February 2, 2007

DNC Winter Meeting - Remarks as Prepared for Delivery

Washington, D.C.
February 2, 2007

Thank you.

We’re all here together – but why are we here?

Why are we here?

We are here because somewhere in America an eight-year old girl goes to sleep hungry, a little girl who ought to be drawing pictures and learning multiplication cries herself to sleep, praying that her father, who has been out of work for two years, will get a job again. It doesn’t have to be that way.

We are here because somewhere in America, a hotel housekeeper walks a picket line with her union brothers and sisters fighting for decent health care benefits during the day and works the late-shift at a diner at night so that she and her family can live a decent life and so her boy can go to college and have choices she never had. And somewhere a young man folds a college acceptance letter and puts it in his drawer because even with his part-time job and his mother’s second job, he knows he cannot afford to go. It doesn’t have to be that way.

We are here because somewhere in America a mother wipes her hand on a dishcloth to go answer a knock on her door … and opens it to find an army chaplain and an officer standing there with solemn faces and her boy’s name – her patriotic son who enlisted after September 11 – on their lips. It doesn’t have to be that way.

We are here because somewhere in the world, a 5-year old boy in a refugee camp is bending under the weight of his 2-year old sister. His family massacred, he carries his remaining sister everywhere, and sleeps with his arms wrapped tightly around her, knowing that tomorrow he will have to do the same thing, and again the next day and the day after that because she is all the family he has now. It doesn’t have to be that way.

We are here because somewhere in America a father comes home from the second shift and feels a raging fever on the brow of his sleeping daughter as he kisses her goodnight. And now, bone-weary and worried, he cradles that child in his arms at the emergency room, because there is nowhere else for him to go. It doesn’t have to be that way.

They are why we are here. Because everywhere in America, people are counting on us to stand up for them.

And so I ask you, will you stand up for that tired father forced into emergency rooms to get health care for his little girl?

Will you stand up for the brave young boy in the refugee camp?

Will you stand up for the working men and women in our labor movement who have to fight for decent working conditions and living wages?

Will you stand up for the young man who knows that education is his way out of the cycle of poverty and yet it seems beyond his grasp?

Will you stand up for that hungry eight-year old girl so she doesn’t give up on her life before it’s even begun?

Will you stand up for all the American families whose loved ones are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Will you stand up?

Will you stand up for America?

Because if we don’t stand up, who will?

If we don’t speak out, who will?

Forty years ago, speaking in protest against the war in Vietnam on the eve of its escalation, the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King said there comes a time when silence is betrayal. Silence is betrayal.

That time has come again. We cannot stand silent.

They have to hear you. Can they hear you?

I believe it is a betrayal not to speak out against the escalation of the war our nation is engaged in today, in Iraq.

It is a betrayal for this President to send more troops into harm’s way when we know it will not succeed in bringing stability to the region.

And it is not right by our silence to enable this President to escalate the war in Iraq. And we must not delude ourselves: our silence enables this President to escalate the war.

It is a betrayal not to stop the President’s plan when we have the responsibility, the power and the actual tools to prevent it.

Being satisfied with non-binding resolutions we know this President will ignore is a betrayal. And shutting down debate in the Senate on this issue is worse than a betrayal. It’s an outright denial of the people’s will.

And one more thing, while I’m at it.

You described yourself as "the decider." I have news for you. The American people are the real "deciders," Mr. President. And they are saying, "You have had your chance."

Americans are speaking out. And our leaders must do no less.

You must stand up now against George Bush’s escalation of the war in Iraq. George Bush is counting on us not to stand up, not to fight against this escalation with everything we have. George Bush is counting on a Democratic Party that will not press for what we know is right.

Silence is betrayal.

Opposing this escalation with all the vigor and tools we have is a test of our political courage. And you’d better believe that George Bush, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove are betting that we don’t have that courage.

They don’t think we have it in us. They’re counting on their opponents to be weak, and political, and careful.

This is not the time for political calculation. This is the time for political courage. Stand up.

Being honest and changing course in Iraq is the first step in restoring America’s ability to provide moral leadership throughout the world. And make no mistake: America must lead. We are the pre-eminent, stabilizing power in the world. If we don’t stand up, who will?

This is the time for political courage – not only when it comes to speaking out against Iraq, but also about the challenges we face here at home.

Because, when it comes to 37 million Americans living in poverty, silence is betrayal.

One in every five children – count them, one in every five American children – live in poverty, here on the richest nation on the planet. It doesn’t have to be that way.

The causes of poverty are complex, entrenched, and powerful. And our will to address them and restore the promises of equality and social justice must be just as strong. Are you strong enough? Will you stand up to end poverty in America? It means addressing education, jobs, health care, housing, predatory lending, and personal responsibility. The fight will be long and it will not be easy. Are you ready? Will you use your voice against poverty, or will you stand silent? Stand up. Stand up to eradicate poverty in America.

When it comes to 47 million Americans without health care, silence is betrayal.

The 47 million are silent victims of a health care system gone wrong, where policies are driven by profits not patient care. We have to stop letting the health insurance companies and the big pharmaceutical concerns decide our nation’s health care policy. We have to give the silent victims, who stand in line at free clinics and use the expired medicines of friends and neighbors, we have to give them the dignity of universal health care.

And while we’re at it, we have to stop using words like “access to health care” when we know with certainty those words mean something less than universal care. Who are you willing to leave behind without the care he needs? Which family? Which child?

We need a truly universal solution, and we need it now.

Will you stand up for universal health insurance in America?

And it’s time we stood up for an energy policy that’s not dictated by the profit margins of Big Oil -- and an environmental policy that’s not promoted by or regulated by polluters. Today, not tomorrow, or in the next decade or in the next generation. Today, our planet is at risk, and here, again, silence is betrayal.

So, will you speak out? Will you stand up?

These are the great moral imperatives of our time. And by breaking the silence we are not breaking faith with our flag or our forefathers or our brave young men and women in uniform. We are keeping faith with America.

Because we are better than this. We are better than this.

We should be the bright light, the beacon for all the world.

We are not the country of the Superdome in New Orleans after Katrina;

We are not the country of Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo;

We are not the country of secret surveillance and government behind closed doors.

We are Americans, and we’re better than that.

And we are Democrats, the party of action – not reaction. We are Democrats, the party of principle – not appeasement. The time for half-measures, empty promises, and sweet rhetoric is gone. Now is the time for courage, decisiveness and moral leadership.

It’s time to stand up for the promise of America again -- and for the principle that every American matters, no matter where you come from, or what color your skin is, or how much money you have in your pocket.

Let’s stand up for the working people whose labor made this country great. America was built by men and women who worked with their hands. And organized labor has fought for and made better the lives of every working man and woman, by giving them a voice – labor never stands silent where wrongs need to be righted. Will you stand with them? It is time we acknowledged that it is organized labor, which has protected the American worker against mistreatment by corporate America. I am proud to stand beside organized labor? Will you stand with them, too? Will you walk with them and march with them?

We know one thing for sure: it is time to be patriotic about something other than war. It is time to do what you know is right and to speak out against what you know is wrong.

