REPORTCARD2000.com
November 19, 2007 Senator Clinton Speech Analysis
Home Table of Contents Discussion Board
RED text enclosed with *…* are
comments provided by the author of REPORTCARD2000.com.
* Senator
Clinton previously stated, “And no one should be surprised,
human nature being what it is, people will go as far as they possibly can get
away with.” A word to the wise should be sufficient *
ECONOMY:
Policy Address on
Click here to read Hillary's plan.
Thank you. Oh, my goodness, thank you
all so much.
Jackie, thank you. That was absolutely
wonderful. And those of you from
Thank you, Jackie.
[Applause]
I also want to thank Dr. Randy Flack,
And Tim McGee,
I also want to thank and recognize
Marcia Nichols, who is the political director of AFSCME Council 61.
And there is someone else I want to
introduce. That is Sari Bourne, the field organizer for
And someone else who is very, very dear
to me, who has served
Now, I'll be all over the state today
and tomorrow, and then I think we're all going to give you a break for
Thanksgiving. Don't you think that's a good idea? So everybody can gather with
friends and family. That's what I'll be doing; going back home and working with
my daughter to create Thanksgiving dinner, something that we like to do every
year. Then we'll be back over the weekend, traveling the state, meeting as many
Iowans as I possibly can.
But today I wanted to come to
Now, this is kind of a familiar
situation for me, because when my husband became president he inherited a lot
of economic problems. * A look at the results of
President Clinton’s performance indicates the upswing in the economic activity
and budget improvement started in 1995, the year Netscape went public, the
massive capital investment associated with the “new economy” began, and the
lowest percentage to GDP for Defense Spending. * As someone said the
other day, there seems to be a pattern here: It takes a
[Applause]
And so I want to spend some time
telling you how I see this problem and talking about some of the things that I
want to do to address it, because I believe that the next president will not
have a minute to waste.
You know, we've got an economy that is
increasingly interconnected with the global economy. It is shaped each day, not
just by the billions of decisions that 300 million Americans make, but by
billions more that are made around the world. And something that now happens
far away from
Our economy in recent months has been
the subject of increasing worry. We've got rising oil prices; we've got a
deepening housing crisis; we have a falling dollar, in terms of its value; we
have a ballooning national debt; and we have weakening consumer confidence.
Just 13 percent of Americans say that
economic conditions in our country are positive. That is the lowest reading
since the
So we understand that we've got real
problems, but we see nothing happening under this president to address those
problems. Unfortunately, the president either doesn't see them or refuses to
deal with them. And the net effect of it all is that the economy is not working
for middle-class families.
Now, we all hope that the economy will
remain resilient, and we know that, if we make the right choices, the American
economy can, once again, create millions of jobs and lift up the middle class * A look at the AGI
levels in the 1990s indicates the top 1 percent did the best *
. But instead of positive policies aimed at making that happen, we've had the
opposite: reckless fiscal policies and a president with a tragic habit of
ignoring problems until they become crises.
The next president will be a steward of
our economy at a time when the bills from eight years of neglect and
mismanagement will be coming due. * A look at historical indices show the current economy is near to historical
averages. * The next president will have to turn around our nation and
our economy.
More than ever before, workers will
need good job training for the jobs of this new century, but there is one job
we can't afford on- the-job training for: That is the job of our next
president. That could be the costliest job training in history.
Every day spent learning the ropes is
another day of rising costs, mounting deficits, and growing anxiety for our
families. And they cannot afford to keep waiting.
We need a president who understands the
magnitude and complexity of the challenges we face *
And the ability to read beyond the second sentence in a 190 page document *
and has the strength and experience to address them from day one, a president
who has faith that the American people and the American economy are up to the
task. And if you give me that chance, I will be that president for all of you.
[Applause]
In recent months, we've seen a number
of troubling developments. First, we have a growing crisis in our housing
market that is threatening our families and unsettling the capital markets.
Over the past seven years, as incomes fell, wages stagnated * The Senator is comparing wage growth from the spike year of
2000. See Appendix IV to see that wages have recently been increasing on the same
Trend Line established from 1951 through 2006. * , many families were
lured into risky mortgages to finance their homes, with rates that would jump
beyond what they could afford. And regulators did little to crack down on
fly-by-night brokers peddling loans to unqualified buyers.
