to declare a winner and loser. And so, I said, it was time to remove the Confederate Flag from the statehouse grounds. It was a highly emotional issue in our state. And removal required a two-thirds vote in both our State House and Senate. But several days later, large, diverse, and bipartisan majorities in our state legislature voted to bring down the flag. We found consensus on a very tough issue. Republicans and Democrats worked together and made progress by talking to each other like human beings. We saw past our differences, and united to move forward, as one state and one people. What was true then, with the flag, can be true now, with abortion. This should not be about picking sides, scoring points, or stoking outrage. It is about saving babies and supporting moms. I am fighting for all of them, and I will work with anyone to do that. I have faith we can make progress. I have faith we can save more lives, and give every baby, mother, and family the best shot at the best life. Our national history should give us hope. Time and again, the American people have confronted great wrongs, and worked hard to convince their fellow citizens to make them right. They spent the better part of a century striving to end our original sin of slavery. It took them even longer to secure the support of their fellow citizens for women's right to vote. Their tireless work showed America that segregation was wrong, and equality was right. Think about the progress we are already making in the restoration of the right to life. Fifty years ago, a court forced unlimited abortion on an unwilling nation. Millions of Americans responded - not with rage, but with resolve. They reminded our fellow citizens about the humanity of the unborn child and the needs of pregnant mothers. Now that power has been restored to the people. Let us treat it as the important and deeply personal issue it is. Let us discuss it in ways that allow Americans to show love for one another, not judgment or contempt.


I once learned in a public-speaking class that you should never open your remarks with an apology. But, then, how can I explain to you that I am sorry I was late and have kept you waiting here? I will tell you how that happened here if some of the fellows behind me will not get mad. They had a meeting scheduled also with a delegation from the Congress, and I have found out that every time that happens I am late from then on. We are gathered to draw attention to the plight of the long-suffering Baltic people and to affirm to the world that we do not recognize their subjugation as a permanent condition. The Soviet occupation of Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania is a living reminder of the cynical agreement between Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany that precipitated the Second World War. The Soviets would like the world to forget this dark chapter of history, but it is something the Baltic people and freedom-loving people everywhere will always remember. The Soviet Union invaded these small but proud countries in 1940. And then, in June of 1941-only days before Hitler turned on his partners in the Kremlin-the Soviets arrested tens of thousands, executed many, and began a mass deportation to Siberia. At the end of the war, the horror continued as hundreds of thousands were sent to the Gulag. Today, it is no coincidence that a large percentage of people living in these occupied countries are not of Baltic descent. The Soviets have tried their best to Russify the Baltic peoples, as they have with so many of the other oppressed nationalities within the Soviet empire. The worship of God, once at the heart of Baltic culture, has been brutally suppressed. Any legitimate attempt at independence from Moscow has been suppressed. Any tangible effort to preserve their national identity has been denied. But the Soviets have never broken their spirit. Underground publications flourish, and ad hoc committees and groups defend religious and national rights as guaranteed by the Helsinki accords. It seems ironic that those responsible for the repression I have been describing are now proposing what they call an atom-free Baltic, a Nordic nuclear-free zone, especially since unidentified submarines have repeatedly violated the territorial waters of Norway and neutral Sweden. This kind of conduct does not lend itself to a spirit of trust. As a matter of fact, the curious thing is, if you really stop to think about it, their description of a nuclear-free zone is that there will not be nuclear weapons in that zone.

Remarks at a White House Reception for Baltic Americans


Thank you very much, Governor Jay Rockefeller, who is destined, I believe, because of the deep appreciation of the West Virginia people for what he is and what he has been and what he will do, to be the next Governor of your great State. And I look forward to working with him during the next 4 years. And I am also grateful to Jennings Randolph, a man who sets a standard for public service that is an inspiration to us all. As Wendell Ford and Carl Perkins and Nick Joe Rahall and all of us who've served in Washington together know, most of the new ideas that come forward for us to address have already been understood and proposed by Jennings Randolph, because he has his heart close to the people of this Nation. And when there is a real need for better housing, better transportation, better use of coal, better life for the working families of this Nation, Jennings Randolph seems to have a special sensitivity to understand that need and to lead the rest of us in meeting those needs for all. I am grateful, too, to have a chance to come here to meet with people from Ohio, particularly Kentucky, because they are represented here by a great Governor and also by a great Senator. And Carl Perkins, a Congressman from across the river, is one of my greatest friends of all. Let me say that I have spent the last few days thinking about the upcoming debate tomorrow night. As Wendell Ford pointed out, my opponent is not out campaigning among the people; he is trying to decide what role he is going to play in the debate tomorrow night. The problem that I have had in preparing myself for the debate is, which Ronald Reagan am I going to face tomorrow evening on television? Because as the election has progressed and as we get closer and closer to the voting time, he has flip-flopped on almost every conceivable issue depending upon what audience happens to be listening to him at the particular time. He is been strongly against, even prayed against, aid for New York City, but lately he is been in New York, telling them how much he loves New York. He was against many things for which he now professes to support. Not too long ago, as a matter of fact this October, to the automobile workers in the Chrysler plant, he was telling them how proud he was that the Federal Government, with the help of the people on this stage, had helped Chrysler stay solvent.