Not tomorrow. Now. Speak out now, take action now.

We don’t have to wait to see if someone keeps the promises of a 2008 campaign. In fact, the transformational change this country needs cannot wait until January 2009.

Tomorrow begins today. And our obligation to act starts right here, right now.

Because somewhere in America, because everywhere in America, people are counting on us to stand by them and to fight alongside them for what we know in our hearts is right.

So let’s stand up together. We have always been the party of promise who stood with the working man and woman, the party of hope who stood with the needy, the party of compassion who stood with the young and the old and the frail. It is who we are.

In times like these, we don’t need to redefine the Democratic Party; we need to reclaim the Democratic Party.

Thank you, God bless you and God bless this great country.

Filed under Speeches by John Edwards for President: Speeches

Permalink Print

June 22, 2006

National Press Club Policy Address

Remarks as Prepared for Delivery

Thank you. It’s good to be here.

I thank you for the opportunity to speak -- this is an important moment in time for our country.

The focus of my speech will be on poverty. But we cannot address an issue like poverty without answering a few basic questions. Questions we ought to be asking ourselves and answers we ought to be demanding from our leaders about how we as a nation are going to confront the very real and very major challenges we face, including the great moral challenge of poverty.

First, what kind of leadership should America be providing in the world? We live in a moment of dramatic change and huge global challenges. Our military power is fortunately strong, and we must keep it that way. But our economic power will be challenged by new forces, and our most important asset, our international moral authority, is not what it ought to be. Far from it. What kind of leadership can address all these fronts and serve us at home as well?

Second, what kind of America do we want, not just today, but twenty years from now, and how do we think we can get there from here? The founders of this country created the country we have today because they dreamed large. They knew there were obstacles, but those obstacles didn’t mean that they decided a less perfect union would be a good compromise. We will never get what we don’t reach for. So in 2006 and the decades to come, for what should we reach?

And last, on a more partisan note, what and for whom do we want our Democratic Party to stand for and fight for?

Those are the questions. I’d like to start with direct answers to these questions.

On America’s leadership role in the world, we need to restore the moral core and legitimacy that has been the foundation of our influence. It’s no secret that America’s credibility has been tarnished during the past six years. And that in too many places, even among our best friends, the very idea of American leadership seems like a contradiction. Poll after poll shows this, but it isn’t some abstract thing – during the past year, I’ve felt this first-hand, from Europe to the Middle East to India and Russia. Reversing this is one of our most important challenges.

I want to live in an America that is once again looked up to and respected around the world; an America that is an inspiration to common people everywhere who want to make their lives better. That means working to restore our legitimacy by strengthening international institutions or creating new ones; it means leading on the great challenges before us: whether it’s preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, ending the genocide in Darfur, or fighting extreme poverty and diseases that ravage societies. It also means a plan to substantially reduce our presence in Iraq, by at least 40,000 troops immediately, and to continue that reduction so that the Iraqis can take control over their own lives. As we do so, we should call upon the other countries in the region who have expressed an interest in securing the stability of Iraq to step forward. Restoring our credibility and legitimacy is absolutely essential if we are to defeat global jihadists.

How we work to improve our country and lift people up is also critical to restoring American leadership in the world. For decades, many drew inspiration from us, admiring how we worked everyday to make our country a better place. And the whole world is watching. Just as we fight poverty here at home, we must show more leadership in ending extreme poverty around the globe. It is wrong that close to half the world’s population – more than 3 billion people – live on less than 2 dollars a day. And it is a disgrace that millions of people suffer and die from diseases that are preventable – for example, a $5 dollar mosquito net could save a family from malaria; a few cents could vaccinate a child; and a $4 dose of medicine can help prevent a mother from transmitting AIDS to her newborn at childbirth. If we are to rebuild America’s moral leadership, we must do better at home – and abroad.

On the America we want to achieve in the next twenty years, I don’t think the picture is hard to draw. It is an America where we are well on our way to ending poverty. It is an America where every American has health care coverage – not access to health insurance or other wiggle-word ways we try to describe something less than health coverage for every American. It is time. It is an America where businesses and working people thrive in a competitive and fair international marketplace. It is an America where everyone can join the middle class and everyone can build a better future than their parents had.

I want to live in an America free from dependence on fossil fuels, where our environmental policies reflect our pride in the blessings of a beautiful and abundant country and our commitment to preserve that country for our farmers, our fishermen, our children. Sacrifice, conservation, and innovation will be required.

I want to live in an America that has not sacrificed individual liberties in the name of freedom, where – in the fight to preserve the country we love – we do not sacrifice the country we love, where we don’t make excuses for violating civil rights, though we understand the test of liberty is in the moments when such excuses almost sound reasonable.

I want to live in an America where we value work as well as wealth, because we understand that we are only strong because our people work hard, that we are made strong by our longshoremen and autoworkers, our computer programmers and janitors, and disrespect to any of them is disrespect to the values that allowed for America’s greatness in the first place.

I want to live in an America where the difference in our best schools and our worst schools cannot be measured by Newsweek, where those who can teach are encouraged and rewarded and where the world of learning is opened to every child.

Today I will focus on the first of these goals – an America without poverty, but in the coming months, I will address each of these issues that will make such a difference to the country we can be in twenty years.

Finally, the Democratic Party. We should also recognize that our political parties, and what they stand for, are critical in shaping our country’s future. I believe in a Democratic Party of big ideas, with the courage and backbone to translate those ideas into workable policies.

I believe in a Democratic Party that fights for those who have no voice: the forgotten middle class, the poor, those who have labored a lifetime, and all those who speak the truth against overwhelming public opinion.

And I believe in a Party willing to take stances that are right, whether or not they are popular. This is the tradition of America, fighting for what is right regardless of the odds, regardless of the power of those on the other side. It is what the Democratic Party I believe in is all about. We do not have to posture or to accept mediocrity or compromise our values. We can decide to be great, we can address great problems, we can see great possibilities.

I do not believe in a Party obsessed with incrementalism, half-measures, and positions based on yesterday’s polls. If we want to lead – and in these times we desperately need to lead in another direction – we have to represent something greater than our own self-promotion. We have to believe that our country is more important than ourselves. These times are critical, so let me be clear: in this battle for the soul of our Party, no less than the future of America and the future of the world are at stake.

As Democrats, we need to speak to these issues with specifics on how America should address them.

As Democrats, we need to make clear that hard challenges don’t frighten us, but call us to action.

To me, there is no better opportunity to make this clear than the enormous challenge of helping 37 million Americans who live in poverty.

How we respond to the fact that millions among us live in poverty says everything about the character of America.

***

As some of you know, I’ve served as director of the Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill for a little over a year. The Center is a place where we’ve brought together the best minds in the country to discuss – and challenge – the latest ideas about how to fight poverty. In our first year, we’ve held several national forums, asked all the tough questions, and scoured the country to find the most innovative solutions being implemented now. When I talked about poverty in the 2004 campaign, political types said it was futile. They said nobody cares about poverty except for the poor. Not true, and we saw it with Katrina. You’ve heard me talk about the Two Americas? One for those families who have everything they need, and then one for everybody else. Katrina showed us the Two Americas. Those images of men and women at the Superdome stranded without food, water or hope – simply because they didn’t have a car or the cash to escape. Those images are something we’ll never forget.

