REMARKS BY GOVERNOR BILL CLINTON WSB-TV Town Hall Meeting Atlanta, GA June 21, 1992

Article 4400 of alt.politics.clinton:

Path: bilver!tous!peora!masscomp!usenet.coe.montana.edu!caen!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!uicvm.uic.edu!u45301

Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton

Subject: CLINTON TEXT: TOWN HALL MTG WSB-TV (ATLANTA)

Supersedes: <92228.210814U45301@uicvm.uic.edu>

Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago

Date: Monday, 17 Aug 1992 17:13:18 CDT

From: Mary Jacobs <U45301@uicvm.uic.edu>

Message-ID: <92230.171319U45301@uicvm.uic.edu>

Lines: 828

SEND COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS INFORMATION TO THE

CLINTON/GORE CAMPAIGN AT 75300.3115@COMPUSERVE.COM

(This information is posted for public education purposes.  It does

not necessarily represent the views of The University.)

========================================================================

                REMARKS BY GOVERNOR BILL CLINTON

                    WSB-TV Town Hall Meeting

                           Atlanta, GA

                          June 21, 1992

HI, I'M SUE WHITNEY WITH THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF GEORGIA,

AND WE'RE VERY CONCERNED WITH THE GROWING DISPARITY BETWEEN THE

VERY RICH AND THE VERY POOR, THE DWINDLING MIDDLE CLASS, THE FACT

THAT THE COMING ON LINE JOBS ARE LOW LEVEL INCOME JOBS AND WHAT

IS YOUR SOLUTION?

If there were a reason, we'd be doing it.  But there is a

solution to it.  The fundamental problem is that government has

failed most people.  Government by both parties in Washington has

failed most people.  For a dozen years now we've been governed by

a theory that said if you just gave a little bit more inequality,

more money to people at the top and the richest corporations,

that they would invest and create jobs.  It hasn't worked.  It

just didn't work.  And what we need is a program that program

that puts our people first again.  Other countries, Germany and

Japan and many other nations that are growing faster than we are,

put their people first.  What does that mean?  That means you

have to invest more in jobs.  Private investment which creates

jobs in the private sector, that's the overwhelming thing.  We

need more incentives for that.  Public investment, we need to

spend more of your tax money investing in roads, and streets, and

bridges, and high speed rail, and new aircraft and an economy for

the twenty-first century.

It means education and training.  We ought to give this country a

world class education system.  Everybody knows we're not doing it

now.

And it means affordable health care for all Americans.  Unless we

control the cost of health care, we can't bring the government

deficit under control, and we can't bring productivity back to

our manufacturing sector.  So jobs, education, and health care.

Those are the key.

YOU'RE UNVEILING AN ECONOMIC PLAN, ACTUALLY YOU'VE GIVEN IT OUT

TODAY.  GIVE US AT LEAST ONE HIGHLIGHT OF IT.

The economic plan that I released today is an outgrowth of what I

learned in the primaries, building on the earlier plan that I

released in New Hampshire.  It would have the biggest plug of

investment since World War II.  An investment tax credit and

other incentives for industry to put new plant and equipment and

jobs in America -- no more incentives to move our jobs overseas.

Fifty billion dollars a year in jobs, education, and training and

other investments for working families in America today to help

people raise their children and educate them better, to help the

work force be better educated and trained, to control health care

costs, and to build an economy for the 21st century.  It's a very

exciting plan.  I hope all of you will get copies of it, and read

it, and let me know what you think.

I'M (NAME UNCLEAR), A RETIRED SCHOOL TEACHER FROM THE DEKALB

COUNTY SCHOOL SYSTEM.  I WOULD LIKE TO ASK GOVERNOR CLINTON, WHY

DO YOU FAVOR THE DEATH PENALTY?

I favor the death penalty in certain circumstances because I

think it is an appropriate penalty for the severity of the crime

involved, and because I think it can be a deterrent under certain

circumstances.  In my state, since I've been governor, we've had

four executions, three of them were people who killed more than

one person deliberately, and two of the four killed police

officers in the line of duty.  Under those circumstances, I think

it's appropriate.

HI GOVERNOR.  I WANT TO KNOW, IF YOU'RE ELECTED PRESIDENT, HOW

YOU WILL ENSURE THAT THE 43 MILLION AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES

CAN ATTAIN HEALTH CARE COVERAGE?  THOUGH WE ARE OTHERWISE

HEALTHY, THOSE OF US WHO CAN'T WALK CAN'T QUALIFY FOR HEALTH CARE

COVERAGE.

That's an important question.  And let me give you two answers.

I think there are two different problems.  First, for basic

health coverage, under the health care plan that I will urge the

Congress to adopt, we will require insurance companies to go to

broad based community ratings and put all citizens in a given

geographic area in a certain rating pool so disabled people won't

be disadvantaged.  No one will be able to be turned down and no

one will ever be able to lose their health care if they change

jobs.  So there will be a requirement for basic, overall

coverage.  And we'll do it and actually lower the unit cost of

health care in the country.  America has the most expensive

health insurance system in the world because we haven't required

the insurance companies to do what they do in other countries.