Wayne County, West Virginia Remarks at a Rally With Area Residents.


But that contrasts with the Ronald Reagan of last October, who said he did not see anything wrong with Chrysler going bankrupt. I do not know if I will be debating the Ronald Reagan who now professes to be for safety and health of workers, or one who replied not long ago when somebody said that OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, ought to be abolished, who stood there and said, Amen. I do not know if I will be debating a man of this election campaign who now professes to be for improving the social security system, or one who on at least four different occasions has suggested making social security voluntary, a proposal that would mean the end of a strong and viable social security system. I do not know if I am running against a man who opposed selling grain to the Soviet Union last year, or the one who declined this year to support the grain embargo after the Soviets had invaded Afghanistan. I do not know if I am debating a Ronald Reagan who now professes to be for working families, but who is against labor law reform, who is against the Davis-Bacon Act, who said about the minimum wage that it is caused more misery and more unemployment than anything since the Great Depression, and who said just this year again that the primary cause of unemployment was the minimum wage. I do not know if I am debating against a man who now professes to be for working families who are temporarily unemployed, or one who said not too long ago that unemployment compensation was just a prepaid vacation for freeloaders. I do not know if I am debating a man who lately professes to be almost in the image of Franklin Roosevelt, or one who a little earlier said that the foundation for the New Deal was fascism. I may be having difficulty predicting what Governor Reagan will be saying in this debate, but we all know which Ronald Reagan would sit in the Oval Office if the Republicans win this election. It will be the same Ronald Reagan who said just a few weeks ago that he has not changed his position in the last 20 years, the Ronald Reagan who worked to kill Medicare, who opposes national health insurance, who rejects a decade of progress in nuclear arms control, who wants to scrap the synthetic fuels program, which will take coal from this region and convert it into synthetic fuel, that is the key to breaking the OPEC stranglehold which they formerly had on us.


There is one thing in this election that is certain, though, and I want you to listen very carefully to this, because you have got a good voting record in this area. Republicans always campaign like Democrats. You have heard them. They quote Franklin D. Roosevelt; they quote Harry Truman; they quote John Kennedy; they quote Lyndon Johnson. Have you ever heard a Republican candidate for ENTITY quoting a Republican Speaker? But when they get in the Ova Office, they are just like all the Republican Speakers that have caused hardship and trial and tribulation and forgotten the working families of this country, but they try to mislead you the last few days before the election. Republicans will govern like Republicans. Do not you forget it on election day. I want to say just a word about coal. I am proud to have been able in my administration, working with your Democratic Governors, United States Senators, the Members of Congress, to do more for the coal industry than ever before in the history of this country. We will produce more coal in 1980 than has ever before been produced in the United States of America. We will exceed 800 million tons for the first time, and the trend is in the right direction. This is the first year in our history in which more than 50 percent of all our Nation's electricity has been produced from coal. Our exports of coal to foreign countries will set an alltime record this year. And we could load millions more tons of coal on ships to be sold overseas if we just had the transportation system and the port loading facilities available for this new demand for coal that is been brought about by the policies of our administration. In the near future, as you know, you will have an exciting, new, bright life ahead of you as we begin to produce synthetic liquids and gaseous fuels from your coal. We can triple-triple-United States coal production in the next 15 years if we keep Democrats in office to help you. That is where we need your help. As you know, over the past several weeks, since the Congress has finally passed our new energy policy into law, we have begun to move on our new synthetic fuels program. We have signed historic agreements to help finance and to guarantee the construction of synthetic facilities, including the SRC-1 program in Kentucky and the SRC-2 plant in West Virginia.


These major plants will be the forerunner of others in this Nation and will show why 75 percent of the $88 billion in windfall profits tax will go to produce synthetic fuels out of coal. If we are ever to achieve our goal for energy security, do not let anyone try to convince .you that the best way to produce and' use more American coal is to lower air quality standards or water quality standards. What these men on the platform and I have done, working with Sam Church, ENTITY of the United Mine Workers, is to try to make sure that all the projected increases that I have described to you, all of them, include maintaining the quality of our environment. We do not have to make people choose between jobs and prosperity on one hand and good health and a beautiful America on the other. We can burn coal, let it be the bright new vision of an independent policy in the future, and still keep our air clean and our water clean and our land productive. Do not let anyone mislead you about that, because the best way to turn people against coal is for them to think that we have to lower those standards for air and water quality. Last week the Environmental Protection Agency extended a plan in Ohio which will allow greater use of coal. This plan sets limits on average emissions over a 30-day period, rather than a daily average. And this will continue on into 1982. This would allow much greater use of Ohio coal. Also last week the EPA and Armco Steel Company reached agreement on an innovative approach to control air pollution of the Armco plant in Middletown, Ohio. Instead of controlling each individual source, it limits the total pollution emitted from an imaginary bubble over the entire plant. This allows the company to concentrate its cleanup efforts on sources that are the least costly to control. The result is more pollution control per dollar spent. This is the first practical application of this new principle. And now other steel companies throughout the Nation can do the same, reducing pollution control costs and thus raising capital or money to modernize their facilities and to put more people to work. Just last Friday we announced a grant to finance a coke production plant in Canova, West Virginia. This would not only mean new jobs at the plant when it is finished, but 300 construction jobs and 1,500 miners will go to work now in West Virginia, in Virginia, and in Kentucky.