The result is 1.6 million foreclosures
so far this year, nearly 1,500 in
That's serious no matter how you look
at it, because 60 percent of the total wealth of middle-class families is in
their home equity. And home equity withdrawals accounted for more than 8
percent of a family's disposal income in the last couple of years. So as
housing prices decline, people have less money to draw on for everything from
medical bills to college tuition.
To make matters worse, all of these
mortgage woes have unsettled the capital markets. Banks have suffered enormous
losses on securities linked to mortgages. They've written down more than $30
billion in their holdings. Investors are increasingly risk-adverse, companies
are struggling to raise the capital they need to expand * Senator Clinton acknowledges the need for capital in the
Second, skyrocketing energy prices are
squeezing middle-class families already struggling with falling income and
rising costs. You know, after September 11th, we had a historic opportunity to
call Americans, to call all of us to energy independence. Instead, we
outsourced our energy policy to Dick Cheney and the oil companies. And today we
are even more dependent on foreign oil than we were on September the 11th. * The increasing dependence on foreign oil did not begin in
2001. It has been increasing for
decades. *
Oil prices have increased more than 70
percent since the beginning of this year. Prices are moving up. It's now nearly
$100 a barrel. Gas hit $3.11 per gallon nationwide, the highest price ever for
this time of year. * Even if adjusted for inflation? *
As a result, average families are spending roughly $2,000 more a year on energy
costs, for electricity, home heating, and gas.
That's a huge increase. It's like a
$2,000 energy tax in just the last seven years, more than three times what the
typical American family received from the Bush tax cuts.
I talk to a lot of people who are
worried they're not going to be able to get through the holidays and the winter
months. We've been blessed; the weather has not yet gotten cold. So a lot of
people have been holding their breath. But if we do have a cold spell, you know
what will happen: So many folks will find it difficult to pay the price.
Third, while corporate profits are
reaching new heights * Something
that was lacking during the
temporary economy of the 1990s *, our labor market is just
not working for middle-class families. The Bush administration bragged about
the fact that the unemployment rate is 4.7 percent. But do you know one of the
reasons it's 4.7 percent? It's because millions of unemployed people have
stopped looking for work.
We've had millions of Americans just
drop out of the labor force. If you compare where we are today with where we
were when President Bush took office, if you had the same number of people actually
working and actively looking for jobs, the unemployment rate would be closer to
6.7 percent. * The workforce as a percentage of the population peaked in the
1990s, which happened to be the peak income years of the baby boom generation
and the boom in the temporary “new economy”. *
Corporate profits, however, are at a
40-year high. * If corporate profits had increased
during the 1990s the “new economy” would not have been the “temporary new economy.” In addition, 70 percent of corporate profits
are being generated from foreign sources.
Senator, how do domestically generated corporate profits compare to
historical averages? What were the
corporate profits from foreign sources in 1929? * So here we contrast very high corporate
profits, and the average American family has lost $1,000 in income in the last
seven years.
And over the 12-month period that just
ended in July, the slow growth in wages *
See Appendix IV
to see the wage growth rate from 1951 to 2006 has
been maintained. * actually
accounted for more than two-thirds of the increase in corporate profits. What
does that mean? * Because you have not identified the
source for 70% of the corporate profits, how can you have any possible idea
what it means? * Well, the profits go up, but unlike every other time in
our history * Senator, when was the last time 70% of
corporate profits were generated from foreign sources? *, the CEOs and the
boards of these companies are not sharing the wealth. So companies are actually
profiting off of keeping workers' wages stagnant. * See Appendix IV to see the wage growth rate from 1951 to 2006 has been
maintained. *
And American workers? We're working
harder than ever * Senator, can you define “harder” in
the context in which you use it? * We're the hardest working people in
the world. * Harder than the person working the rice
fields of
In 2005, the last year I could find the
numbers for, all income gains went to the top 10 percent of households, while
the bottom 90 percent saw their incomes decline. That is not the
The wealthiest 1 percent of Americans held 22 percent of
Fourth, seven years of fiscal
recklessness has driven up our debt, eroded confidence in our economy, and left
us vulnerable to foreign creditors. Since President Bush took office, we've
seen the most dramatic deterioration in our nation's financial health in
history. * According to the 2001 CBO report, the
decline started in 2000, prior to President Bush.*
Reckless tax cuts for the wealthy,
bloated spending * Defense Spending under President
Clinton hit post war lows as a percentage of GDP. Is “bloated spending” a reference to a return
to near average Defense Spending? * that wasn't paid for have pushed up
our national debt to $9.1 trillion. Think about that. When President Bush became president, he inherited a
balanced budget and a surplus, a projected surplus of $5.6 trillion * The Senator is acknowledging the relevance and endorsing
the validity of the 2001 CBO Budget and Economic report that contained the $5.6
trillion budget projection. (This CBO report is the basis for the
analysis in REPORTCARD2000.COM. Thank
you senator for validating the relevance of REPORTCARD2000.COM.) The $5.6 trillion projection is contained in
the second sentence of the Summary Section of a 190 page report. If the Senator
would have read further and included the 11 pages of uncertainties surrounding
the projection, she would have learned the CBO also included a statement that
if the “new economy” proved to be temporary, the
So when people across
Finally, we face new threats that
neither the president nor federal regulators have adequately acknowledged or
addressed. Take the risk of so-called derivatives and other new financial
products that Wall Street is selling.