The second thing we need to do is to establish a long term care

system to allow disabled people to buy in based on their ability

to pay so if they need a little help at home, for example, they

can get that based on their ability to pay.  You would have to

pay something for that if you needed it, but you wouldn't ever

have to spend yourself in the poorhouse in going to a nursing

home just to get some health care.  That's what happens all too

often today.

GOVERNOR CLINTON, WITH ALL THE NEGATIVE PUBLICITY BETWEEN THE

COMMUNITY AND THE POLICE LATELY, HOW DO YOU PLAN TO ASSIST THE

LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY TO MAKE THEIR JOBS MORE EFFECTIVE?

Jerry, I think that if we assist the law enforcement community in

helping them be more effective, their public esteem will rise

too.  I'm glad you're concerned about it.  Before I was Governor,

I was Attorney General.  I've been working with law enforcement

officers for nearly fifteen years now.  And I have some ideas I

think will help.  Let me just give you one or two.

First of all, you've got to realize what kind of pressures these

law enforcement folks are under.  Thirty years ago, there were

three policemen for every serious crime reported; today there are

three crimes for every policeman.  One of the things we need is

just more police.  And we need them to work in certain set

communities again, especially in these big cities.  They need to

be in the same neighborhoods day in and day out, making friends

with their neighbors, working with them, helping to solve crimes.

So I have offered two proposals to get more police back in the

communities.  One of them I got from your senator, Sam Nunn.  And

that is to let military people who are going to be mustered out

because of defense cuts get emergency certification to be trained

as law enforcement officials, put out to work in law enforcement,

and able to earn against their military retirement while they're

doing it.  The other is to let young who borrow money from the

government to go to college retrained as law enforcement

officials, and then work off their college loans by working in

law enforcement.  That will raise the overall social esteem of

law enforcement, I think.  It will also help police agencies do a

better job.  I feel very strongly that these two things should be

done.

THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION SEEMS TO HAVE HAD A VERY INDIFFERENT

APPROACH TO SOLVING THE PROBLEM OF THE SPREAD OF HIV IN THE

UNITED STATES. WHAT WILL YOU DO, IF YOU'RE ELECTED PRESIDENT,

ABOUT THIS PANDEMIC THAT IS OCCURRING.

Well, first let me tell you that one of the things I've learned a

lot more about since I've been running for president is AIDS.

Over a quarter of a million HIV positive people in New York, over

a million in the United States, over a 140,000 people have died.

This is a problem for every American, spreading into different

populations now.  It's no longer just a sexually transmitted

disease among gay and lesbian people.  It is going into the

heterosexual population and I tell you that when confront the

dimensions of it, it's staggering.  All the costs savings we hope

to make in health care could be exploded unless we get ahead of

the curve on AIDS.  I think there ought to be one person put in

charge of it, a czar to lead a war on AIDS, cut through all the

Federal bureaucracy.  I think we ought to spend more on education

and treatment and training.  And I think we ought to go into

these schools with aggressive programs to tell these kids how to

stay alive.  I know that's controversial, but if we don't do it

we're going to have an unmanageable problem in the years ahead.

There has been an AIDS commission, you may know about it.  Magic

Johnson was appointed to it.  They've issued two fine reports

with a whole lot of recommendations.  Nobody's doing anything

about them.  So I want to put somebody in charge, take the

commission, take their recommendations and implement them, and

get ahead of the curve on this one.  We've got to drive down the

numbers of people being infected every year.

AS ONE WHO HAS BEEN UNEMPLOYED FOR OVER TEN MONTHS, I'D LIKE TO

KNOW TWO THINGS.  ONE, WHERE DOES UNEMPLOYMENT RANK ON YOUR

AGENDA?  AND WHAT DO YOU SPECIFICALLY PLAN TO DO TO LOWER THE

UNEMPLOYMENT RATE?

It ranks at the top.  If every American who wanted a job and was

willing to work had one.  And if Americans who worked harder got

more money instead of less, we wouldn't have half of the problems

we have today.  As governor, I have spent most of my time working

on getting and keeping decent jobs.  In my state, we had a

manufacturing job growth rate of ten times the national average,

partly because we worked at it really hard.  This country has no

national economic strategy.  Obviously the President doesn't find

jobs for individuals, but the President creates an economic

climate.

One of the reasons I got into this race is I was so angry that

year in and year out, America was the only major nation without

an economic plan.  What's the key to it.  Number one, you've got

to invest.  My plan calls for big incentives for business and

wealthy individuals to invest in this economy but no more

incentives to invest overseas.  Number two, I want to spend more

of your tax money that you give us investing in your future to

generate more jobs.  We can generate a lot of jobs directly and

indirectly by spending more on the things that other countries

spend more on--on rebuilding our road systems, our water systems,

our sewer systems, our rail systems.  I want to do that.

The third thing I want to do is to make sure that you have a

competitive government-business-education partnership.  That we

are educating and training people for the jobs of tomorrow and

that I'm not letting America be taken advantage of in research

and development and new technologies and in the trade war.  I

will meet the competition and America will win again if I get

elected President.