They’ve become the face of poverty in America – a symbol of the poor and forgotten families that live in big cities like New Orleans and in small towns and rural America too.

But if Katrina showed us the Two Americas, it also showed us something else. It showed us the American people want to live in one America. In the months after the hurricane, millions opened their hearts, their homes and their wallets to this cause.

It’s clear the American people want to do the right thing on poverty, but it’s also clear there are a couple things holding us back.

So many of our families are struggling too much themselves to focus on those in need. Others don’t want to repeat the failures of the past and throw money at a problem with the hope it will magically disappear.

These are very real concerns, but they’re ones we can overcome.

• If our ideas about alleviating poverty are based on the values that made our country great -- that we expect people who are capable of working to work, expect them to be responsible, and expect them to make smart choices.

• And if we make it clear that ending poverty is not something we are doing just for others but something we do for all of us.

Maybe you’ve heard the phrase “it’s expensive to be poor.” Well, it’s also expensive for America to have so many poor.

We all pay a price when young people who could someday find the cure for AIDS or make a fuel cell work are sitting on a stoop because they didn’t get the education they need.

We all pay a price when our people turn to crime because they have no other hope. Harvard’s Richard Freeman estimates that growing incarceration costs and unemployment of ex-offenders costs 4 percent of our economy, each and every year.

And we all pay a price when the American Dream no longer seems American.

We need to restore the dream that is America. But we also need to do it in a way that all Americans will be proud of. Not just by giving handouts to the poor, or pumping money into a broken government program. But by finding ways to help everyone who works hard and makes smart choices get ahead.

If we’re going to be the America we believe in, we can’t look the other way.

It’s wrong we have 37 million Americans living in poverty - - separated from the opportunities of this country by their income, their housing, their access to education and jobs and health care- - just as it was wrong we once lived in a country legally segregated by race. Too many places today are segregated by class.

Poverty is the great moral issue of our time, and we all have an obligation to do something about it.

Not just alleviate some of the symptoms…

Not just find ways to help some of the people…

But end it.

***

America has fought poverty before. Past efforts like Social Security, Medicaid, welfare reform and the Earned Income Tax Credit have made a real difference.

But poverty is still with us. Any effort to address it must face up to the reasons that past efforts have fallen short, and to the new challenges that have arisen.

First, work doesn't pay enough. A single mom with one child who works full-time for the minimum wage is about $2,700 below the poverty line. In 2005, while corporate profits were up 13 percent, real wages fell for most workers.

Second, in too many poor communities, marriage is too rare, and male responsibility is not what it should be. Welfare reform has helped reduce poverty rates among single mothers, but too many young men remain cut off from the hopes and routines of ordinary American life.

Third, the debate of poverty policies is stuck in the old days. One side is driven by guilt, and the other by a deep skepticism of what government can accomplish. In reality, we need both the courage and the confidence to take a new course. And both sides should recognize that our whole economic future depends on making upward mobility universal.

***

Which is why, today, I’m proposing we set a national goal of eliminating poverty in the next 30 years.

It’s an ambitious goal, but it’s one we’ll meet by building the America our founders imagined - - an America where if you work hard, take personal responsibility and do the right thing, you won’t live in poverty, you won’t just get by, you’ll get ahead.

I propose a great national goal, because Americans believe in achieving great things. Like JFK challenging America to land a man on the moon, a national goal of eradicating poverty will sharpen our focus, marshal our resources and at the end of the day, bring out our best.

Besides, we need a goal. America will never get close to eliminating poverty until we set our sights and commit to try.

Poverty is such a low priority in Washington that politicians aren't even interested in developing an accurate statistic. The official measure is incomplete and out-of-date – overlooking as many as 1 million Americans. It's a metaphor for how poverty is ignored. Setting a bold goal is how we'll bring change.

Tony Blair understands the power of great goals. In 1999, he announced a goal of ending child poverty by 2020. Since then, British child poverty has dropped by 17 percent. It’s a remarkable accomplishment in just seven years, and there is no reason we can’t see similar results here.

But this afternoon, I want to make clear I’m not willing to settle for some Washington “pie-in-the-sky” dream that gets promised and then quickly forgotten. Poverty is an issue where we cannot fail. So to hold us accountable, I propose we also set a benchmark to measure our progress and guide our way.

In the next 10 years, we need to cut poverty by a third, improving the lives of 12 million Americans.

If we meet this benchmark, we’ll be well on our way.

***

In order to get the country on the path to eliminating poverty, we must build a "Working Society," which builds on the lessons of the past to create solutions for the future. At the heart of the Working Society is the value of work. Work is not only a source of a paycheck, but also a source of dignity and independence and self respect.

In a Working Society, we would create new opportunities to work. We would offer affordable housing near good jobs and a million last-chance jobs to people who cannot find work on their own.

In a Working Society, we would reward work. We would raise the minimum wage and cut taxes for low-income workers. We would find ways for workers to not only have but keep their health care and other key benefits, a topic I’ll return to in the future. We would help workers save for the future with Work Bonds and homeownership tax credits. And we would create a million more housing vouchers for working families.

And in a Working Society, we would expect work. In return for greater investments, we would expect everyone who can work to work, for the sake of their country, their families, and themselves.

***

In a few months, there’s a new movie coming out starring Will Smith. It’s called “The Pursuit of Happyness.”

The film is about a man who goes from being homeless to earning millions as a stockbroker.

The rags to riches movie is based on a true story, but to too many poor Americans, it sounds like a fairy tale.

That’s because we live in a time where it’s harder than ever to get ahead. Today, it’s easy to be a millionaire, but trying to become one is like climbing a greased pole.

The Working Society is based on the premise that we should expect work and reward work.

One harsh reality is that some people are in poverty because no one will give them a job, either because they have no prior work history, they lack basic skills such as the ability to read, or, the truth is, they have physical and mental challenges.

This is particularly true for young men. Welfare reform asked young mothers to join the workforce and gave them help to get there. Millions of poor women benefited, but poor men lost ground during the best economy we've ever had. In America today, there are communities where half the young men are out of work.

It's time to finish the job of welfare reform by giving low-income men the opportunity to work and challenging them to take responsibility for doing so. If they don't work, they won't get paid. If they owe child support, their children will get paid first, because women shouldn't have to raise children on their own.

I believe we'll find out once again that poor people are just like everyone else: they want to work, they want to do right by their children, and given the chance, they will work their hearts out.

If we believe that everyone who is capable of working should work, then we need to make sure that they have the opportunity to do so. I believe that we should create one million "stepping stone" jobs over five years. A good job that will let people work their way out of poverty in the short term, and help them get experience so they can get better jobs in the future.