These products offer new opportunities
for investors to diversify portfolios and protect themselves against certain
risks. For example, a farmer here in
But derivatives also create new risks.
They can swing wildly in value. It isn't always clear who owns them or how much
they are really worth. Owners don't always understand the risks, which is why
even the investment banks that created them are losing billions of dollars on
these derivatives. And the ripples are being felt from Wall Street to
I believe in our markets, but markets
work best when there is information flow. And a lot of these new financial
products are not transparent. The market doesn't have enough information about
them, and certainly buyers don't. Today, we need a sensible middle ground
between heavy-handed regulation and a hands-off approach to a risk that can
hurt the innocent, as well as the sophisticated buyer. *
It does look like the Senator is concerned about the profits of speculators. *
Another new challenge on the horizon is
the growth of sovereign wealth funds. Now, what are these? These are investment
funds owned by foreign governments. They're not businesses. A government of a big
oil-producing country creates a fund of money, puts a name on it, calling it an
investment fund, and runs the investments out of this fund. They're using these
funds to buy up billions of dollars worth of American stocks, real estate, and
corporations.
Now, where exactly are countries
getting the money for these funds? They're getting it from us. Our dependence
on foreign oil means we send billions of dollars to countries like
Today, sovereign wealth funds hold an
estimated $2.5 trillion. Within a decade, it's predicted they'll hold five
times that much. We have never seen anything like this, and you don't hear a
peep out of the Bush administration.
Now, why exactly are these sovereign
wealth funds cause for concern? Well, let me ask you this: How would you feel
if a foreign government used its sovereign wealth fund to buy an American car
company and moved it overseas? Right now, that government might be our banker,
but what if they became our boss, as well?
And how would you feel if countries
used their investments in
I don't think we'd be comfortable with
our own government speculating in real estate or buying up companies, and we
should be doubly uncomfortable with the idea of a foreign government doing
these things in our country. In short, these sovereign wealth funds represent a
potential threat to our economic sovereignty if we don't act now to assess
their impact on our economy. * In 2000 there was a peak
of over $300 billion of Direct Foreign Investment into the
So today we face an array of serious
and growing economic challenges that call for a president willing to make
responsible economic stewardship a key priority, willing to confront complex
problems and devise comprehensive responses, a president who always puts the
middle class first.
But for seven years, we've had just the
opposite. In fact, we've had a president who's guided the economy with just one
simple principle in mind: Take care of those at the top and let middle- class
families fend for themselves. He calls it the ownership society, but it's
really nothing more than "you're on your own."
And what do we get from President Bush
when the fact is that middle-class families' income has dropped $1,000? A call
to cut taxes again for
When foreclosures doubled last year,
what was President Bush's response? Nothing. When families and community groups
reported that crooked buyers and lenders were preying on homebuyers, nothing.
But when the housing crisis started to
threaten large Wall Street investment banks, the Bush administration sprang
into action. It convened meetings and conference calls with the heads of major
Wall Street firms, eager to help however they could.
What was President Bush's answer to
seniors who can't afford to retire? Privatize Social Security. * SS privatization has nothing to do with current seniors who
cannot afford to retire. The senator is
once again employing deceptive tactics. * What about rising oil prices?