MR. GOVERNOR, FIVE YEARS AGO WHEN ROSS PEROT GAVE A ROUSING

SPEECH IN FRONT OF THE NATIONAL GOVERNOR'S ASSOCIATION YOU URGED

HIM TO RUN FOR THE PRESIDENCY.  SO GIVEN THAT HE IS RUNNING WELL

ON THE POLLS AND BOTH OF YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE COURSE FOR THIS

COUNTRY,  WOULD YOU CONSIDER BEING HIS RUNNING MATE AND DOING A

GREAT SERVICE FOR THIS COUNTRY?

No.  No, because I think I would be a better President than he

would.  I've worked on these problems for more than ten years.

Unlike Mr. Perot, I've not been part of the Washington

establishment, making deals, getting tax breaks, lobbying

Congress.  I've been out here trying to create jobs in a global

economy and educate people and move people from welfare to work

and do all these things that other politicians just talk about,

and I'm the only person running who's got a plan to do something

about the fix we're in.  So, I won the Democratic primaries.  I'm

the nominee of the Democratic Party.  It was an unusual thing.  I

didn't know if I could win because I told people all the way

through the election, this was not a Republican or Democratic

issue, that both parties had let us down in Washington.  But I

really believe that I should stay in this race because I can do a

better job of bringing America back and bringing America

together.

WHAT DID YOU SAY ABOUT ROSS PEROT FIVE YEARS AGO AND RUNNING FOR

PRESIDENT?

I don't know.  That's what he said I said.  He says a lot of

things I agree with.  But it's one thing to say something and

another thing to do something about it.  We can all identify with

the problems.  I woke up every day mad for years.  That's why I

got into this race.  I kept thinking, somebody will run and say,

both parties have let us down, we've got to change the direction

of the country, we've got invest again, we've got to compete

again.  And when nobody was really addressing that, that's why I

got in this race in the first place.  So I can't criticize him

when he's upset about what's going on.  But I know that I have

done more in the last ten years than anybody else who's run to

try to fix it and that's what I want to do as President.

GOVERNOR CLINTON, THE FEDERAL DEFICIT HAS SPIRALED UNDER A

DEMOCRAT CONGRESS.  HOW WILL A DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS AND A DEMOCRAT

PRESIDENT CURB AND REDUCE THE FEDERAL DEFICIT ESPECIALLY

CONSIDERING YOUR PLANS TO INCREASE SOCIAL PROGRAMS AND NOT REDUCE

ENTITLEMENTS?

Well, that's a very clever way that you said it.  But there were

Republican presidents in there who never once presented a

balanced budget.  Our deficit never exceeded $70 billion a year

until Ronald Reagan urged us to cut taxes and raise spending at

the same time.  Mr. Bush has never presented a balanced budget.

If the budgets of the last two Presidents had been adopted just

as they were recommended, our deficits would be even bigger than

they are today.

Under my plan we would cut the federal deficit by more than fifty

percent in the next four years.  How would we do it:  First, we

would take the defense cuts that are coming anyway and invest

more in the American economy to generate growth.  Second, we

would take on health care cost control--something neither the

President nor the Congress has been willing to do.  That's the

main focus of entitlements explosion in the deficit-- health care

cost explosion.

Third, we would ask the wealthy whose taxes were cut while their

incomes went up in the 1980's to pay their fair share.  Fourth, I

would adopt a vigorous spending cut program.  We would phase out

100,000 federal employees by attrition.  We would reform a lot of

the procurement practices in the Pentagon and other departments

of the federal government where we've got, among other things,

1.2 million canisters of nasal spray now, and I could give you a

lot of other examples, there are billions of dollars there.  I

would reduce the administrative costs of the federal government

by 3 percent a year.  I would cut the White House staff 25

percent and send a bill to the Congress to do the same thing with

their staffs.  We would shrink the unnecessary government, raise

taxes from those who owe their fair share, and invest more in the

country to get more growth.  That's how we control the deficit.

And my plan cuts it by well over 50 percent in just four years.

IF YOU WERE ELECTED PRESIDENT OF WHAT IS KNOWN AS THE WORLD'S

ONLY SUPER POWER, AND YET THERE'S SUCH A SENSE OF HELPLESSNESS,

OF RAGE, THAT EXISTS WITHIN OUR OWN COUNTRY.  WHAT WOULD YOU DO

AS PRESIDENT, GOV. CLINTON, TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF THE RAGE THAT

EXITS WITHIN US AND AMONG US.

I would try to tell the American people as President that we have

to live together again and we have to bring out the best in each

other again.  Our diversity is incredible--our racial, our

ethnic, our income diversity--and we're as divided now as we have

been in a long time.   I would say, we don't have a person to

waste, everybody counts in this country.  We've all got to be on

the same side.  I want to bring America back.  But before we can

bring America back we have to bring America together.  And I

would talk about it over and over and over again.  I would

appoint people who believed in human rights and equal opportunity

and the capacity of every man and woman and boy and girl in this

country to live up to their God given ability.  I would appoint

people who believe that we can win again and I would try to lift

the spirits of this country and bring them together.  I want

people to get up every day and think we're making progress again.

