For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
February 28, 2001
Remarks by the President in Small Business Roundtable
Control Concepts Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
9:35 A.M. EST
Q What a distinct honor
and privilege to have you here today.
I guess I have to open up with a tough
question. I have a four-year-old daughter and a two-year-old
daughter who are out here in the crowd. My four-year-old
wants to know the name of your puppies. (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: Let me see if I can
get it right. (Laughter.)
We're the proud owner of Spot. She
was born in the White House in 1989 to
Millie. (Applause.) On November the 4th, I was
campaigning in New
Jersey. It happened to be my wife's
birthday. And the then governor of New Jersey said, well,
Governor, what did you buy your wife for her birthday. I
said, nothing, which wasn't the right answer. (Laughter.)
Certainly not politically correct, as they say.
It then happened that Laura and Christie Todd
started talking about the fact that Christie Todd raises Scottish
terriers. It turns out I did buy my wife something for her
birthday, a Scottish terrier named Barney, who is having a heck of a
time on the carpet upstairs in the White House, by the way.
I think the answer is Spot and Barney --
(laughter) -- and one cat named India.
Q Thank you, sir.
I would like to say a little bit about Control
Concepts, who we are and what we do. We are a manufacturer
of industrial electrical switches for heavy-duty
machinery. We have been in business since 1976, when the
company was founded by my father in 1976. I am second
generation in the business.
The electrical switches that we manufacture
are used in things like food processing industry, the package industry,
the machine tool industry, petrochem facilities, offshore oil rigs, et
cetera, and they are used to basically start or stop a piece of
equipment or have an indicator light on it that will indicate the
status of what a machine is in.
We do something a little unique in our
industry, especially for a small to medium-size company, where we
actually manufacture every single thing here under one
roof. Now, we don't make light bulbs and we don't make the
raw materials, but we actually manufacture our own tools, dies and
molds to do our own injection molding, do our own
assembly. Everything, you name it, it is done here under
this roof and we can control the quality
of the product that way, we can control the quality of the service and
the delivery of the product -- ship every order the same day we
receive it 95 percent of the time. And we also control the
cost and pass on a significant cost savings to our customers.
As a small to medium-size business, a capital
intensive kind of business, we were very interested to hear your budget
proposal in your tax plan last night. It appears that it is
going to be of great benefit to Control Concepts and hopefully of great
benefit to the rest of the nation and to small companies across the
nation.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, thank you,
sir.
I want to thank you all for having
me. First, the greatness -- this country's greatness is
because there are a lot of entrepreneurs in America,
and you are an entrepreneur. And I'm honored to be sitting
next to you and your son.
I love the concept of a family-owned business,
the idea of a mom and her son working together to not only produce a
product but, more importantly, to employ capital so people can find
work. After all, small businesses are the main creators of
jobs in America. And all public policy
and tax policy must work to create an environment in which
entrepreneurship can flourish.
So my speech last night was speaking not only
about a budget, but was also talking about the entrepreneurial spirit
in our country. And one of the reasons we came here is
because the entrepreneurial spirit is alive and
well here and I appreciate it very much. (Applause.)
It is important to remember the role of
government is not to create wealth. The role of government
is to create an environment in which businesses, small and large, can
flourish. That's the role of government.
(Applause.)
I want to thank my friend the governor of
Pennsylvania for being here. We hosted the governors at
the White House last Sunday night. It happened to be the
first lady of Pennsylvania's birthday as well. And it was
good to see you, Tom. Thanks for
coming. (Applause.)
Pennsylvania is well represented in the United
States Senate by two very capable, smart, concerned Pennsylvania
citizens. So concerned we spent most of the flight from
Washington to Pennsylvania talking about how to make the economy of
Pennsylvania a better place. Senator Spector and Senator
Santorum are not shrinking violets when it comes to making the case
for the citizens of Pennsylvania and the country. I want to
thank you all for traveling with me. (Applause.)
Finally, a freshman, just like me, Melissa
Hart. And Melissa is an active soul -- (applause).
I appreciate you giving me the chance to
explain the rationale behind my budget. It was very
important for people to hear that what I think is -- what I know is
true, and that is we've got a lot of cash flow coming into the U.S.