These jobs could change the face of our hardest hit communities. Workers could serve with non-profit organizations working wonders, building parks and keeping our neighborhoods clean. They will bring opportunity to neighborhoods where jobs are scarce and hope is sometimes even scarcer.

And while we expect people to work and help make sure they can, the Working Society would make sure all Americans have something to show for it.

The erosion of the minimum wage is a disgrace; we need to raise it to at least $7.50 an hour – a step that, by itself, would give full-time workers a $4,800 raise and lift more than a million people out of poverty. Just yesterday, Republicans in the Senate blocked Senator Kennedy’s attempt to raise the national minimum wage. Since the Republicans in Washington won’t raise the minimum wage we are taking this fight to the states.

We also need to give America’s workers a real right to organize. Unions helped move manufacturing jobs into the foundation of our middle class, and they can do the same for our service economy. This week’s Time magazine describes one difference between a janitor making $6.50 an hour and another making $12.50 an hour -- a union. The union itself is the difference between working in poverty and working your way out of poverty.

There’s a saying you may have heard – “income is what you use to get by, but assets are what you use to get ahead.”

It’s true, and it’s why we’ll beat poverty by helping every working American build – and protect – their own assets… a savings account they can use to start a small business, money to fall back on in hard times, or a down payment to buy their first home. I’ve previously described a proposal I call “Work Bonds,” which would match low-income workers’ wages with a tax credit to help jumpstart their savings accounts.

***

In the 1990s, we saw how a new approach to welfare could help millions of families achieve independence. Now it is time for a new approach for another tough issue: housing.

I believe we should radically overhaul HUD in three big steps.

First, we need to integrate our neighborhoods economically. Many neighborhoods were once segregated by race; now segregation by wealth is common, often with a racial dimension. If we truly believe that we are all equal, then we should live together too.

We could all see the problems of concentrated poverty after Katrina, but the truth is that nearly every major American city has similar neighborhoods that remain unseen. The federal government has built public housing in the worst neighborhoods and overlooked the need for affordable housing in the suburbs.

These policies cut willing workers off from entry-level jobs, which are often created in the suburbs, far from public transportation. And they keep low-income children far from good schools.

If conservatives really believed in markets, they'd join us in a more radical and more sensible solution: creating 1 million more housing vouchers for working families over the next five years. Done right, vouchers can enable people to vote with their feet to demand safe communities with good schools. We can help pay for this by cutting back HUD’s role in managing public housing, which it doesn’t do very well and often sticks working families in bad neighborhoods.

Second, we need to put families ahead of bureaucracy. HUD is bloated and has a track record of mismanaging money.

We should start by cutting back HUD's excessive, unnecessary, and sometimes incompetent contractors. Second, we should trim the agency by at least 1,500 employees and get the money out where it can do some good.

We can take the opportunity to give more authority to cities and states to tackle housing problems in their own regions. They will be responsible for taking a regional approach -- including both cities and suburbs -- and creating affordable housing near jobs and good schools.

Finally, work should be at the center of our housing policy just as it is at the center of our other social policies. We should attach a contract to new housing vouchers: if they don’t already have jobs, recipients must work toward independence, and in return we will help them earn more and save more. A similar program is already working for 75,000 families today.

I’ve talked a lot about housing in cities, but we shouldn’t forget that housing is a rural problem too – 1.5 million rural homes are substandard – without plumbing or with a crumbling foundation or sagging roof.

The Working Society won’t forget about America’s small towns and rural communities. It will offer tailored solutions to meet their needs.

We would invest in community colleges, which are particularly important in rural areas.

We would open rural small business centers, which will provide investment capital and advice to help entrepreneurs get off the ground.

And we would take a long, hard look at America’s schools, which are too often no better than the zip code they’re in.

***

Across the country, many of our schools – particularly our high schools - are failing.

Today, almost one in three students don’t graduate. On average, minority students enter high school four years behind their peers.

In the Working Society, we’d get serious about improving our schools. There is no greater challenge in America today, and I’ll talk more about what we need to do in the coming months. It includes expanding preschool for three- and four-year-olds, getting good teachers into the places we need them most, and overhauling our outdated high schools.

We also need to address the dropout crisis in our nation. We can never overcome poverty until we address it -- not by lowering standards, but by making sure everyone can meet them.

America is about second chances, so I don’t see why we shouldn’t have "second-chance schools." These schools would lift up former dropouts, offering them one-on-one attention and a chance to earn a diploma at night or at a local community college. Many drop-outs want to do the work and they realize dropping out was a mistake. They should have the chance to earn a diploma and get on with their life.

Now, if you’ve every heard me talk about education, you know about a program I call “College for Everyone,” which allows students to go to the first year of college for free if they are willing to stay out of trouble and take a part-time job.

Today, I have good news. College for Everyone works.

Last month, I attended a high-school awards ceremony in Greene County, North Carolina. Through a pilot program we were able to provide students there over $300,000 in aid. That means kids who never before would have dreamed of going to college are not only leaving for school this fall – but paying for their first year without going into debt.

***

Good public schools and the chance to go to college meant everything in my life. But even to this day, there’s something that matters more. Family. I don’t know where I’d be without parents who taught me right from wrong, and that there are consequences for the choices I make in life.

In a Working Society, we’ll make a priority of strengthening families.

As a start, we would cut the marriage penalty that still hits poor workers, because penalizing marriage makes absolutely no sense. We would also cut taxes for low-income single workers, who are the only Americans living in poverty and paying federal taxes, to draw them into the workforce. And, as I mentioned earlier, we would create opportunities for young fathers to work and take responsibility for their children, and reward them for doing so.

But after that, there’s only so much the government can do. So the real burden of promoting strong families falls to us.

All of us—parents, clergy, teachers, public officials—we need to say that it is wrong when young men father children but don’t support them.

It is wrong when girls and young women bear children they aren’t ready to care for.

It is wrong when corporate America – through movies, music and advertising – promotes a culture of reckless behavior to our youth.

And it is wrong when all Americans see this happening and do nothing to stop it.

Fighting poverty is a job for government, it is a job for communities, it is a job for all of us.

***

One of the great pleasures I’ve had this past year is traveling to college campuses to engage young people in the cause of poverty. I’m so impressed with young people today, particularly the 700 college students who skipped Spring Break to clean up Katrina damage with me in St. Bernard Parish.

These young people were tremendous. They understand that in America, when a neighbor is in need, you don’t make excuses. You don’t point to someone else and say it is their responsibility. You just step up.

I believe these college students have a lot to teach us about how we approach challenges like poverty. All of us, we need to move right past the skeptics, and follow the lead of these young people.

We need to get involved when our neighbors need us.

We need to speak up when we know something’s wrong.

And we need to step forward to meet the challenges we all face.

Issues like poverty, they are our test, and we have a moral obligation to make sure we pass.

In America today, there are millions of our neighbors who think they’re alone. That no one knows they’re struggling with their bills. That no one cares they can’t afford to turn on the lights. That no one thinks twice about the fact their kids go to bed hungry at night.

Well I have something to say to those families today: We know. We care. And we will lift you up.