There is so much rage in this country because two things have

happened that are bad.  We have lost the idea of progress.  Most

people are working harder for less and they think that tomorrow

won't be better than today.  And we've lost the idea of

community.  We feel like we're coming apart when we ought to be

coming together.  I'd want to bring both those things back to

America.

(Brief exchange between commentator and questioner about Sister

Souljah remarks) WHAT COULD YOU DO MORE THAN RHETORIC TO REALLY

INSPIRE US AS A NATION TO BE (INAUDIBLE)...

You've got to give everybody something to do and you've got to

make them believe they can make a difference.  Look, when I said

what I did about those remarks that's the context in which I said

it.  It said, look, we've got to bring people together.  Look how

alienated some of our people are.  Look how angry they are.  And

then I mentioned those remarks. To say that I didn't agree with

them, but we had to do something about the rage and the anger.  I

think you've got to first of all, tell people they all matter and

you're going to give them all the chance to get an education and

have a job.  Secondly, you've got to challenge people to change,

and you've got to challenge people to help one another again.

Those corporate executives, I agree with you, a lot of them are

doing a good job and they are dying to get involved in solving

our problems. I'm going to give them a way to do that.  I'm going

to give them all a chance to participate in rebuilding America.

The President can't do it alone.  You've got to have a way to

galvanize, and organize, and mobilize other people.  That's what

this plan is all about.

Government works just fine if you're in the top one percent or if

you're in a big special interest group.  If you're an ordinary

person, whether you're a middle class person or a poor person, if

you're working for a living you're probably worse off now than

you were last year.  That's what's the matter.  We've got to make

the system work again.  I'll turn the system around, but the

people have to make it work too.

GOVERNOR CLINTON, MR. BUSH AND HIS ADMINISTRATION SEEMS TO BE

VERY PERSISTENT ON BALANCING HIS BUDGET ON THE BACK OF THE SENIOR

CITIZENS.  WHAT ARE YOUR PLANS FOR SOCIAL SECURITY FOR SENIOR

CITIZENS?

I'm going to protect Social Security.  I think it's a solemn

trust.  I think the people who paid into it deserve to draw out

of it.  Today the fund is very secure, in fact, it produces $70

billion in taxes more than we actually pay out in Social

Security.  If you elect me your President you won't have to worry

about your Social Security.  We will protect it, protect the

integrity of the fund.  It's one of the few things government's

done that's worked the way it was supposed to.

GOVERNOR CLINTON, IF YOU HAD BEEN PRESIDENT DURING THE RECENT

ENVIRONMENTAL CONFERENCE, HOW WOULD YOU HAVE HANDLED THE

PERCEIVED

LACK OF COOPERATIVE EFFORT THAT PRESIDENT BUSH EXHIBITED--WHAT

WOULD YOU HAVE DONE DIFFERENTLY?

I would have agreed with the Germans and the Japanese and the

other countries to sign the global warming treaty which would

have called on us to limit our ability to warm the environment--

our green house gas emissions. I think that was a good treaty and

I think we made a big mistake to gut it.  I would have signed the

agreement to protect the world's plant and animal species under

the circumstances that would have protected our bio-technology

industries in America which are very important.

In other words, I would have made America a leader in working

with these other industrial countries.  We are still under the

impression that if you help the environment it hurts the economy.

These other countries know that if you help the environment in

the right way it helps the economy.  Today in the United States,

foreign companies have 70% of the market for environmental

technologies to clean up our environment.  Down at Rio we were

being eaten alive be the foreign competition in environmental

technologies.  We need to change our policies and say we are

going to make protecting the environment good economics.  That

will be my policy as President.

OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS I HAVE SEEN TUITION INCREASE OVER

THIRTY-FIVE PER CENT. I CHOSE TO GO TO A HISTORICALLY BLACK

STATE-SUPPORTED UNIVERSITY. I AM JUST WONDERING ALONG WITH THAT

THIRTY-FIVE PER CENT INCREASE, I HAVE SEEN A DECREASE IN FACULTY

AS WELL AS A SLIGHT REDUCTION IN CLASS AVAILABILITY. I WAS

WONDERING AS PRESIDENT WHAT YOU COULD DO TO GIVE PERSONS SUCH AS

MYSELF THE AVAILABILITY TO GO TO THE SCHOOL OF THEIR CHOICE?

Thank you Dennis.  One of the most important parts of this plan

of mine that puts America first is a revolutionary new program

that which would combine the best of two of the best things

America ever did--the GI and the Peace Corps.  Under this

program, we would replace the present student loan program with a

National Trust Fund.  And anybody in America like you, without

regard to income, could borrow the money to go to college.  When

you are finished you have got to pay it back.  You have two

choices, you could pay back as a small percentage of your income

over time at tax time so you couldn't beat the bill. Or what I

would hope you would do is you could pay your college loan back

by going back to your home town or your home state and working

for two years in a domestic peace corps to rebuild America--be a

police officer, be a teacher, work in a drug program to keep kids

of drugs, help solve the problems of America--pay your student

loan off.  It would be the best we ever spent.  And it is funded

in this program of mine. I hope you will support because it can

make it possible for millions of people like you to get a good

education and make America stronger.