The first is, this is the third time I have been here, and every time I come, when I go back to the White House, I feel like I am in reasonably nice public housing. The second thing is that I want Dianne Feinstein to be reelected so badly that I have spoken at two of her fundraisers, but this is the first one where she is showed up. You know, Hollywood discovers stars all the time, and now America is beginning to discover Dianne Feinstein. You can clap for that. She is sort of replacing Tommy Lasorda as the person people think of when they think of California. You know, before I started running for President, that is what I thought of in California. I'd see Tommy Lasorda getting smaller and smaller and smaller on television, saying he'd shrunk himself with that Slim-Fast. That is what we are trying to pour into the Federal budget. Now the deficit is down; the Dodgers are in first place. I have asked Lasorda to take over the lobbying for health care reform. I do not know before we get to Dianne's main event we will have to watch this primary with Bill Dannemeyer and Michael Huffington, who spent $5 1/2 million of his own money in the last election. And now he is spent $2 million to go on television to review Bill Bennett's book. I do not know how she can hope to meet and defeat a person who is foursquare for virtue. But I want to say a little more about that in a moment. I think Dianne Feinstein works for virtue and embodies virtue, and I hope she will be returned on that basis. I want to say something serious, if I might. This is a, actually, kind of tough day for me to give a speech. I had the opportunity, as Senator Feinstein said, to go with her and Senator Boxer and others to the Inland Empire today to talk about how we could revitalize San Bernardino after the Norton Air Force Base closure and what is being done there, which is truly astonishing, and then to go to UCLA and speak to some wonderful young people at their convocation.

Remarks at a Fundraiser for Senator Dianne Feinstein in Beverly Hills, California


But this is a sad day for Hillary and for me because Jackie Kennedy Onassis passed away last night, and she was not only a great symbol of courage and grace and dignity for our country, but she was a real friend of ours and a special friend of my wife and very kind to our wonderful daughter. And like many of you, when I heard last night that she had lost her fight, my mind began to race over the last 30 years, back to how it was then, back to how it is now, back and forth, what happened in between. One thing that Jackie and John Kennedy surely did was to make us all believe that somehow together we could make a difference, that what we did mattered, that our role as citizens was important, and that if we gave ourselves to public service, that was the sign of good judgment and compassion. In other words, we lived in a time then when there was much less cynicism and pessimism and skepticism and in which public discourse was a thing of honor, not a shouting match bent on destruction and division and distraction. I honestly believe that our ability to bring this country into the 21st century as strong as it needs to be and as united as it needs to be depends perhaps more than anything else on our uncommon strength of purpose which we have mustered in times past, this time to muster on our own state of mind, to fight against all the forces that seek to drag us down and pit us against one another, and to somehow elevate our sense of common purpose. It is not easy, and there are lots of folks who hope it will not happen for all kinds of reasons. But if you think about this race in which Dianne Feinstein is involved, it is an example of what we plainly have to do. I will never forget last fall when she was fighting for the assault weapons ban. And she called and she said, Now, you said you were for this, Mr. President, and I want you to help me. And I said, Well, Dianne, we are probably not going to win, but I will work like crazy for it. So, she gave me my list to call, and call I did. And then, that incredibly sensitive Senator on the other side of the issue said that she needed to become a little more familiar with firearms and their deadly characteristics. You all remember what she said in return.


She recalled how she became the mayor of San Francisco, how she tried to find the pulse of her slain colleague, how she had been trained in the shooting of a firearm when she had terrorist attacks, with a bomb in her house when her husband was dying, when her windows were shot out. Well, I do not know if that other guy's made a speech on the floor of the Senate since then. But I do know that speech had something to do not only with the passage of the assault weapons ban but with changing the tone and tenor of the debate in the United States Senate over an issue of immense national importance. When we were trying to get the assault weapons bill passed in the Housesame song, second verseCharles Schumer, a wonderful Congressman from Brooklyn, had carried this bill and had been defeated by 70 votes in 1991. Some significant changes were made in the bill; it was clarified and tightened up a bit. And we even did something that had never been done before, we listed several hundred purely hunting and sporting weapons that were protected under this law. And Senator Feinstein went to work and Chuck Schumer went to work. And so Chuck called me, and he said, Well, Mr. President, we really need your help. And I said, I'd be happy to lose in this cause, but do not be too sure that we cannot make it. But I wish I could tell you all the stories that produced that 216-to-214 vote victory. One of the clearer reasons was that a conservative Republican from Illinois who is very much respected among his party members, Henry Hyde, was undecided when Dianne Feinstein sent him a big, fat briefing book which included a list of the assault weapons shootings in Illinois since 1991. Henry Hyde stunned the entire Congress by announcing that he had changed his position, he was going to vote for the ban. And he credited Dianne Feinstein for providing him with convincing information. First one, then another person would announce for the bill. A Congressman from Michigan in a hunting area, who had never in 20 years in Congress, never cast one vote against the NRA , Two Democrats from difficult constituencies, one of whom was an ex-police officer, changed their vote walking down the aisle to cast their ballot, people knowing they were putting their careers at risk because they grew weary of the shouting and pushing and the division and the rhetoric and they wished something to happen.