There was a woman – an extraordinary activist – who would end her speeches by saying “you know, the leaders we have been waiting for are us.”

She’s exactly right. Poverty is our challenge. It’s time for us to lead.

Filed under Speeches by John Edwards for President: Speeches

Permalink Print

National Press Club Policy Address

Remarks as Prepared for Delivery

Thank you. It’s good to be here.

I thank you for the opportunity to speak -- this is an important moment in time for our country.

The focus of my speech will be on poverty. But we cannot address an issue like poverty without answering a few basic questions. Questions we ought to be asking ourselves and answers we ought to be demanding from our leaders about how we as a nation are going to confront the very real and very major challenges we face, including the great moral challenge of poverty.

First, what kind of leadership should America be providing in the world? We live in a moment of dramatic change and huge global challenges. Our military power is fortunately strong, and we must keep it that way. But our economic power will be challenged by new forces, and our most important asset, our international moral authority, is not what it ought to be. Far from it. What kind of leadership can address all these fronts and serve us at home as well?

Second, what kind of America do we want, not just today, but twenty years from now, and how do we think we can get there from here? The founders of this country created the country we have today because they dreamed large. They knew there were obstacles, but those obstacles didn’t mean that they decided a less perfect union would be a good compromise. We will never get what we don’t reach for. So in 2006 and the decades to come, for what should we reach?

And last, on a more partisan note, what and for whom do we want our Democratic Party to stand for and fight for?

Those are the questions. I’d like to start with direct answers to these questions.

On America’s leadership role in the world, we need to restore the moral core and legitimacy that has been the foundation of our influence. It’s no secret that America’s credibility has been tarnished during the past six years. And that in too many places, even among our best friends, the very idea of American leadership seems like a contradiction. Poll after poll shows this, but it isn’t some abstract thing – during the past year, I’ve felt this first-hand, from Europe to the Middle East to India and Russia. Reversing this is one of our most important challenges.

I want to live in an America that is once again looked up to and respected around the world; an America that is an inspiration to common people everywhere who want to make their lives better. That means working to restore our legitimacy by strengthening international institutions or creating new ones; it means leading on the great challenges before us: whether it’s preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, ending the genocide in Darfur, or fighting extreme poverty and diseases that ravage societies. It also means a plan to substantially reduce our presence in Iraq, by at least 40,000 troops immediately, and to continue that reduction so that the Iraqis can take control over their own lives. As we do so, we should call upon the other countries in the region who have expressed an interest in securing the stability of Iraq to step forward. Restoring our credibility and legitimacy is absolutely essential if we are to defeat global jihadists.

How we work to improve our country and lift people up is also critical to restoring American leadership in the world. For decades, many drew inspiration from us, admiring how we worked everyday to make our country a better place. And the whole world is watching. Just as we fight poverty here at home, we must show more leadership in ending extreme poverty around the globe. It is wrong that close to half the world’s population – more than 3 billion people – live on less than 2 dollars a day. And it is a disgrace that millions of people suffer and die from diseases that are preventable – for example, a $5 dollar mosquito net could save a family from malaria; a few cents could vaccinate a child; and a $4 dose of medicine can help prevent a mother from transmitting AIDS to her newborn at childbirth. If we are to rebuild America’s moral leadership, we must do better at home – and abroad.

On the America we want to achieve in the next twenty years, I don’t think the picture is hard to draw. It is an America where we are well on our way to ending poverty. It is an America where every American has health care coverage – not access to health insurance or other wiggle-word ways we try to describe something less than health coverage for every American. It is time. It is an America where businesses and working people thrive in a competitive and fair international marketplace. It is an America where everyone can join the middle class and everyone can build a better future than their parents had.

I want to live in an America free from dependence on fossil fuels, where our environmental policies reflect our pride in the blessings of a beautiful and abundant country and our commitment to preserve that country for our farmers, our fishermen, our children. Sacrifice, conservation, and innovation will be required.

I want to live in an America that has not sacrificed individual liberties in the name of freedom, where – in the fight to preserve the country we love – we do not sacrifice the country we love, where we don’t make excuses for violating civil rights, though we understand the test of liberty is in the moments when such excuses almost sound reasonable.

I want to live in an America where we value work as well as wealth, because we understand that we are only strong because our people work hard, that we are made strong by our longshoremen and autoworkers, our computer programmers and janitors, and disrespect to any of them is disrespect to the values that allowed for America’s greatness in the first place.

I want to live in an America where the difference in our best schools and our worst schools cannot be measured by Newsweek, where those who can teach are encouraged and rewarded and where the world of learning is opened to every child.

Today I will focus on the first of these goals – an America without poverty, but in the coming months, I will address each of these issues that will make such a difference to the country we can be in twenty years.

Finally, the Democratic Party. We should also recognize that our political parties, and what they stand for, are critical in shaping our country’s future. I believe in a Democratic Party of big ideas, with the courage and backbone to translate those ideas into workable policies.

I believe in a Democratic Party that fights for those who have no voice: the forgotten middle class, the poor, those who have labored a lifetime, and all those who speak the truth against overwhelming public opinion.

And I believe in a Party willing to take stances that are right, whether or not they are popular. This is the tradition of America, fighting for what is right regardless of the odds, regardless of the power of those on the other side. It is what the Democratic Party I believe in is all about. We do not have to posture or to accept mediocrity or compromise our values. We can decide to be great, we can address great problems, we can see great possibilities.

I do not believe in a Party obsessed with incrementalism, half-measures, and positions based on yesterday’s polls. If we want to lead – and in these times we desperately need to lead in another direction – we have to represent something greater than our own self-promotion. We have to believe that our country is more important than ourselves. These times are critical, so let me be clear: in this battle for the soul of our Party, no less than the future of America and the future of the world are at stake.

As Democrats, we need to speak to these issues with specifics on how America should address them.

As Democrats, we need to make clear that hard challenges don’t frighten us, but call us to action.

To me, there is no better opportunity to make this clear than the enormous challenge of helping 37 million Americans who live in poverty.

How we respond to the fact that millions among us live in poverty says everything about the character of America.

***

As some of you know, I’ve served as director of the Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill for a little over a year. The Center is a place where we’ve brought together the best minds in the country to discuss – and challenge – the latest ideas about how to fight poverty. In our first year, we’ve held several national forums, asked all the tough questions, and scoured the country to find the most innovative solutions being implemented now. When I talked about poverty in the 2004 campaign, political types said it was futile. They said nobody cares about poverty except for the poor. Not true, and we saw it with Katrina. You’ve heard me talk about the Two Americas? One for those families who have everything they need, and then one for everybody else. Katrina showed us the Two Americas. Those images of men and women at the Superdome stranded without food, water or hope – simply because they didn’t have a car or the cash to escape. Those images are something we’ll never forget.

They’ve become the face of poverty in America – a symbol of the poor and forgotten families that live in big cities like New Orleans and in small towns and rural America too.

But if Katrina showed us the Two Americas, it also showed us something else. It showed us the American people want to live in one America. In the months after the hurricane, millions opened their hearts, their homes and their wallets to this cause.