IN LIGHT OF THE RECENT ENVIRONMENTAL CONFERENCE IN RIO, WHAT

WOULD YOU DO TO RESTORE THE UNITED STATES' PUBLIC CREDIBILITY

WITH THE NATIONS CONCERNED WITH THE ENVIRONMENT?

Well, as I said a moment a go I think we should fight against

global warming.  Senator Al Gore of your neighboring state of

Tennessee has written a wonderful book about what is happening to

the environment.  In which he says that the warming of the planet

is a huge threat to America's future and the world's future.

Here at home what I try to do is to adopt first a new energy

policy.  Get us off our reliance on foreign oil which is very

hard on the environment.  And use more natural gas, use more

renewable resources like solar energy, and achieve international

standards of energy conservation and efficiency.  We could save

tens of billions of dollars for our economy just by improving our

energy efficiency.  In my budget we are going to cut our energy

bills almost a billion dollars a year in the federal government

alone just by energy efficiency.  So we'll have a new energy

policy, and again I say, we would say here's the big idea:  we're

going to make good environmental policy good for the economy.

We're going to create jobs.  If you look at the defense cuts, it

really breaks my heart to see all these defense workers put out

on the street.  They won the Cold War, now they're out in the

cold.  What should we have done with them?  When we reduce

defense, we should invest all that money.  Every bit of it in new

environmental technologies or other things that would be

important to the economy in the 21st Century.  We could make the

environment a big job generator for America, and that's what we

out to do.

GOV. CLINTON, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, INSTEAD OF USING OUT

TAXPAYERS MONEY TO FUND THE PRISON SYSTEM, WHY DON'T WE USE THAT

MONEY TO BETTER EDUCATE OUR YOUNG PEOPLE TO PREVENT THEM FROM

GOING TO PRISON IN THE FIRST PLACE?

We should.  We should.  Let me give you a couple of examples of

things I think we ought to do that would reduce the crime rate by

keeping more young people in the mainstream.  We ought to have

the opportunity for every child from a low income family to be in

a preschool program.  Where their parents can also learn to be

their children's first teacher.  We ought to have smaller classes

in the early grades.  We ought to have opportunities for young

people when they reach adolescence to work in the summer to get

to know successful adults.  And when they get in trouble the

first time, instead of sending them off to prison, they ought to

be in community based boot camps, where they can get military

discipline, education, and treatment for drug abuse or alcohol

abuse if they need it.  And the opportunity to get to know caring

adults.  You know, most kids who get in trouble did not have a

consistent, stable relationship with an adult who was both

successful in the community, and caring.  I want to fund the kind

of experimental community programs that I think we could take all

across this country and really make a difference.  You know,

President Carter is here working in Atlanta to try to do some of

these things, and I think that focusing on keeping our young

people in school and out of jail is about the most important

thing we can do to reduce the prison population.

AT WHOSE COST?

Well, we're spending the money now.  I mean if you look the

Georgia budget, the Arkansas budget, the New York budget, the

California budget, we're spending a fortune on prisons now.  What

I am trying to do at home, and what I want us to do nationwide,

is to begin to set aside more money to divert people from prison

in the first instance, keep them in school, and give them a

chance to do community service work.  We'd put some money in it

from the national government, some money would have to come at

the state and local level.

GOV. CLINTON, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO STAND HERE TODAY, AND PROMISE

THE MIDDLE CLASS THAT YOU WILL NOT RAISE TAXES IF YOU WERE

ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES?

I will not raise taxes on the middle class, in fact, I have a

proposal to provide some modest relief.  Look, in the 80's, and

in the last 12 years, you know what's happened if you're a

financial analyst.  Taxes on middle class people have gone up,

while their incomes went down.  Taxes have gone down on people

with incomes of roughly $200,000 a year and above, their taxes

have gone down, while their income has gone up.  So, under my

plan, what we do is to give middle class families a choice:  they

can take a rate reduction for four years, or they can take a

credit instead of a deduction for their children.  If they have

more children, they can take a children's tax credit, so we can

invest more money in our children by giving the money back to the

parents to invest in their children.  I don't plan to raise taxes

on middle class families.  I want to lower their income taxes,

and give them some money to raise their kids on.  I feel very

strongly about this.  This is an important part of investing in

America.  We've had for ten years now, really for more than ten

year, middle class people are working harder for less money.

More than two-thirds of the American people are worse off today

in real dollar terms than they were ten years ago.

YOU'VE DONE SOME ADJUSTING OF YOUR MIDDLE CLASS TAX BREAK PLAN.

WHY DID YOU FIRST SAY THERE WOULD BE, WHAT $500 OR SO TAX BREAK.

NOW YOU'RE TINKERING WITH IT A LITTLE BIT IN THIS NEW PLAN OF

YOURS. WHY?

Well, because I thinks it's important to make a real effort to

reduce the deficit, and to increase investment.  The main thing

middle class people need is a growing economy with good jobs.

You can't get that without investment, and you can't get that

without reducing the deficit.  On the other hand, most middle

class people really are paying taxes that are too high.  So, what

I tried to do is to take two ideas that I had, and combine them

into one, so that we cut the cost of the overall tax break, let

every person in the middle class income range, that is under

$80,000, will either get some rate reduction, or would get a tax

credit, instead of a tax deduction for their children.  I want to

focus on bonding and building families.  And this new tax change

does that.  It rewards families.  I might say that most of our

competitors in Europe, for example, have this kind of children's

allowance.  They recognize that the rearing of children is still

the most important work of any society.  So, that's what this

does.