And in doing that, they ennobled the whole public enterprise again. They made us all believe that, yes, we can, together, make a difference. I ran for President, as I told those young people at UCLA today, because I thought my generation did not finish its work for America, because I did not want to see my daughter grow up to be part of the first generation of Americans to do worse than their parents in a country that was coming apart when it ought to be coming together, because I always felt that we could restore the purpose of America and the promise of America if we committed ourselves together to create opportunity, to insist upon responsibility from our citizens, and to reestablish the common bonds of community in this country. You know, she is been criticized lately on the television for voting for our economic plan last year. Let me tell you why that was such a tough vote. It was such a tough vote because in Washington for so long we had heard nothing but hot air rhetoric instead of reality about what it took to get the deficit down. One is to raise taxes; the other is to cut spending; the third is to grow the economy. We did all three with that economic program. We will have, when the Congress passes this year's budget, 3 years of deficit reduction in a row for the first time since Harry Truman was President of the United States of America. At the end of 5 years, we will have reduced the size of the Federal Government to a point where it is below 2 million people for the first time since John Kennedy was President. And all the savings will be put into a trust fund to pay for the crime bill to make our streets safer. That is what we have been doing in Washington. Yes, Senator Feinstein voted for the bill, and so did Senator Boxer. And I guess you could say if either one of them had not , we would not have had it. a lot of rhetoric, no reduction in the deficit, no reduction in interest rates, no growth in the economy. But people would still be able to make speeches. You have to decide whether you want real progress and tough decisions made or more of what you had before. It was not very good for the California economy, and we are beginning to turn that around. You know, one of the things we have to decide is what standard we are going to require in our public discourse.


I know when I see an advertisement running against a Senator like Dianne Feinstein, saying that this program was just a tax billwell, let me tell you, You need to know that 100 percent of that money, 100 percent of it, went to bringing the deficit down. You also need to know that 2 million of your fellow citizens actually got an income tax cut, 15 percent of the Californians. Because they are low-wage workers with children who are hovering just above the poverty line, and we want to encourage them to stay in the work force instead of going on welfare. Ninety percent of the small businesses in this country qualified for tax cuts under the bill. California was helped by the capital gains tax for investments in new enterprises, by the research and experimentation tax credit, bynow because your college costs have gone upthe availability of lower cost college loans with longer repayment terms. That is what was in that economic program that Dianne Feinstein voted for that had the most deficit reduction in history. I do not think it is fair to characterize it as a tax bill, and I do not think it furthers the public debate. All it does is further the present state of high rhetoric and division. I made a remark a few moments ago about the publicity about Bill Bennett's book. Some of you probably have not read it, but it basically quotes other people on virtues. You cannot run a democracy without an addiction to truth and to fairness. What Dianne Feinstein deserves is truth and fairness. If she gets it, she will be overwhelmingly reelected. Senator Feinstein talked a little about breaking gridlock. That is one of the things I was hired to do. It took 7 years to pass the Family and Medical Leave Act, 7 years to pass the Brady bill, 5 years to get a crime bill. That is how long it takes to get things done in Washington. It is taken us about a year to 15 months to get a lot of these things done. We are turning these things around. I'd also like to say that Dianne Feinstein is one of the most effective lobbyists of anybody in Congress. I said todaylobbying the President, that isI said today when she and Barbara Boxer come after me at the same time, it is sort of like Mutt and Jeff, you know. And it is likeI feel almost as if they have got this gigantic fingernail file that they are putting on my head and rubbing it, you know.


I mean, Just Say Yes, that is what they want me to do. You do not know how I have suffered from this. It is literally true that no Member of the Senate has called me more persuasively, more frequently for projects that would create jobs, deal with the crime problem, or deal with the immigration problem in a responsible way than Dianne Feinstein, nobody in the Congress. She is helped me to change the whole approach of the national bureaucracy on defense conversion and base closings so that we can turn closed bases into economic oases for the 21st century. She has helped me to pass a crime bill that has not just this assault weapons ban but a bill to provide 100,000 more police officers for our streets, not only to catch criminals but to keep crime from happening by working with the children and the neighbors and the people in the community; that has not only tougher punishment with the three strikes and you are out law but also more prevention to give our kids something to say yes to and a chance to turn away from a life of violence and to turn away from resolving their differences in a destructive way toward finding constructive ways of dealing with problems and frustrations and anger. This is a very important piece of legislation. You heard Sally talk about the California Desert Protection Act. That also has been bottled up for 7 years. And after she came to the Senate, it passed 69 to 29. You wonder what it was doing for the last 7 years. On this immigration issue, you are going to hear a lot about it during this campaign, and you will probably hear the incumbent Governor putting a lot of pressure on me to do more. I do not mind that. I do not think the States have been treated fairly who have had large immigration problems, not just California, but Florida and New York and New Jersey and other States. But I will tell you this, in the last year we got more money for California in education, health care, and border patrol officers dealing with the cost of immigration than had been the case in the previous 4 years. We are moving in the right direction, thanks to the fact that Dianne Feinstein has taken a responsible, constructive approach, not just a rhetorical, pressure-oriented approach. She is doing something that makes sense, that will actually make a dent in this problem. And she ought to be rewarded for it.