Veto funding to help low-income families pay their energy bills. Nine million
children without health care? Veto health care for needy children. * The President has offered to compromise on the health care
for children bill. *
His answer to middle-class families who
feel like they're standing on a trap door, just one pink slip or one medical
diagnosis or one missed mortgage payment away from falling through and losing
everything? Tax cut after tax cut for the wealthiest of Americans. * The
Now, it's no surprise that the
president continues to stand by his failed economic policies. * Senator Clinton is constantly comparing the Bush economy to
the peak results of 2000, which according to the CBO in the same report as the
$5.6 trillion projected surplus, was incurring a surprisingly rapid deceleration. * This
is, after all, a man who believes that stubbornness is a virtue.
What is truly amazing, however, is that
the Republican candidates for president are determined to continue these failed
policies. In fact, we can describe their approach to the economy in four simple
words: more of the same.
They see $9 trillion in debt and say,
"Why not trillions more?" They see tax cuts for wealthy Americans and
big corporations and say, "Why not more?" They see one attempt to
privatize Social Security and say, "Why not one more?" In short, they
see eight years of Bush economics and say, "Why not eight more?"
Well, here's my response to that:
You've got until January 20, 2009. And not one day more will we put up with
these failed policies.
[Applause]
I can't wait to get on a stage to
debate the Republican nominee as we make the case for change and they argue for
the status quo. To them, it's "leave no Bush economic policy behind."
But today,
It's easy to give a speech about
restoring the middle class, but it is hard to actually do it. * The most truthful statement in the entire speech. * It's
easy to make up a program that addresses every economic problem, but it's hard
to figure out how to pay for it. We've been here before with a president who
leaves the economic cupboard bear on Election Day.
This time, however, we won't just have
to clean up the economic mess he made. We'll also have to end the war he
started and address the health care crisis he left behind.
[Applause]
So
we don't need more Republican scare tactics about a Social Security crisis. * In the January 2001 CBO report containing the $5.6 trillion
projected surplus the Senator so glowingly referenced earlier in this speech,
there is the following sentence: “Over the longer term, however, budgetary pressures linked to
the aging and retirement of the baby-boom generation threaten to produce record
deficits and unsustainable levels of federal debt.” Does the Senator expect us to focus on the
second sentence in the report and ignore everything else? Right here is the best possible example of
economic deception that exists. The
senator picks and chooses what she wants to make her case and hopes we don’t
see the rest. Senator, you lose. From the same report the senator accepts the
conclusion of the $5.6 trillion budget surplus projection and ignores “the
budgetary pressures linked to the aging and retirement of the baby-boom
generation threaten to produce record deficits and unsustainable levels of
federal debt.” Even the most casual
observer to this behavior has to question the honesty and integrity of the senator. *
And we don't need a trillion-dollar tax
increase that will hit families already facing higher energy, health care and
college costs. * Senator, if you were paying attention
in the 1990s, and disregarded political posturing, you would have learned that
we need economic policies that encourage
productivity growth and expansion of the GDP through investment of capital. And if you would have read beyond the second
sentence of the CBO 2001 report you would have learned that tax revenues are
historically closely correlated to GDP with only minor fluctuations for tax
policy. *
What we need is to focus on the real
crises of health care * Can anyone consider there to be
a serious attempt to address the health care issue without addressing the
obesity issue? * and Medicare and on expanding opportunities for poor,
working and middle- class families who are struggling now. If the gathering
economic challenges strike all at once in a perfect storm, these families,
So, in short, President Bush has
abandoned the middle class, tilted the playing field against them, and said,
"You're on your own." Republicans running to replace him say,
"It's time for more of the same." And I say we need a new direction.
We had an economic strategy that worked
in the 1990s.