Treasury. And the fundamental question is what to do with
it. How best can we spend the people's money?
Last night I made the case that our nation can
achieve the following priorities: One, set aside all payroll
taxes that are designed for Social Security to be spent only on Social
Security. That is $2.6 trillion over the next 10 years will
be set aside to be spent only -- only -- on Social
Security. I believe there's wide consensus on both sides of
the aisle that
that is prudent fiscal policy.
Secondly, I made the case that we can
prioritize and fund Medicare for
our senior citizens, that we're going to spend -- we're going to
double the Medicare budget over the next 10 years. And if
we have the right kind of leadership in the Congress, someone willing
to -- people willing to work
with the President to reform Medicare, we will not only have money to
fund Medicare, we will have a Medicare system that will enable seniors
to choose the health care plan that meets their needs, all of which
will include prescription drugs.
I made the case that we can meet our needs by
funding what's called discretionary spending at a 4 percent
increase. Some says 4 percent sounds
like a small number, but I want to remind you it's greater than the
rate of inflation.
It is less than what Congress spent during the
last three session, I readily concede. But we've got to be
careful about over-spending in Washington, D.C. We shouldn't
have bidding contests in Washington. What we ought to have
is rewards for people who are concerned about over-spending, it seems
like to me. And so I propose increasing the discretionary
spending at 4 percent.
It means, for example, that public schools
will get a significant increase in spending out of the federal
government. Now, having said that,
I promise you I will stand tough to the principle that we ought to run
our schools locally -- that local control of the schools --
(applause.) We've got to run our schools locally in order
to achieve excellence for every single child.
We need to pay our soldiers more
money. (Applause.) But before we spend a lot of
money on the Defense Department, it seems wise -- and I think business
people will agree with this -- that we ought to have a strategy about
what our military ought to look like in the long-term. We've got to
make sure we have a proper strategy on how to prioritize our military
spending before we do so.
There is still money left in the budget, after
growing discretionary spending by 4 percent, after funding the
entitlement programs, after meeting priorities. Over the
next 10 years, we set aside a trillion dollars for what I call
contingencies, a trillion dollars in case we need money for additional
Medicare spending or military spending or spending on farmers in
America. So there is money set aside for that and there is
still money left over.
Now, the debate always seems to come out of
Washington that if you have tax relief, somebody is not going to get
their Medicare check. Or, if
you have tax relief, somebody is not going to get a Social Security
check. My point to you is that we set priorities and fund
them. We protect Social Security and Medicare and fund
them. We spend money on the military
to keep the peace. We set aside contingencies, money for
contingencies, and there's still money.
And what I want to do is to remind Americans
-- this is why I've come to Western Pennsylvania -- remind Americans
that the surplus is your money,
it is not the government's money, and once -- (applause).
One reason Dave and Janet sit here is because
I think it is very important for people to know that behind every
statistic there are Americans who -- in whom we ought to place our
trust. These good folks pay
$4,400 in federal income taxes. Under the plan I proposed
last night in the Congress -- which doubles the child credit from $500
to $1,000, reduces
all rates for everybody who pays taxes, drops the top rate from 39 to
33, reduces the bottom rate from 15 to 10, reduces the effects of the
marriage penalty, eliminates the death tax -- these good folks will
save $1,980.
Now, for a lot of folks, they'll yawn and say,
gosh, that's $1,980, that's really nothing. We
disagree. We disagree -- $1,980 a year can make
a big difference to people who are raising two lovely children, to
people who want to set aside money for savings. It is so
important for members of
the Congress to realize what the average citizen is going through
today.
When you couple high energy prices with
consumer debt, there's a lot of good folks who struggle in
America. And it seems like to me the right thing for
Washington to do is, once we fund our priorities, enhance the cash
flows of the people who pay the bill in the first place in America.
(Applause.) In so doing, not only do we help working
Americans, but we also will add a second wind to an economy that is
slowing down.