So I say to you, this Senator, in a remarkably short period of time, has established herself as a national leader on the economy, on crime, on the environment, on immigration. That is an amazing record in no more time than she is been there. And she is had the courage to challenge her colleagues and her President to produce, to lower our guards, to trust each other, to talk through these problems. One of the things that I felt very strongly, having been a Governor, was something I know Dianne felt, having been a mayor, and that is that most of our problems that we face now as a country and as a people, do not fall easily within the past labels of partisanship. You know, I will just tell you a story that just tore my heart out. Last week I was on my way to what I thought would be a wonderful day in Indianapolis to dedicate a site for a statue honoring Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy on the site where Robert Kennedy spoke in Indianapolis on April 4, 1968, the night Martin Luther King was killed. And some of you may remember that magnificent speech which calmed the crowds in Indianapolis and made it one of the major cities in America where there was not a riot after Dr. King's assassination. And Ethel Kennedy went with me, and two of Martin Luther King's sons went with me. And they had just come back from South Africa. And it is a wonderful thing, this statue's going to be made out of metal melted down from guns turned in by gun buy-back programs sponsored by the Indiana Pacers. And I picked up my notes and read yet another story of another human tragedy. A 13-year-old boy in Greenbelt, Maryland, right outside Washington, had just won a scholarship to a prestigious school, standing on a street corner waiting for a bus, shot dead when he got caught in the crossfire between two groups of warring youngsters, neither of whom knew him or gave a rip about him. He just happened to be in the way.


Now, when I hear that story, or when I get yet another letter from somebody telling me they can never change jobs because they have got a child with a terrible illness and their preexisting condition will not allow any other employer to give them health insurance, or when somebody talks to me like they did in San Bernardino today about whether there are going to be enough jobs for their children there after the base closings, it just seems to me that those are the things that our public discourse ought to be concentrated on. When I looked at those kids at UCLA today, that is what I thought. You know, in this country todayit's going to be a great test for Willie Brown with his new talk showmost peopleI'm serious, I am serioushe's a delightful man with a wonderful personality, he will pull it off. But the truth is that most people who talk sense and try to bring out the best in folks today are not great commercial successes. If you want to immediately become a popular culture figure, just bad-mouth somebody; they will give you a talk show. You think about it. We have to fight against that. If you think about what the Kennedys meant to us a generation ago, they were able to do that because we had inside a willingness, a willing heart, a listening ear, a willingness to be summoned to higher purposes, a willingness to believe that we could come together, a willingness to believe that we could make a difference. You all still have that here. You can feel it here tonight. Those kids at UCLA62 percent of the student body now minority students, they are in the majority, just as they will be in many States within a very few yearsyou could feel it there. What we owe to our country is to change the heart of the country. We just simply cannot be, with all these challenges before us, all of which, by the way, can be met with sufficient effort and thought and constancy, we cannot afford to be divided, diverted, distracted. We have to stop shouting at each other and start talking with each other. And we surely have to make a beginning by retaining in public life those people who have devoted themselves to actually doing something that makes a difference. You will rarely find anybody who has served in the United States Senate for 6 or 12 years who has been involved in so many things that make a difference as has Dianne Feinstein in her very short tenure there.


We welcome all of you to this room tonight to honor the President of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Dwight Eisenhower, whose husband was President of the United States when the Congo was born--she came from Gettysburg and wanted to be here for this dinner tonight--and Justice Thurgood Marshall, who has had a very difficult time over these last few months in the hospital, but who has fully recovered and who attends his first White House dinner since that time. We are very happy to have him here. President, since I came into office over 18 months ago, you are the youngest head of state to be honored in this room, and you represent the youngest nation. But though you are a young man and you come from a young nation, there are things we can learn from you. Tomorrow I have a meeting scheduled with my Cabinet on the budget. I find in studying your administration that you not only have a balanced budget but a favorable balance of trade, and I'd like to know your secret before our meeting with the Cabinet. This morning when I welcomed you on the South Lawn, I told our Americans listening on television that the Congo was a good investment. I would like to tell this very special group in this room why I consider the Democratic Republic of the Congo a good investment. I could say it was a good investment because it is one of the richest countries in the world in terms of natural resources. But it has far more than that. It has, also, people who are able to develop that wealth if given the chance to do so. In my visit to your country in 1967, I was impressed, of course, by my meeting with you and other government leaders. But I was impressed, too, when I visited a shipyard and the university and a factory and walked over the streets of Kinshasa, and I saw the people, working hard, strong, vigorous, vital and very proud-proud of their country, and with great dignity. And when we combine rich natural resources with a strong, vigorous people, and a leader who is able to provide the stability and the vision for progress for that country, then that country is a good investment, a good investment for its own people or for others who may desire to participate in its growth. I am sure that as we look back over the 10 years of the history of this country, we think of how time has capsuled in this century.