I'M A TEACHER, AND I WORK WITH HEARING-IMPAIRED STUDENTS, AND

PRESENTLY I'M WORKING IN A SPECIAL ED PROGRAM THAT ALLOWS ME TO

WORK WITH A SMALLER STUDENT-TEACHER RATIO.  THIS DOES ALLOW ME TO

DO A LOT MORE WITH MY STUDENTS, AND GIVE THEM A LOT MORE

ATTENTION.  IS THERE ANY HOPE THAT IN THE FUTURE THAT YOU COULD

LOWER THE STUDENT-TEACHER RATIO IN REGULAR CLASSROOMS AS A MEANS

OF HELPING WITH THE EDUCATION SYSTEM?

Thank you for that question.  I hope we can, but as you know,

most of the money for public schools comes from the state and the

local level.  In our state, we've lowered the student-teacher

ratio to 20 children per class from kindergarten through third

grade.  And a recent study coming out of Tennessee said if we

could go down to 15 students we would dramatically increase the

learning of children who are educationally disadvantaged.  What I

have proposed to do is to increase funding through the Chapter 1

program to schools in a way that would be targeted toward smaller

classes in the early grades, at least.  With all the other

budgetary problems the federal government has, I think we'll be

lucky to do that, but I do believe we can do that.  We can give

the schools some incentives in return for additional money to

lower the class sizes in the early grades.  And you're absolutely

right.  There is no question that it would increase student

learning dramatically.  All the teachers with whom I've talked

over the years tell me that over and over and over again.  Thank

you for your question.

GOVERNOR CLINTON, OUR PRESIDENT IS ADVOCATING FEDERAL FUNDS FOR

PRIVATE SCHOOLS.  WHAT WILL YOU DO AS PRESIDENT TO SEE TO IT THAT

PUBLIC SCHOOLS ARE NOT ROBBED OF QUALITY EDUCATION, PARTICULARLY

URBAN SCHOOLS?

Well, I oppose the diversion of public funds to private schools.

I am the parent -- this is Father's Day, you know -- I am the

parent of a daughter who is a seventh-grade student in the Little

Rock, Arkansas public schools.  It's a majority minority school

district, but it's a good one, and I think she's getting a good

education there.  I believe in school choice if by that, we mean

giving parents and children more choices over the public schools

their children attend.  But I don't believe in private vouchers,

and letting people take already limited public funds into the

private school system.  We already spend less of our income on

public schools in America than many, many of our competitors do

in Japan and Germany, and other places, and I don't favor

reducing that further.  So I will oppose the private voucher

plan.

WHAT WILL YOU AND YOUR ADMINISTRATION DO TO CLEAN UP THE GENERAL

CLASSROOM, TO REINSTATE DISCIPLINE, AND TO RETURN EXPRESS

AUTHORITY TO OUR TEACHERS, AND TO GUARANTEE OUR TEACHERS THE

FREEDOM TO TEACH WITHOUT FEAR OF LAWSUITS, AND REMOVE DISRUPTIVE

AND OFTEN VIOLENT CHILDREN FROM THE CLASSROOMS OF OUR OWN, ON-

TASK CHILDREN?

As you can imagine, most of that has to be done school district

by school district and school by school.  But I tell you what I

will do, through the United States Department of Education and

through my office.  I will support giving principals and teachers

more authority, school by school, to run their schools, to

establish goals, to achieve them, and to make the decisions they

need to make.  For young people who are disruptive, I will

support the establishment of alternative school environments,

where they might learn better, and where they won't be able to

undermine the learning of other students.  And I will support the

national education goals which I worked hard to write in 1989

which, among other things, say that by the year 2000 we should do

our dead-level best to train every educator in America so that

all of our schools can be safe and disciplined and drug-free.

It's a question of leadership and community support, but the

President can speak out and can support proven strategies to get

that done, and I assure you I will.  Without discipline, learning

cannot occur.

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF YOU HAVE A PLAN FOR THE PRISON SYSTEM OF

OVERCROWDING PROBLEMS IN OUR PRISON SYSTEM?

I think the answer to the overcrowding in our prison system is

obviously either to build more prisons, or reduce the population

going in.  The only responsible and safe way to reduce the

population going in is to take non-violent offenders and let them

work in community boot camps.  And my budget, this plan I've been

talking about tonight, includes some seed money to help cities

and states establish these boot camps in the communities, so you

get people who aren't violent to do community service work and do

their education, and training, and treatment, and disciplinary

training, and at the same time you free up beds in the

penitentiary for the truly dangerous people that ought to be

behind bars.  There is also the possibility of more federal

prison-building which may take some of the pressure off of you,

but the main thing we've got to do is to provide alternatives for

the non-violent people so that the beds you have can be used to

keep the people who ought to be behind bars there without letting

them out too early.