I come from the school of thought, I know many
of you do as well, that
sound fiscal policy, coupled with sound monetary policy, is going to
make a difference in this economy; that by giving people their own
money back will be a part of sound fiscal policy. The more
money you have to spend, the more money circulating, the more likely it
is the economy will recover. And all of us in Washington
must do everything we can to make sure that the economy is strong
enough for people to be able to keep jobs and find work, if they're
looking for work. That's the whole purpose of economic
growth, is for people to be able to find work.
I'm so thankful that you gave me a chance to
come to make my case. I can't think of a better place to
make the case than in a business run by a family, a business run by
entrepreneurs, a business who care more about their employees than they
do about themselves because they recognize if the
employee is happy, an employee can work, an employee is satisfied,
that the business it self will run well.
It's my honor also to be here with Dave and
Janet and Erin and Jonathan -- Americans who, under our plan, will
receive real, tangible benefits. But that's not really the
right way to say it, is it? It's your
money to begin with. Americans under our plan will keep
more of their own money so they can spend it where they see fit.
Thank you very much. (Applause.)
Q Thank you, Mr.
President.
Dave, would you like to tell the President how
you started here at Control Concept?
MR. BERGER: Yes, I
would. About 10 and a half years ago, I was out on the golf
course with the founder of the company, Glen Taylor. And he
knew I went back to college recently. And he was always
asking me when I was going, how is it going, and I'd say, oh, not too
bad. I was 33 at the time. I was working at
Westinghouse and got laid off, and really basically
decided what are we going to do from here on in.
And after a while, I guess Glen was watching
me for over a year or so -- he called me in after we got some things
--- he says, I own a small business. He said, I'm thinking
of adding a position down there that you could get into. He
said, why don't you come down and take a look.
So I came down and looked around at Control
Concepts. It was really small at the time. The
dog ran out at you whenever you walked anywhere.
(Laughter.) And barked at you. And I said, oh,
boy. Walked in, talked to
Glen, he gave me the tour. He showed me, and he asked,
well, what did you think? And I had good feelings about
this place. It was a homey feeling. Everybody
stopped and said, hi, how are you doing, introduced themselves,
showed me what they were doing, explained a little bit about their
job. And I know they weren't told about it, they just naturally
volunteered the information. And over the 10 and a half
years since I've been here, the company has grown
enormously. It's been a great 10 and a half
years. I hope it's another 20 and a half years.
THE PRESIDENT: I'll give you a
loaded question. Do you want some tax
relief? (Laughter.)
MR. BERGER: All you can
give. (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: You know, I'm
constantly amazed that -- first of all, one of the things that happens
when you talk about tax relief, people immediately go to the class
warfare argument, the only the rich people will
benefit, which obscures reality, and reality is, $1,980 is a lot of
money. And I'm not going to ask you what you're going to
do with it, because I trust you to do the right thing with
it. Frankly, it's none of the government's business about
what you decide to do with your own money. (Applause.) But
I bet it may have something to do with your children's future
education, for example.
MR. BERGER: Yes, it
will. My wife would like to talk about her job, and also how
that might affect her thoughts on that amount of money.
MRS. BERGER: I'm an administrative
technician at Medical Center Beaver, and I've been there almost 20
years. And I worked in -- where we do all of the pre-op
testing and patient education for patients having surgery in the near
future. I get to talk a lot with patients on anything,
and I'm very glad -- and they are very glad that -- especially senior
citizens -- that you're discussing their health care needs.
THE
PRESIDENT: Yes. Well, we're concerned, all of us
are concerned about making sure that Medicare fulfills the promise to
our seniors. It is
a solemn obligation that the federal government has assumed, and it's
a solemn obligation that the federal government will keep.
And there will be a lot of discussion, a lot
of argument and we're going to end up with reform that will make the
system solvent and give seniors a variety of options and a plan that
meets their needs, all of which will include prescription
drugs. And it's going to be a titanic
struggle. But it's one that, with the right leadership and
the right tone in Washington, D.C., people I think are going to be able
to come together on, and I think we'll get something done.
Q And on a personal
note, I'm glad to hear that your tax reform will refund almost $2,000
for our family for education and our needs.
THE PRESIDENT: Well,
thanks. I -- let me talk about a couple of aspects of this
tax relief plan that I want to explain to you.