Toasts of the President and President Mobutu of the Democratic Republic of the Congo


We think of the fact, as we sit in this room with the great picture of Abraham Lincoln, the portrait, overlooking the room, that a war between our States occurred 100 years ago, and 100 years, virtually, after we were founded. In 10 years the Congo was born, survived a civil war, and now is a strong, effective, and progressive leader in the exciting new continent, the new Continent of Africa. An enormous amount of the credit for that development goes to its leaders and particularly to our honored guest tonight. I know that all Americans, as they think of the Congo, know that the ENTITY has often referred to his country as being the heart of Africa. I think all of us at this table tonight would speak from our hearts to the heart of Africa when we raise our glasses to the health of the ENTITY of the Congo and Mrs. Mobutu. President Mobutu responded in French. President, Mrs. Nixon, ladies and gentlemen, distinguished guests: I followed very closely your brilliant presentation, Mr. President. And now I should like to express on behalf of my wife and my delegation and in the name of my people-what I should like to say here tonight, Mr. ENTITY, publicly, is, first of all, all our thanks to your country for everything that you have done for my country for more than the last 10 years. This morning in response to your kind words of welcome, and at the State Department in response to Secretary Rogers' toast, I said this very forcefully, that in coming here I was bringing the message of gratitude and friendship to the American people, and I said to Secretary Rogers that we have a saying in the Congo that it is in adversity that you know your friends. My country, beset with problems and difficulties from 1960 to 1965, my country had added a word to the international vocabulary. But fortunately, the American people, with all its succeeding ENTITYs since ENTITY Kennedy, ENTITY Johnson, and yourself, Mr. ENTITY, was never discouraged and continued to follow the same consistent line of confidence in my country and today we witness the crowning moment of this task of confidence. The Congo, thanks to your Government and to the people of the United States, stands up and is an object, if not of envy, of pride for all its friends and particularly for the United States.


I should like to say that my official visit here has as its central purpose to say thank you with all our hearts for all you have done and for all you will be doing to assist us in our economic and financial recovery in the heart of Africa. Since I have had the opportunity to speak here tonight, I must express publicly that we are setting an excellent example of cooperation between an industrialized country and a developing country. We are the living demonstration in concrete terms--the relations between the United States and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are a demonstration of what has happened because you have helped us, and we are showing proof that this aid was not wasted, that we have used diligently the aid given to us for our recovery, for our march towards progress. I am sure, Mr. ENTITY, that your voice will be heard by the Americans to whom you have said that the Congo is a good investment. This means for American investors, particularly of the private sector, that our recovery has been effective; that we have political stability, order, peace, and calm in the Congo; that the Congolese people is cured from its growing pains; that a people without a leader has become a people with discipline, work, and creative energy. You have helped us launch the Zaire operation 1 which has succeeded. Our country, which was the sick child of Africa, now sets an example for all the countries of the developing world of what can happen with will, with determination, and this is a marvelous example we can show to the whole world. ENTITY, you were speaking of what the American investors value most. What they want in a young country is the stability, and that we have; resources, and that we have also. But even more than our investment code which guarantees these investments, there is the fact that neither in our philosophical doctrine nor in our economic concept is there room for the concept of nationalization. We respect private ownership and we see great profits to be derived from this policy. Confusion in the early stages of our history was taken advantage of to make people believe, and to make particularly American investors believe, that we would nationalize, but this is not true. There is the unfortunate case of Union Miniere, 2 which is often cited. I do not want to go into past history, but Bossuet has said, The past can set an example for what we should do in the future.


I really appreciate the chance to come to the Limerick Generating Station. I am glad to see it in action. More importantly, I was glad to see the people working here, glad to meet them, glad to get to know them. I appreciate their strong dedication to safety. I appreciate their dedication to the consumers you serve. This plant serves 2 million homes in the area, and it does so in a way that does not require us to pollute the air. It is a perfect example of how we can grow our economy and protect our environment at the same time. I thank John Rowe for introducing me, and thanks for coming over from Chicago. I want to thank Chris Crane. I want to thank Ron DeGregorio. I want to thank the mayor, Sharon Valentine-Thomas, of the Borough of Pottstown. I want to thank all the folks from the local government sorry about clogging the neighborhoods coming through, but thanks. I want to talk about how the United States of America can continue to be the economic leader of the world. First of all, I think it is important that we are the economic leader of the world, because when you are the leader, it helps the folks who live in your country. See, it matters if we are on the cutting edge of change. It matters to people working every day in America if we are creating strong economic growth. Today, we are creating strong economic growth. I mean, this economy of ours is moving forward with a full head of steam fifth year in a row of uninterrupted growth Our economy grew faster than any other major industrialized nation in the world. We added 5.2 million new jobs since August of 2003. A productive society will yield a higher standard of living for our people. Hourly compensation grew at an annual rate of 5.7 percent in the first quarter of this year. Our workers are taking bigger home bigger paychecks. The standard of living is on the rise. After-tax income is up. And the fundamental question is, can you keep them that way, see? And there is a lot of competition in the world that creates some uncertainty and anxiety amongst our people. And the temptation for some is to say, Well, we cannot compete anymore so let us protect ourselves and let us withdraw; let us become isolationists. I think that would be a wrong approach by our country. See, we ought not to fear the future; we ought to shape the future.