* Once again Senator, what was the economic strategy
that worked in the 1990s? Are you
suggesting a return to Defense Spending cuts, a hyped stock market to generate
massive capital gains tax revenues, massive spending on wages and salaries in
unprofitable enterprises that turn into highly taxed wages instead of profit
generating enterprises? Are you
suggesting a return to the “temporary” economy as suggested in the 2001 CBO
report? * We believed that fiscal
responsibility could spur economic growth, so we *
“We”, who is we? * balanced the federal budget. * The 2001 CBO report you previously endorsed said the
economy of the 1990s was not well understood and that it may be only temporary,
which it turned out to be. The 2001 CBO
report highlighted the increasing wages as a percentage of GDP, which, as it
turns out, increased to unsustainable levels, and now you are telling us that
“we believed fiscal responsibility could spur economic growth, so we balanced
the federal budget.” Senator, your lack
of understanding about the economy of the 1990s is alarming! You need to read and understand the contents
of REPORTCARD2000.com so “we” can
have an intelligent debate over the
We believe that investments in our
people were investments in our economy, so we * who is
“we”? * expanded the earned income tax credit, provided health insurance
to six million needy children, invested in Head Start and student loans. We saw
historic declines in child poverty, family incomes up on average more than
$8,000, and many Americans joining and staying in the middle class. * Apparently a temporary economic phenomenon is good economic
policy to the senator. Senator, does a
temporary economic phenomenon constitute a good economy? *
So today we face 21st-century
challenges, some of which we could have never imagined back in the 1990s. * So why do you make comparisons to 1929? * But I believe
the principles that guided us then are still relevant today. * What are the principles that guided us to a temporary new
economy? * These are the principles that are truly at the start of my
plan to help restore our economy.
I believe in an optimistic,
progressive, modern approach to the economy. * As
opposed to a pessimistic, regressive ancient approach? * There's no
limits to what we can do if we set our minds to it. And I believe that we can
begin on day one to turn the economy around.
I have four components: creating new
jobs, good jobs, essential to broad-based prosperity; restoring fairness to our economy;
renewing the basic bargain that if you work hard you can get head; and putting
our fiscal house in order again. * Is a temporary
economic phenomenon like the 1990s what you are looking for again? *
We're going to ask everybody to
participate, but I am not going to ask the middle class to do more than it has
already done. Staying afloat during the Bush administration has been a major
accomplishment.
[Applause]
So we're going to take away the tax
subsidies from the oil companies * Senator, what impact
will removing tax subsidies on the oil companies have on the oil
companies? Will it mean that marginal
producing wells will now be plugged? If
so, how do plugged wells generate tax revenues?
The senator is providing an excellent example of static analysis. *,
and we're going to put those to work on behalf of clean, renewable, alternative
energy.
[Applause]
We're going to force the pharmaceutical
companies to compete. We're going to make them have to negotiate with Medicare
to get those drug prices down. * Senator, why do we
always talk about drugs that are developed in the
[Applause]
We're going to tell the health
insurance companies who have denied so many people coverage that they will no
longer be able to discriminate against the sick, and we're going to insure
every single American for quality, affordable health care.
We're going to fight any ill-advised effort
to privatize Social Security. We're going to keep Social Security rock solid
for generations * Once again the Senator ignores the
following statement in the 2001 CBO report she earlier endorsed: “Over the longer term, however, budgetary
pressures linked to the aging and retirement of the baby-boom generation
threaten to produce record deficits and unsustainable levels of federal debt.”
* . And we're going to help families save for retirement with new
retirement accounts. * What good will new retirement
accounts do because Americans are notorious for not saving in the accounts they
already have? *
[Applause]
And when it comes to trade, we're going
to have real, enforceable standards and protections for our workers and our
environment. And unlike the current president, I will make trade enforcement a
top priority again.
[Applause]
We're going to have a manufacturing
policy, because I don't believe we can remain a great country with a strong
economy if we don't make things in
[Applause]
We're going to pass laws that help
people be able to join unions and bargain collectively for good wages and fair
benefits again. We're going to focus on family farms, instead of corporate
farms, and we're going to give family farms the support and the tools that they
need to be successful.
And we are going to finally close the
tax loopholes and stop giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas.
Enough with outsourcing American jobs using taxpayer dollars. * Previously addressed in an earlier
[Applause]
But I'm going to go further than that:
I will provide tax relief for the middle class, because you heard me say that,
given the increase in energy prices since 2000, on average $2,000, that is far
more than any middle-class family got out of these Bush tax cuts. * The top 5 percent are paying a bigger share of taxes now
than in 2000. *
We're not going to be fooled. We're
going to get back to real tax relief for middle-class families. I'll extend the
middle-class tax cuts, give generous tax breaks to help families afford health
care, offer up to $1,000 in matching tax cuts to help families save for
retirement. * Are you going to cut Defense Spending as was
done in the 1990s to pay for this? *
I'll expand the earned income tax
credit, increase tax credits for child care, and provide a new $3,500 tax
credit to help middle-class families send their children to college. * Are you going to cut Defense Spending as was done in the
1990s to pay for this? *
[Applause]
And I will tie the minimum wage to
congressional salaries so that Congress can't get a raise until working men and
women get a raise in the minimum wage. * So the millionaires in congress can’t get a raise unless
the minimum wage is increased? This
leaves me speechless. *
[Applause]
That's what I will do as president, but
there are things we should do right now, immediate action to face the economic
challenges. That starts with steps to prevent as many housing foreclosures as
possible.