First of all, I believe that the government
should not decide, oh, you
get tax relief and you don't get tax relief. To me, the
best tax policy is to treat everybody fairly and to say if you pay
taxes, you get relief. (Applause.)
Secondly, it is very important to understand
that the tax code is unfair for people at the bottom end of the
economic ladder. If you're say a single mom struggling to
get ahead in life and you're making about $22,000 a year, as she begins
to earn additional money, she loses earned income tax credit, she pays
payroll taxes and she pays income taxes, which means that every
additional dollar above a level of $22,000 is taxed at nearly 50
percent. That's the way this tax code is structured.
It means that folks who struggle to get to the
middle class pay a higher marginal rate than someone who is successful,
someone who has got quite a bit of cash flow, and that's not fair.
Part of the tax relief package has got to be
aimed at making the code easy to understand and fair. One
thing our country is known for is being a
fair country. Another thing we ought to be known for is we
want people to succeed and the code ought to reward success.
Secondly, a lot of small businesses, as I
mentioned earlier, these small businesses provide, by far, the vast
majority of new jobs in America. And dropping the top rate
will serve as a catalyst to attract capital to small
businesses. Many small businesses are unincorporated small
businesses; many are what's called Subchapter S businesses, and they
pay the high rate. And by dropping the rate it will provide
capital for small business expansion. And that's very
important for this country. And I know the
rhetoric will be, oh, he's focused on the billionaires and all that
business. That's called class warfare. The truth
of the matter is, this plan is aimed at helping small businesses
flourish and grow
and succeed.
It is important for America that the small
business person remain vital and healthy. And so this is a
plan that is well-thought-out. It is -- I found it
interesting during the course of the speech last night, I said, some
think it's too big -- and of course, those who thought it was too big
cheered -- and some think it's too little -- and they
cheered. Of course, I thought it was just
right. (Laughter and applause.)
Let me say that part of my job as President,
as well -- I might as well be just very up-front -- is to travel the
country ginning up support for this plan. And that's why I'm
here. I would hope that you would not only contact your
immediate representatives -- I don't think you need to in
the case of the three here (laughter) -- but I would hope that if you
find others that may be reluctant to listen to what we have to offer
-- and I say "we" because this is a plan that really is aimed for
people -- that you'd help, that you would write,
that you would
e-mail ,
that you would call folks to encourage them to be open-minded and to
think about
you when they cast votes.
And this is a plan that will benefit
hard-working Americans. I find it such an honor to be your
President, and I love traveling the country to go out and -- I'm going
from here to Nebraska and Iowa and Arkansas and Georgia. And
it is exciting because this is a great country, made great by
the fact that it's got such wonderful people. And it's so
important for all of us who have the honor of representing you to have
public policy in mind that makes lives easier. And this
series of initiatives that we're going to be debating over the next
months will be aimed, if it's done right, at easing the burden of the
working people in the country. And America will be even
stronger as a result.
So it's an honor to be
here. (Applause.)
Q As a business center,
we couldn't agree more -- marginal tax rate
is increased. Not only is it good for the economy now to
give a jump-start again, it's good for the employees who are able to
take that money and do with it as they please, whether it be in
education, or back into the economy. But as a business
owner, if the marginal tax rate can be
decreased, we now have more positive cash flow. And as a
result of that more positive cash flow, we can reinvest back into
technology, into equipment, into product development, sales and
marketing. All those things
will help grow our business from a sales revenue standpoint.
And as our business grows, we're now able to
have more jobs. Job employment will increase. As
a result of that, there is going to be more money back into the
economy. So not only does it help our business, it helps
most small businesses across the country and the economy as a whole.
So we are very thankful and we're looking forward to this
plan.
The other thing, Mr. President, that we're
interested in hearing about, too, and we're excited about is the
long-term debt reduction. What a great thing for this
economy, not just for the economy as a whole, but also for individuals
and small businesses as well.
THE PRESIDENT: I appreciate you
bringing that up. We have set aside $2 trillion over the
next 10 years to pay down debt. Now, people say, well, why
don't you pay all the debt off. The one reason why you don't
pay
all the debt off is because at the end of 10 years, a number of bonds
will have not matured. It does not make economic sense to
pre-pay American debt that will cost American taxpayers a premium to
do so.