Remarks on Energy in Pottstown, Pennsylvania


We ought to be confident in our ability to be able to compete and to remain the most innovative country in the world. First, if we want to be the economic leader in the world so our people can prosper, we need to keep taxes low. We need to be able to be a society that says, you get to earn more of that which you earn. As you might recall, we went through a pretty tough time in this country over the past 5 years. We had a recession, corporate scandals, a stock market correction, a attack on our country. We went to war to defend ourselves; we have had high energy prices; and we had natural disasters. And yet this economy of ours is strong. And I believe the reason why is, is because of the tax cuts we passed in Washington, DC. We believe that if you have more money in your pocket to save, spend, or invest, the economy grows. And so one way to make sure that we are the economic leader in the world is to make sure the tax cuts we passed are permanent. Now, people say, Well, if you make the tax cuts permanent, you cannot balance the budget. I have been there long enough to be able to give you an accurate report. Do not believe it when they say they are going to raise your taxes to balance the budget. They are going to raise your taxes and figure out new ways to spend the money. The best way to balance the budget is to keep progrowth economic policies in place. And, by the way, last year, because our economy was growing, we generated $100 billion more for the Treasury than we thought. And this year, because of the economy growing strong, we are generating better rates than we did last year. And so the best way to balance the budget is to keep growing the economy so we collect more tax revenues and be wise about spending your money. See, in Washington, everything sounds good there; every program sounds fantastic. But Government, in order to be wise about spending your money, has got to learn to set priorities. So long as we have a soldier in harm's way, he or she will have what it takes to achieve victory and secure America. We are on our way to cutting the deficit in half by 2009. Congress is now debating a supplemental bill. It is money to help fund our troops in Iraq, as well as helping the victims in Katrina.


And I have made it very clear that I intend to participate with them in keeping the spending down. And if they exceed the $92.2 billion request, plus monies for avian flu, I am going to veto the bill. See, that is one way you keep fiscal discipline in Washington, DC. We will be competitive if we keep taxes low and be wise about how we spend your money. We will be competitive, by the way, if we are smart about improving education for our people. See, this is a global economy, whether people like it or not. And the jobs of the 21st century will be either here in America or wherever the workforce is trained to fill those jobs. And therefore, it is important for us to make sure we educate our children early and emphasize math and science so our kids have got the skills necessary to fill those jobs. We changed how we view public education in Washington. We passed the No Child Left Behind Act, see. Are you meeting objectives, for example? If you set a goal, are you meeting those goals? How about every child learning to read at grade level by the third grade? That did not seem like an unrealistic goal to me. As a matter of fact, it was a necessary goal. And then we said to the States, you measure. We are going to get you some money, but you measure to show us whether or not we are meeting the goal. And if you are not meeting the goal, figure out why. See, you cannot solve a problem unless you diagnose the problem. And so the No Child Left Behind Act basically says, we are going to diagnose problems early and solve them, before it is too late. This business about shuffling kids through the school through our schools, based upon age, did not work. And so the No Child Left Behind Act says, we are going to measure early, and we are going to help children who have fallen behind in reading early, and then we are going to extend that to math. See, one of the interesting things is because we measure, we know that we are doing fine in math in the eighth grade. But children get to high school relative to other countries, we are not doing fine in math. And we better do something about it now if we want to be the economic leader of the world. So we have got a plan to, one, make sure the same standards applied to reading for early grades are applied to math.


If we measure in the eighth grade or ninth grade and you are falling behind, you are going to get extra help. I bet I am looking at some folks out here who took AP when they were in high school. AP means high standards. But we do not have enough teachers around the country to teach AP, so we have got a plan to train 70,000 Advanced Placement teachers to keep raising those standards. We want to have 30,000 adjunct professors in our classrooms in high school and junior sometimes it is not cool to be involved with science and yet it is cool. And we need people who are on the frontlines of science explaining that. I went to a school in Maryland the other day, and there was a NASA scientist there, explaining to junior high kids why the sciences matter and why it is fun to be in science. We are going to make sure our Pell grants which, by the way, have expanded by a million kids since I have been the President continue to have incentives in there for children to take rigorous academics coming out of high school and the first 2 years of college, and then if they maintain a 3.0 average or are taking math, science, or critical language, there is an additional $4,000 on top of their Pell grant. In other words, this is an effort to make sure that we have a workforce that can compete in a global economy so we remain the economic leader of the world. I want to talk about energy, see. If we do not get it right in energy, we can have the most educated workforce in the world, but we are not going to be able to compete. We can have the lowest taxes in the world, the least regulations, the fewest lawsuits, but if we have not done something about our energy situation, we are not going to be able to compete in the world. And so that is why I have come to this important powerplant, to talk about how the United States can have a diversified energy policy that makes us less dependent on foreign sources of oil and more dependent on renewable sources of energy. Now, one of the things I want to start off by telling the telling you all, and I hope others are listening, is that over the past 30 years, our economy has grown three times faster than our energy consumption. In other words, we are becoming more technologically advanced. And during that same period of time, we created more than 55 million jobs while cutting air pollution by 50 percent.