I THINK THAT THE GREATEST LOSS IN THE LAST DECADE HAS BEEN OUR

SENSE OF COMMUNITY, WHO WE ARE AND ...(tape skips)... CLEARER

THAN IN THE HEALTH FIELD.  IN GEORGIA RIGHT NOW, ONE IN THREE-

QUARTER MILLION PEOPLE HAVE NO ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE SERVICES.

AT THE SAME TIME, WE ARE SPENDING MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER

NATION IN THE WORLD.  ALSO AT THE SAME TIME, ONE IN FOUR OF OUR

PRIMARY CARE INTERNAL MEDICINE DOCTORS HAVE LEFT THE CARE FIELD

TO GO DO SOMETHING ELSE BECAUSE THEY CAN'T MAKE IT WORK.  THE

PROBLEM ISN'T HOW MUCH WE'RE SPENDING; THE PROBLEM IS HOW WE'RE

SPENDING.  I'M INTERESTED IN WHAT YOU ANTICIPATE DOING IN TERMS

OF SYSTEMATIC REFORM SO THAT WE CAN GET A SYSTEM THAT'S

RESPONSIVE TO THE NEEDS OF OUR PEOPLE AND AT THE SAME TIME

DELIVERS CARE TO THE PEOPLE THAT SO DESPERATELY NEED IT.

First, doctor, let me say how much I respect you as a doctor for

saying that we're spending enough money, we're just spending it

wrong.  And if you look at where we're spending money, as

compared with other nations, we spend a lot more on insurance, we

spend a lot more on health care bureaucracy, we spend a lot more

on government regulations, we spend more on pharmaceuticals, we

spend more on extreme care and less on primary and preventive

care.  So under my plan, we would go after these areas of

excessive cost.  We would simplify the billing system, provide a

basic package of affordable health care to all Americans, either

through the government or through their employers, we would

require tough insurance reforms, to try to cut down on that cost,

and then, in addition to that, we would set aside some of this

government money we spend to increase the availability of primary

and preventive health care services in clinics and cities and

rural areas throughout the country because, as you know from what

you said, if we could increase the number of people who go to the

doctor, and go to these clinics in a timely fashion, we would

actually cut the cost of health care.  If we could make sure that

every pregnant woman in America went to the doctor six times

before giving birth, that would reduce low birthweights.  That

would give us $3000 births instead of $50,000 or $250,000 births.

DO YOU HAVE ANY ANTICIPATION OF SYSTEMATIC REFORM IN THE SENSE

THAT, RIGHT NOW, MEDICARE, PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE, AND MEDICAID

INCREASINGLY ARE THE PROBLEMS, NOT THE SOLUTIONS?

Yes --

AND MOST OF THE PROPOSALS WHICH I HEAR SEEM TO WANT TO PUT MORE

MONEY INTO THESE SYSTEMS RATHER THAN COME UP WITH CREATIVE NEW

WAYS OF PUTTING OUR MORE THAN ADEQUATE RESOURCES INTO MORE

EFFECTIVE WAYS OF TAKING CARE OF --

I think you have to redo the whole system, have a uniform paying

schedule.  You can have the government and private insurance

companies all in it, but you have to have a uniform paying

schedule, and I think you've got to encourage people to join

health care networks so that they can make annual payments and

have their needs taken care of in a totally different and

systematic fashion.  I don't think that just pumping more money

into Medicare and Medicaid or the private system's going to do

it.  The number one thing you could do for some businesses in

America is just bring the cost of health care in line with

inflation.

LET'S MAKE SURE, BECAUSE THIS IS, OF COURSE, ONE OF THE CRUCIAL

ISSUES ON THE CAMPAIGN, THAT OUR VIEWERS UNDERSTAND YOUR PLAN FOR

HEALTH INSURANCE.  YOU DON'T, OF COURSE, SUPPORT A NATIONAL

HEALTH CARE PLAN.  YOU DON'T WANT A GOVERNMENT-SPONSORED PLAN.

I don't think the government has to finance it all, no.  I think

you can leave the insurance companies in it.  But you have to do

what they've done in Hawaii.  In Hawaii, I might add, their

insurance premiums are 50% below the national average.  Because

they require the insurance companies to undertake big reforms, go

to broad-based community rating, to offer a comprehensive package

of benefits.  They got more people to doctors and clinics

earlier.  For primary and preventive care they have the most

extensive system  of seeing the doctor in an early and timely

fashion of any state in the country, and it's really made a

difference.

THEY ALSO LACK OUR PROBLEM HERE IN ATLANTA OF THE TREMENDOUS

DIVERSITY OF ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE.  WE'VE

GOT 250,000 PEOPLE HERE WITHIN THE PERIMETER OF ATLANTA WHO LACK

ANY ACCESS TO PRIMARY CARE SERVICE.  IT'S NOT A MONEY PROBLEM,

IT'S A NETWORK AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROBLEM.

But I think you're going to have to -- I agree with that --

you're going to have to build a health care network for them,

you're going to have to build a network of clinics for them, and

you're going to have to have real incentives for primary care

physicians to get back into it.  You know, in Canada, over half

the doctors are primary care physicians.  In America, it's under

15%, now isn't it, doctor? (YES) And we're going to have to have,

we're going to have to do whatever it takes to build that

infrastructure, because that's where we're rationing health care

today.