And so we pay down all available debt, all the
debt that matures will be paid off. And it's going to ease
the interest burden on the country. It makes fiscal sanity and sense
to do so. And there's ample cash flow to be able to meet the
debt requirements, and put aside a contingency fee, and
provide tax relief.
I urge the Congress to be cautious about
over-spending. The rate of spending increased last year by 8
percent. That is a significant number, particularly when
you're talking in terms of trillions. And there was
something like over 5,000 one-time expenditures in the budget at the
end of
the year. And so we're going to have to work with the
appropriators to say, let's be reasonable about how we spend the
people's money.
A sure way to make sure this economy gets drug
down is to over-spend. A bloated federal government will
affect economic vitality. And so it's going to require a lot
of us working together to say, well, wait a minute, it's important to
set priorities. One thing business owners learn how to do is
how to prioritize and then have the discipline necessary to meet
priorities.
So I appreciate you bringing up the debt
retirement, and it's an issue
that I'm confident we can work together on. It's just
important for people to know that it's only wise to pay down a certain
portion of the debt before it costs taxpayers an additional
premium. And that doesn't make any sense. It
doesn't make any sense to do that. (Applause.)
MR. BERGER: The education reform
that you stated last night -- as a parent, Janet and I were very
interested in that. We have two reasons sitting out in the
audience right there. We were impressed that you were going
to increase spending for children's reading.
THE PRESIDENT: I am. You
all know I used to be a governor, and therefore, I'm a little suspect
about federal involvement in any way, shape
or form in education. I do, however, think that it is
appropriate for the federal government to spend money, so long as it's
spent wisely. I can't think of anything more important than
to increase the amount of money available at the federal level for
reading programs -- so long as the strategy makes sense.
And there has been a lot of thought and a lot
of research about what works. A lot of programs in states,
you know, abandoned the concept of phonics and, as a result, many
children weren't learning to read.
The reason I bring that up is I want to
reinvigorate the curriculum debate, all based upon -- the conclusion of
which we based upon a simple concept: If it works, use
it. So part of the reading initiative is to encourage people
to analyze the facts about reading.
Secondly, I strongly believe in
diagnosis. And I believe we've got to
measure children. And I believe we've got to measure
children to make sure that not any children get left
behind. And that includes K through 2 little
children. We ought to develop a reading diagnostic tool that
can be
easy to administer but point up where there are some reading
deficiencies that need to be corrected early before it's too
late. That is a very feasible and logical approach to
reading.
Finally, I know we need to retrain
teachers. Part of the failures in our society thus far have
been that some teacher colleges -- I'm certainly not accusing any here
in the state of Pennsylvania -- that have not taught teachers how to
teach reading. And if that be the case, we need to retrain
teachers in the science of reading, so they can teach
reading. So I believe this makes sense, the
initiative. (Applause).
I used to be a business person. As
a matter of fact, I was in a business where the results were posted
every day. It's called baseball. Generally, the results
weren't all that good. (Laughter.)
So I understand when the president of a
company says, what is the bottom line. It is a philosophy to
which I adhere. I ask the question, are the children
learning? And if we spend federal money, particularly on
disadvantaged children, the debate ought to be not whether or not we
ought to spend money on disadvantaged children; the debate ought to be,
are we getting our money's worth?
I believe every child can learn. I
refuse to accept excuses that there are certain children who can't
learn; therefore, let's don't measure or let's just move them through
the system.
And so therefore, I'm asking Congress to say
-- to enact this reform. If you receive federal money, you
the state of Pennsylvania or the state of Texas or any other state,
must devise and implement an accountability system that determines
whether or not children are learning basic English skills and math
skills. That's what we want to
know. Accountability becomes the whole cornerstone for
reform.
Without measurement, we're just
guessing. With measurement, it would enable policymakers and
educators to devise programs that will meet needs. You
don't know if you don't measure. And so the crux of the
reform is that we do spend some more money, and that's
fine. But money alone is simply not the
answer. There must be reform. There must be a
system in place that creates the incentive for people to change when
there's failure and to address problems early before it's too
late. It's the whole cornerstone of what we're trying to
do.