It’s clear the American people want to do the right thing on poverty, but it’s also clear there are a couple things holding us back.

So many of our families are struggling too much themselves to focus on those in need. Others don’t want to repeat the failures of the past and throw money at a problem with the hope it will magically disappear.

These are very real concerns, but they’re ones we can overcome.

• If our ideas about alleviating poverty are based on the values that made our country great -- that we expect people who are capable of working to work, expect them to be responsible, and expect them to make smart choices.

• And if we make it clear that ending poverty is not something we are doing just for others but something we do for all of us.

Maybe you’ve heard the phrase “it’s expensive to be poor.” Well, it’s also expensive for America to have so many poor.

We all pay a price when young people who could someday find the cure for AIDS or make a fuel cell work are sitting on a stoop because they didn’t get the education they need.

We all pay a price when our people turn to crime because they have no other hope. Harvard’s Richard Freeman estimates that growing incarceration costs and unemployment of ex-offenders costs 4 percent of our economy, each and every year.

And we all pay a price when the American Dream no longer seems American.

We need to restore the dream that is America. But we also need to do it in a way that all Americans will be proud of. Not just by giving handouts to the poor, or pumping money into a broken government program. But by finding ways to help everyone who works hard and makes smart choices get ahead.

If we’re going to be the America we believe in, we can’t look the other way.

It’s wrong we have 37 million Americans living in poverty - - separated from the opportunities of this country by their income, their housing, their access to education and jobs and health care- - just as it was wrong we once lived in a country legally segregated by race. Too many places today are segregated by class.

Poverty is the great moral issue of our time, and we all have an obligation to do something about it.

Not just alleviate some of the symptoms…

Not just find ways to help some of the people…

But end it.

***

America has fought poverty before. Past efforts like Social Security, Medicaid, welfare reform and the Earned Income Tax Credit have made a real difference.

But poverty is still with us. Any effort to address it must face up to the reasons that past efforts have fallen short, and to the new challenges that have arisen.

First, work doesn't pay enough. A single mom with one child who works full-time for the minimum wage is about $2,700 below the poverty line. In 2005, while corporate profits were up 13 percent, real wages fell for most workers.

Second, in too many poor communities, marriage is too rare, and male responsibility is not what it should be. Welfare reform has helped reduce poverty rates among single mothers, but too many young men remain cut off from the hopes and routines of ordinary American life.

Third, the debate of poverty policies is stuck in the old days. One side is driven by guilt, and the other by a deep skepticism of what government can accomplish. In reality, we need both the courage and the confidence to take a new course. And both sides should recognize that our whole economic future depends on making upward mobility universal.

***

Which is why, today, I’m proposing we set a national goal of eliminating poverty in the next 30 years.

It’s an ambitious goal, but it’s one we’ll meet by building the America our founders imagined - - an America where if you work hard, take personal responsibility and do the right thing, you won’t live in poverty, you won’t just get by, you’ll get ahead.

I propose a great national goal, because Americans believe in achieving great things. Like JFK challenging America to land a man on the moon, a national goal of eradicating poverty will sharpen our focus, marshal our resources and at the end of the day, bring out our best.

Besides, we need a goal. America will never get close to eliminating poverty until we set our sights and commit to try.

Poverty is such a low priority in Washington that politicians aren't even interested in developing an accurate statistic. The official measure is incomplete and out-of-date – overlooking as many as 1 million Americans. It's a metaphor for how poverty is ignored. Setting a bold goal is how we'll bring change.

Tony Blair understands the power of great goals. In 1999, he announced a goal of ending child poverty by 2020. Since then, British child poverty has dropped by 17 percent. It’s a remarkable accomplishment in just seven years, and there is no reason we can’t see similar results here.

But this afternoon, I want to make clear I’m not willing to settle for some Washington “pie-in-the-sky” dream that gets promised and then quickly forgotten. Poverty is an issue where we cannot fail. So to hold us accountable, I propose we also set a benchmark to measure our progress and guide our way.

In the next 10 years, we need to cut poverty by a third, improving the lives of 12 million Americans.

If we meet this benchmark, we’ll be well on our way.

***

In order to get the country on the path to eliminating poverty, we must build a "Working Society," which builds on the lessons of the past to create solutions for the future. At the heart of the Working Society is the value of work. Work is not only a source of a paycheck, but also a source of dignity and independence and self respect.

In a Working Society, we would create new opportunities to work. We would offer affordable housing near good jobs and a million last-chance jobs to people who cannot find work on their own.

In a Working Society, we would reward work. We would raise the minimum wage and cut taxes for low-income workers. We would find ways for workers to not only have but keep their health care and other key benefits, a topic I’ll return to in the future. We would help workers save for the future with Work Bonds and homeownership tax credits. And we would create a million more housing vouchers for working families.

And in a Working Society, we would expect work. In return for greater investments, we would expect everyone who can work to work, for the sake of their country, their families, and themselves.

***

In a few months, there’s a new movie coming out starring Will Smith. It’s called “The Pursuit of Happyness.”

The film is about a man who goes from being homeless to earning millions as a stockbroker.

The rags to riches movie is based on a true story, but to too many poor Americans, it sounds like a fairy tale.

That’s because we live in a time where it’s harder than ever to get ahead. Today, it’s easy to be a millionaire, but trying to become one is like climbing a greased pole.

The Working Society is based on the premise that we should expect work and reward work.

One harsh reality is that some people are in poverty because no one will give them a job, either because they have no prior work history, they lack basic skills such as the ability to read, or, the truth is, they have physical and mental challenges.

This is particularly true for young men. Welfare reform asked young mothers to join the workforce and gave them help to get there. Millions of poor women benefited, but poor men lost ground during the best economy we've ever had. In America today, there are communities where half the young men are out of work.

It's time to finish the job of welfare reform by giving low-income men the opportunity to work and challenging them to take responsibility for doing so. If they don't work, they won't get paid. If they owe child support, their children will get paid first, because women shouldn't have to raise children on their own.

I believe we'll find out once again that poor people are just like everyone else: they want to work, they want to do right by their children, and given the chance, they will work their hearts out.

If we believe that everyone who is capable of working should work, then we need to make sure that they have the opportunity to do so. I believe that we should create one million "stepping stone" jobs over five years. A good job that will let people work their way out of poverty in the short term, and help them get experience so they can get better jobs in the future.

These jobs could change the face of our hardest hit communities. Workers could serve with non-profit organizations working wonders, building parks and keeping our neighborhoods clean. They will bring opportunity to neighborhoods where jobs are scarce and hope is sometimes even scarcer.

And while we expect people to work and help make sure they can, the Working Society would make sure all Americans have something to show for it.

The erosion of the minimum wage is a disgrace; we need to raise it to at least $7.50 an hour – a step that, by itself, would give full-time workers a $4,800 raise and lift more than a million people out of poverty. Just yesterday, Republicans in the Senate blocked Senator Kennedy’s attempt to raise the national minimum wage. Since the Republicans in Washington won’t raise the minimum wage we are taking this fight to the states.