YOU'D SPEND GOVERNMENT MONEY FOR THAT PLAN?

Absolutely.

HOW MUCH IS IT GOING TO COST US?

Well, I think for a few billion dollars, you could build the

clinic network you need.

WHERE'S IT COME FROM, THAT MONEY?

It's going to come from what we normally spend on Medicare and

Medicaid premiums to keep stoking the system we've got now, which

is broken.  The American people have to believe that we can do

more with the money we have.  We're spending 30% more than any

country on earth, and I don't know a single doctor who doesn't

believe that we could make universal health care available with

the money we've got.  The average doctor spends what, 30% of

income on paperwork?  (MAYBE 40.)  30 to 40 percent.  Your

competitors in Germany and Japan, they spend ten percent.  So,

when people talk about doctor fees, an enormous percentage of

that is administrative costs.  We have, you could not design a

system more inefficient than ours.  And we're going to change it.

THERE'S A CONCERN CONCERNING THE SPIRALLING COST OF HEALTH

INSURANCE.  WE STILL HAVE AN OUT-OF-POCKET COST TO PAY.  I'D LIKE

TO KNOW WHAT DO YOU PLAN TO DO TO ASSIST US WITH THIS SPIRALLING

COST, AND WHAT CAN WE DO TO HELP?

I'm glad you asked what you could do to help.  What you can do to

help is to insist that in this election year we vote for a

president committed to real health care reform, to providing

affordable health care to all Americans.  Under my plan,

employees like you would still be required to contribute

something to the cost of your health care, but we would bring

health costs in line with inflation and you'd never have to worry

about losing your health benefits or losing them if you changed

jobs.  What we have to do is to stop the spiralling cost of

health care.  To do that, we also have to provide some basic

health care to people who don't have it, because one of the

reasons your premiums go up every year is that people who don't

have health insurance still get health care, when it's too late,

and it's too expensive, and they show up at the emergency room.

So if you vote for me, what I will do is give you insurance

reform, reform of the bureaucracy of the health care, reform of

the way the government regulates and funds health care.  We will

bring these costs in line with inflation, and then, year in and

year out, you can look forward to being able to afford the health

care that you have to pay for.  You won't have it going up at 2

and 3 times the rate your salary goes up.  That's what's

happening to Americans today.

DOES THIS INCLUDE HELPING THE SENIOR CITIZENS, YOUR PLAN?

Yes, it does.  Over the next several years, what we will do is to

set up a system so that the elderly and the disabled can

purchase, according to their ability to pay, some long-term

health care before they have to go into a nursing home after they

spend themselves into poverty.  That's what normally happens

today.  We want a long-term health care component in this health

system.

AS SPENDING DECREASES FOR THE DEFENSE INDUSTRY, THERE'S GOING TO

BE A MOVEMENT FROM THE DEFENSE INDUSTRY TO OTHER INDUSTRIES.

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO TO AID THESE PEOPLE IN THEIR MOVEMENT?

I think we should spend all the money, all the money by which we

reduce defense in targeting research and development into new

technologies, or in actually investing in the economy of the

twenty-first century, the kinds of projects that government

normally funds:  new smart highways, new short-haul aircraft

systems, a national network of fiber optics, and I think we

should give preference to those communities which have lost these

defense-related jobs.  You've asked a good question, you know.

Our high-tech employment base is, by and large, in defense-

related industries, and as we cut these things, we're going to

lose an awful lot of our competitive position in the world, and a

lot of our good jobs, unless we, with iron discipline, reinvest

that money in the economy of the future, and in the technologies

which will generate more jobs at home than we're going to lose by

cutting defense.

I COMMEND YOU ON THE PROGRAM YOU'VE PRESENTED TO US.  WHAT I

HAVEN'T HEARD FROM YOU IS HOW WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SOME CHOICES.

I'VE HEARD YOU SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO STOP BUILDING JAILS, WE'RE

GOING TO CONTINUE TO FUND SOCIAL SECURITY, HAVE A HEALTH CARE

REFORM PLAN.  WE CAN'T DO EVERYTHING.  HOW ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE

THOSE DIFFICULT DECISIONS THAT A PRESIDENT NEEDS TO MAKE?

Well, this plan has a lot of tough choices in it.  Believe me,

nobody's going to be happy who's making money off the present

health care system.  If you take on the health insurance

companies, you drastically slash hospital administrative

employment and doctor's administrative employment.  We're going

to choose direct health care access over health care bureaucracy.

Those are going to be very tough things.  If they were easy,

they'd have already been done.  We're making some tough choices

about which defense cuts to make in the wake of the end of the

Cold War, and which investments to make in the new technologies.

For example, you could say, "Well, Bill, you ought to apply more

of this money to reducing the deficit."  We're going to cut the

deficit by more than 50% but we've got to invest more.  That's

not an easy choice.  There are a lot of tough choices inherent in

this plan.  And we do actually restrain some of the entitlement

growth.  We make people  -- upper-income people -- pay more for

Medicare, we subject more Social Security income to taxes.  There

are some tough choices in this plan.

End of Transcript