The state of Pennsylvania can design the
remedies. They can design what remedies will ultimately make
a difference in terms of creating educational
excellence. The federal government ought to be focused on
some
targeted spending, but also understanding that systemic reform will
yield positive results for children from all walks of
life. It is an incredibly important debate that is taking
place in Washington.
You will hear much of the dialogue that will
be all focused on dollars. That's an important part of the
debate. But the truth of the matter is that federal
government only funds about 7 percent of the education budgets in
aggregate across the nation. Most funding, as you well know,
in Pennsylvania comes from either state government or local property
taxes. And that's where the power ought to be. It
ought to be closest to the people who are paying the bills in order to
make sure that schools chart the path to excellence necessary so every
child learns.
But at the federal level, we can institute
structural reform or insist
upon changes that will eventually yield to structural reform, and
that's what the whole educational debate is about, and it's an
important debate in
America and I'm really glad we've engaged early on that subject in the
Senate and the House. We've got more than
one. (Applause.)
MR. TAYLOR: Education is also very
important to me. As I had mentioned earlier, I have two
small children. And as they grow up, we need
to have some type of accountability so that they are learning the
reading and writing skills necessary.
THE PRESIDENT: It starts with you,
however, as you know -- (applause).
MR. TAYLOR: By the way, just like
you, I also married a teacher.
THE PRESIDENT: Did
you? Good.
MR. TAYLOR: My wife's mother had
started a reading program here in the local Beaver community several
years ago. She passed away two years ago, unfortunately, but
I think it does support greatly your idea that the local government and
the state governor are the ones who should support. They know what's
best for the children in the area.
THE PRESIDENT: Amen.
MR.
TAYLOR: And it is still a thriving
reading program.
Would you like to describe maybe how the
company got started, so he has a little more background on Control
Concepts?
MS. RENNINGER: Before I got into
the company, I also was a former teacher. So I --
THE PRESIDENT: You did a pretty
good job teaching this guy, didn't you?
MS. RENNINGER: Well, I have two
other sons, I have to mention their names, Greg and
Gary. And Gary is in the audience today. And I
applaud you on this support that you have for the
education. It's certainly an investment into the future.
Twenty-five years ago, my husband had a
dream. He decided that he needed to start up his own
company. Well, he was the visionary, he was the
genius. I was the woman behind the man. And the
plastic would go into the oven to dry before dinner could get
ready. And then we would have dinner or I'd throw a load
into the laundry -- but, believe me, we've come a long way since
then. Back in 1996, my husband passed away suddenly. That
left a business that needed to be taken care of, and employees that
needed to be mothered and fathered at that point. We all
needed to be nurtured. And that's what we've
done. We are a family of employees. (Applause.)
My son and I pulled
ourselves up by the bootstraps and within less
than a week we were back in the office and assuming our positions, me
as CEO and Jeffery in the position that he is now.
We've been able to continue. It's
been a dynamic growing business. We are excited, and so are the
employees. We try and return as much as we can to the
employees because they are such an important part of our
business. When we received last fall the entrepreneurial
award for the county, this was due to my husband, my son, and also the
employees, because
Control Concepts is nothing without all of us working together.
And again, I applaud you on your plan for
small business because this is how we have grown. It took a
lot of risk, a lot of hard work, a lot of love for employees and their
love for us. But we work together, and this is what we
hoping to return -- because with that, they will not only return
to the employee, but the community and to the
nation. (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: Well, it looks like
Jeff and I did a pretty good job in picking our own
mothers. (Laughter and applause.)
Q Mr. President, thank
you very much. Our business over the past 10 years has
continued to grow, and it started when your father was in the position
you are now. We are excited about it, excited that your
budget plan, your economic plan is going to bring the wealth and keep
the wealth here in the United States and bring prosperity to all
Americans.
So thank you very much for being
here. We have opened up our house to
you, of all of our employees. So, thank you,
everyone. (Applause.)
END 10:15 A.M. EST
|