I've already announced a series of
policies to do just that, including a $1 billion fund to help states work with
at-risk homeowners to prevent foreclosure.
Today, I call on the president to convene
a crisis conference, bringing together all the stakeholders in the housing
crisis, from lenders to homeowners to community groups, to figure out a
solution to the housing crisis.
The time for hand-wringing and
blame-placing is over. * Except, for when it comes to
you blaming President Bush for the economic downturn that had begun in 2000? *
. We need urgent action. And instead of just trying to help the big banks, how
about helping
[Applause]
Second, we need to immediately address
the impending home heating crisis that could affect so many families this year.
Now, the only long-term solution to high energy prices is reducing our
dependence on foreign oil and lowering the carbon intensity of our economy.
I've outlined a comprehensive plan to
do that that I talked about outside of
And I believe, if we do it, we can
create five million new jobs. You know about blue-collar jobs and white-collar
jobs. How about green-collar jobs for people who are going to put solar panels
on rooftops, do the work on bio-fuels and everything else?
But with oil approaching $100 a barrel,
it's going to cost families 20 percent to 25 percent more to heat their homes
this winter. Too many families can't afford that.
So I was outraged last week when
President Bush vetoed emergency energy assistance funding for families. Because
of his veto, state agencies right here in
I've lived in the White House. They
keep it warm in the White House. And maybe the President should get out of the
White House and come to
I call on the President to put partisan
politics aside and commit emergency funds today, not months down the road, when
millions of seniors and low-income families have literally been left out in the
cold. Let's ensure that no eligible family gets turned away and that assistance
keeps pace with the rising energy prices.
In addition, we should commit $1
billion to an emergency home conservation program to lower costs for families
in cold-weather states. This program will allow states to make weatherization
kits available to three million families. These kits would include
easy-to-install items, like a wrap, an insulating wrap for your water heater, caulking
for doors and windows. We know from experience this can reduce a family's
heating bill by up to 20 percent.
Third, we need to work with governments
around the world to set guidelines to make these sovereign wealth funds more
transparent. You know, here in
Currently, these sovereign wealth funds
don't have to disclose their holdings, their investment objectives, their
investment returns, or their management structures, so it's hard to assess
whether they're introducing unnecessary risks into our markets, hard to know
whether they're buying or selling assets to make a profit or make a point.
So today I call on the Bush
administration, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund to begin
immediately crafting transparency guidelines for these sovereign wealth funds.
Strict disclosure requirements are critical to help us understand how these
funds are operating.
And, finally, we need to start
addressing the risks posed by derivatives and other complex financial products.
You can't let Wall Street send the bill to your street with the bright ideas
that just don't work out.
Derivatives and products like them are
posing real risks to families, as Wall Street writes down tens of billions of
dollars in investments. Companies are taking the loss of a billion here and a
billion there simply because the securities they own are worth less than they
thought. * Is the senator now courting the previously
wealthy on Wall Street? *
So as president, I will move to establish
the 21st-century oversight we need in a 21st-century global marketplace. * Senator, was any of this going on in 1929? * I will
call for an immediate review of these new investment products and for plans to
make them more transparent.
But I would hope that the Bush
administration would do it before I'm sworn in. I don't want to see another 14
months of potential risks being injected into our economy with all of the other
factors at work.
You know, President Franklin Roosevelt,
who said a lot of really smart things, said economic laws are not made by
nature. They're made by human beings.
Never before has
But, you know,
I believe I can provide the economic
leadership we need to make the changes that are so desperately required, and I
ask for your support and your counsel * My counsel is:
You need to read, study and understand REPORTCARD2000.COM so we can have an
intelligent debate! * and your help * My help is
already available on REPORTCARD2000.COM; however, you will need to read beyond
the second sentence. * as we make this journey together. Thank you all
very, very much.
[Applause]