We also need to give America’s workers a real right to organize. Unions helped move manufacturing jobs into the foundation of our middle class, and they can do the same for our service economy. This week’s Time magazine describes one difference between a janitor making $6.50 an hour and another making $12.50 an hour -- a union. The union itself is the difference between working in poverty and working your way out of poverty.

There’s a saying you may have heard – “income is what you use to get by, but assets are what you use to get ahead.”

It’s true, and it’s why we’ll beat poverty by helping every working American build – and protect – their own assets… a savings account they can use to start a small business, money to fall back on in hard times, or a down payment to buy their first home. I’ve previously described a proposal I call “Work Bonds,” which would match low-income workers’ wages with a tax credit to help jumpstart their savings accounts.

***

In the 1990s, we saw how a new approach to welfare could help millions of families achieve independence. Now it is time for a new approach for another tough issue: housing.

I believe we should radically overhaul HUD in three big steps.

First, we need to integrate our neighborhoods economically. Many neighborhoods were once segregated by race; now segregation by wealth is common, often with a racial dimension. If we truly believe that we are all equal, then we should live together too.

We could all see the problems of concentrated poverty after Katrina, but the truth is that nearly every major American city has similar neighborhoods that remain unseen. The federal government has built public housing in the worst neighborhoods and overlooked the need for affordable housing in the suburbs.

These policies cut willing workers off from entry-level jobs, which are often created in the suburbs, far from public transportation. And they keep low-income children far from good schools.

If conservatives really believed in markets, they'd join us in a more radical and more sensible solution: creating 1 million more housing vouchers for working families over the next five years. Done right, vouchers can enable people to vote with their feet to demand safe communities with good schools. We can help pay for this by cutting back HUD’s role in managing public housing, which it doesn’t do very well and often sticks working families in bad neighborhoods.

Second, we need to put families ahead of bureaucracy. HUD is bloated and has a track record of mismanaging money.

We should start by cutting back HUD's excessive, unnecessary, and sometimes incompetent contractors. Second, we should trim the agency by at least 1,500 employees and get the money out where it can do some good.

We can take the opportunity to give more authority to cities and states to tackle housing problems in their own regions. They will be responsible for taking a regional approach -- including both cities and suburbs -- and creating affordable housing near jobs and good schools.

Finally, work should be at the center of our housing policy just as it is at the center of our other social policies. We should attach a contract to new housing vouchers: if they don’t already have jobs, recipients must work toward independence, and in return we will help them earn more and save more. A similar program is already working for 75,000 families today.

I’ve talked a lot about housing in cities, but we shouldn’t forget that housing is a rural problem too – 1.5 million rural homes are substandard – without plumbing or with a crumbling foundation or sagging roof.

The Working Society won’t forget about America’s small towns and rural communities. It will offer tailored solutions to meet their needs.

We would invest in community colleges, which are particularly important in rural areas.

We would open rural small business centers, which will provide investment capital and advice to help entrepreneurs get off the ground.

And we would take a long, hard look at America’s schools, which are too often no better than the zip code they’re in.

***

Across the country, many of our schools – particularly our high schools - are failing.

Today, almost one in three students don’t graduate. On average, minority students enter high school four years behind their peers.

In the Working Society, we’d get serious about improving our schools. There is no greater challenge in America today, and I’ll talk more about what we need to do in the coming months. It includes expanding preschool for three- and four-year-olds, getting good teachers into the places we need them most, and overhauling our outdated high schools.

We also need to address the dropout crisis in our nation. We can never overcome poverty until we address it -- not by lowering standards, but by making sure everyone can meet them.

America is about second chances, so I don’t see why we shouldn’t have "second-chance schools." These schools would lift up former dropouts, offering them one-on-one attention and a chance to earn a diploma at night or at a local community college. Many drop-outs want to do the work and they realize dropping out was a mistake. They should have the chance to earn a diploma and get on with their life.

Now, if you’ve every heard me talk about education, you know about a program I call “College for Everyone,” which allows students to go to the first year of college for free if they are willing to stay out of trouble and take a part-time job.

Today, I have good news. College for Everyone works.

Last month, I attended a high-school awards ceremony in Greene County, North Carolina. Through a pilot program we were able to provide students there over $300,000 in aid. That means kids who never before would have dreamed of going to college are not only leaving for school this fall – but paying for their first year without going into debt.

***

Good public schools and the chance to go to college meant everything in my life. But even to this day, there’s something that matters more. Family. I don’t know where I’d be without parents who taught me right from wrong, and that there are consequences for the choices I make in life.

In a Working Society, we’ll make a priority of strengthening families.

As a start, we would cut the marriage penalty that still hits poor workers, because penalizing marriage makes absolutely no sense. We would also cut taxes for low-income single workers, who are the only Americans living in poverty and paying federal taxes, to draw them into the workforce. And, as I mentioned earlier, we would create opportunities for young fathers to work and take responsibility for their children, and reward them for doing so.

But after that, there’s only so much the government can do. So the real burden of promoting strong families falls to us.

All of us—parents, clergy, teachers, public officials—we need to say that it is wrong when young men father children but don’t support them.

It is wrong when girls and young women bear children they aren’t ready to care for.

It is wrong when corporate America – through movies, music and advertising – promotes a culture of reckless behavior to our youth.

And it is wrong when all Americans see this happening and do nothing to stop it.

Fighting poverty is a job for government, it is a job for communities, it is a job for all of us.

***

One of the great pleasures I’ve had this past year is traveling to college campuses to engage young people in the cause of poverty. I’m so impressed with young people today, particularly the 700 college students who skipped Spring Break to clean up Katrina damage with me in St. Bernard Parish.

These young people were tremendous. They understand that in America, when a neighbor is in need, you don’t make excuses. You don’t point to someone else and say it is their responsibility. You just step up.

I believe these college students have a lot to teach us about how we approach challenges like poverty. All of us, we need to move right past the skeptics, and follow the lead of these young people.

We need to get involved when our neighbors need us.

We need to speak up when we know something’s wrong.

And we need to step forward to meet the challenges we all face.

Issues like poverty, they are our test, and we have a moral obligation to make sure we pass.

In America today, there are millions of our neighbors who think they’re alone. That no one knows they’re struggling with their bills. That no one cares they can’t afford to turn on the lights. That no one thinks twice about the fact their kids go to bed hungry at night.

Well I have something to say to those families today: We know. We care. And we will lift you up.

There was a woman – an extraordinary activist – who would end her speeches by saying “you know, the leaders we have been waiting for are us.”

She’s exactly right. Poverty is our challenge. It’s time for us to lead.

Filed under Speeches by One America Committee: Speeches

Permalink Print

April 30, 2006

The Transatlantic Partnership in an Age of Global Challenges

Thank you, Mark, very much. Let me say before I even begin that I have no expectation that this speech will compare with the last panel.

I’m very proud to be with all of you. It’s an honor to be with you and to be a part of this very important conference. And truthfully, there's no better organization than the German Marshall Fund to organize the Brussels Forum and I want to thank Craig Kennedy and Ron Asmus from GMF and their partners, all those who are sponsoring the event: DaimlerChrysler, Bertelsmann, Monitor Group, the Belgium government, for bringing us together.