So what I believe the American people should understand is that we can put policies in place that encourage economic growth so you have got a better standard of living and, at the same time, become less dependent on energy from overseas and protect the environment. So what do we need to do? Well, the first thing we got to do is understand that we have got to change our driving habits over time. You have seen the price of gasoline going up. One of the reasons why your price of gasoline is going up is because demand for oil is increasing in places like India and China, and the supply for oil is not meeting that demand. And the key ingredient for gasoline is crude oil. So when the Chinese economy is growing or the Indian economy is growing, and that demand is going up, so is your price at the pump. One way to make sure the price at the pump does not go up as global demand increases for hydrocarbons is to figure out how to drive our cars with different kinds of fuels, such as ethanol. One of the really interesting developments that is taking place now in America is the use of corn-based ethanol pretty cool deal, is not it, for the President to be able to say, you know, we are growing a lot of corn and we are less dependent on foreign sources of oil. It is coming particularly in the Midwest right now, there is a lot of ethanol pumps and plants being developed there to manufacture ethanol from corn. We have got to do more, though, if we are going to become less dependent on foreign sources of oil, when it comes to ethanol. And so we are spending a lot of your money to develop technologies that will enable us to be able to manufacture ethanol from wood chips or switchgrass. I said, Well, it is grass that looks like a switch that grows in dry country. In other words, there is all kinds of opportunities to manufacture ethanol, and we are exploring ways to do so. America has always been on the leading edge of technology and research and development, and here is an area where we have got to stay on the leading edge of change. Another way to help reduce our use of gasoline is through hybrid vehicles. They are coming; they are coming on the market. As a matter of fact, the energy bill I signed actually will pay you give you a tax credit if you buy a hybrid. We are trying to stimulate demand through the Tax Code. It makes sense.


But there is going to be an additional breakthrough or additional breakthroughs when it comes to hybrid vehicles, starting with the development of a battery that will enable you to drive your first 40 miles on electricity. And the Federal Government is very much involved in this research. We are spending your money, again, on research to help fund breakthroughs for battery technologies that will enable you to drive a plug-in hybrid battery. And, oh, by the way, on ethanol, just one thing I forgot to tell you is that there are 5 million flex-fuel vehicles on the road today. Flex-fuel means you can either have gasoline or ethanol or a combination of the two. You have probably got one and you do not even know it. The technology the barrier to change is not the automobile; it is the ability to make the fuel in quantities economic quantities so we can get them to you at the pump. And same with hybrid batteries; they are coming. Hybrid, plug-in hybrid vehicles with new batteries, they are coming your way. And one of the reasons why is because the Government has entered into research partnerships with the private sector to accelerate these technologies, all aimed at making us less dependent on oil. A third way to help this country remain an economic leader when it comes to the cars you drive is hydrogen. We spend about a over a billion dollars of research to bring hydrogen to the marketplace. One fellow reminded me, wisely, it costs it takes quite a bit of power to make hydrogen. An interesting way to make hydrogen on an economic basis would be through nuclear power, see. But we are spending money and time and effort, all aimed at making sure that the automobiles of the future will require less crude oil. And we are close to some significant breakthroughs. It is going to take time to move away from the hydrocarbon economy to the hydrogen economy, and in the meantime, it seems like it makes sense to me to do something about the refinery capacity of the United States. Like, if you are worried about the price of gasoline you do not like it when your price got over $3 and I do not blame you you might want to ask the question, how come the Government is not working hard to expand refinery capacity so that there is more gasoline? If you have more gasoline on the market relative to demand, guess what it takes the pressure off price. We have not built a new refinery in the United States since the 1970s. You are kind of used to that here in this industry.


And so we got to cut through all that business. If we are serious about helping our consumers and getting more gasoline to the market, we got to have regulatory relief. I suggested to Congress that we put new refineries on abandoned military facilities. It seemed to make sense to me. And so we need to be wise about these policies so that we can say to the American people, we are on our way out of the hydrocarbon era. But in the meantime, let us be thoughtful of the consumers here in the United States. We are also going to need a lot of electricity in the future. Electricity demand is projected to increase by nearly 50 percent over the next 25 years. And we better be wise about how we implement a strategy to meet that demand; otherwise, we are not going to be the economic leader; otherwise, our people are not going to be having the good jobs that we want them to have; otherwise, your children and my children, our grandchildren are not going to have the bright, hopeful America that we want for them. coal it is about 50 percent; nuclear power about 20 percent; natural gas 18 percent; and then other renewable sources like hydroelectric, solar, and wind power. We got about 240 years at current rates of consumption. It is a valuable asset for the United States. The problem is, coal is not when you burn it, it is not clean. It does not meet our standards. It is not it does not enable us to say, you can grow your economy and, at the same time, protect the environment like we want. And so we are developing clean coal technology. We are spending over $2 billion in a 10-year period to be able to say to the American people that we are using the money wisely to determine whether or not we can have zero-emissions coal-fired powerplants. It is in our interests that we do that. It makes sense. About 2012, under the FutureGen Initiative, we think we will build the first powerplant to run on coal and remove virtually all pollutants. By the way, we can explore for natural gas in environmentally friendly ways. And we ought to be exploring for natural gas in the ANWR, as well as off the gulf coast of the United States. by the way, natural gas, as you know, is not just used for power. It is used for fertilizers, a variety of uses.