This conference actually comes at a very important moment for the world. For the past few years it’s been hard to focus on our common challenges and how we have to work together to meet them. Instead, we spend an awful lot of energy looking backward and looking at the differences that we have.

Debate among friends is natural, sometimes important and sometimes necessary, especially when the issues are so important. But sometimes our disagreements overshadow the things that bind us, the things that we actually share and the new problems and the new challenges that we all face together.

I think that leadership always plays an important role. And I know John McCain was here to open this conference and it won't come as a shock to any of you that I believe that the current administration of the United States can do much better and should be doing much better than they are doing. Our leaders have a responsibility, a responsibility to understand global challenges and to prepare for them, and so do all of us.

How do we strengthen our partnership in a way that deals with the challenges like the global environment, prevention of infectious disease, or the spread of Islamic extremism? How do we begin to narrow the extraordinarily growing divide between the haves and the have-nots, both in America and around the world?

And in my — Craig mentioned this just a few minutes ago, but in my own country I’ve been working to do something about 37 million Americans who live in poverty every day to try to shine a light on it, try to get the American people and the American leadership to address the issue. I think it’s the great moral issue facing America today.

But I also think that America has a responsibility to lead and to lead on the issue of extreme poverty around the world, not just addressing the millions of Americans who live in poverty everyday. As everyone here knows, almost half of the world’s population — three billion people — lives on $2 or less a day. How do we, collectively, address this kind of human suffering? How do we win the hearts and minds of young people, especially the millions who are struggling in the Middle East and in Africa who feel that the modern world offers them absolutely nothing? How do we reach them and give them an opportunity to climb out of hopelessness and into a better life just as we did here with the Marshall Plan after World War II?

These challenges don’t face a single country or a single region, they face all of us. We have to ask ourselves are we doing enough together to meet these challenges. I think the answer is clearly no.

And today, especially with this ongoing war and conflict in Iraq, some ask whether America and Europe should and can work together to ensure the spread of freedom and opportunity. The answer to that question should be yes.

The current administration in Washington speaks, and I’m quoting now, of “spreading freedom and democracy” and they speak of it so casually that you’d think it was a mundane or very easy thing to do. I want to be absolutely clear about something, the idea that America stands for freedom is not new. Freedom and democracy are not commodities that belong to one political party and they don’t belong to one country, nor are they easy to come by.

Spreading democracy is not about knocking regimes down; it’s about building, building democratic institutions and communities that will protect basis freedom. Just as poverty and disillusionment isolate and drain hope from our people in our own cities it does exactly the same thing for every person around the world who feel like they have no chance. Ordinary men and women from Egypt to Morocco to Indonesia need to be convinced that democracy and liberty are the pathways to hope for them. So together we have to achieve these goals.

The question is how, how can we be working together to make the world more secure? How can we strengthen our existing institutions or create new ones to meet these new challenges? How should we be responding to the changes under waiting key countries like China, India, Russia?

The Brussels Forum has been focused on these issues and addressing them. It’s an effort that we ought to continue. This afternoon I want to focus on three strategic challenges that we face. First, what should we be doing together to address the threat of weapons of mass destruction? Second, how do we continue to transform our core alliance, NATO, and strengthen America’s partnership with the EU? And third, how should we adapt to a transforming Russia, a country that’s going to be absolutely critical in addressing every global challenge that we face from energy security and regional stability to non-proliferation, to the environment, HIV/AIDS and the future of democracy.

Let me begin by talking about the issue of the spread of weapons of mass destruction. Nearly everyone agrees about this threat. We know that many of these weapons and bomb-making materials are not secure, especially in Russia and the other states of the former Soviet Union. We know that those who wish us harm want access to them yet we are still, knowing that, not doing enough to stop it.

The international community needs new tools to fight proliferation. Instead of accepting the weaknesses of the global non-proliferation regime we ought to work to fix it. For example, I believe that we should create a new global nuclear compact to reinforce the NPT. This compact would be a new international agreement to close the loophole that allows civilian nuclear programs to go military. The new nuclear deal with India, in fact, is an opportunity to embark on a wider international effort.

The United States should work with Europe to take the lead. We need a global ban on the production of material for nuclear weapons and we have to establish global standards to safeguard this material.

America and Europe also must ensure that the know-how to build nuclear weapons never reaches the hands of terrorists. We should strengthen existing plans that ensure that nuclear scientists are employed for peaceful purposes. And we can provide safety and security to those scientists who are working on weapons programs in rogue nations.

There's some things that we can do to stem future threats but we also must look together to meet specific non-proliferation challenges. And it is Iran’s nuclear ambitions that pose the single greatest security threat to the United States and Europe.

Now for years I’ve argued that my government has not been doing enough to deal with the Iranian threat. While they talk that talk of the dangers of nuclear terrorism, they largely stood on the sidelines as Iran marched forward and this problem got worse. The EU3 deserve credit for its work and its leadership in this area. But American disengagement is not the right way to deal with such an extraordinary threat.

Iran’s recent actions, beginning with the reprocessing and enrichment of uranium and its refusal to cooperate with international inspections in open defiance of the UN Security Council make clear that it intends to secure nuclear weapons. And the Iranian president’s statements such as his despicable description of the holocaust as a myth or his ugly pledge to wipe Israel off the map, illustrates the seriousness of the threat.

When he says things like this we should take him at his word. The international community must confront Iran with a clear choice, give up your nuclear ambitions or suffer the consequences. Right now this means UN Security Council actions to impose sanctions.

But we have more options than doing nothing or using force. That’s a false choice. We have many more diplomatic tools to use and we already use every single one of them. For the United States, this means more active and creative diplomacy, including a willingness to engage the Iranian leadership directly. For the Europeans, it means standing strong to confront Iran in the Security Council with meaningful sanctions, and a willingness to implement those sanctions. A common effort to stop the proliferation, to stop proliferation is important. But, cooperation cannot end there. Also need to be finding new ways to help end conflicts and create stability. A key place to start would be to continue to reform critical organizations like NATO.

Nearly 60 years ago leaders on both sides of the Atlantic showed tremendous foresight by creating the alliance that stood secure during the Cold War. Then a decade ago, Trans-Atlantic leaders again made the right decision to enlarge and transform the alliance to take on new members and missions. Looking back on the successes, it’s hard to remember how controversial they were at the time. Now NATO is entering a third phase, to take on a more global role. It is the world’s greatest democratic security alliance. It now has a mission far beyond the borders of Europe, such as the important work it is doing in Afghanistan. I believe that NATO needs to embrace this kind of mission leap. While it can’t be the solution for all the world’s problems, it is the foundation for our common action. This November summit in Riga is an opportunity for the alliance to embrace this new global role.

But, NATO’s new outlook must go beyond summit statement and words. I believe that we ought to be acting right now to end some of the world’s most dire emergencies. For example, NATO should step in today to end the genocide in Sudan. It’s good that NATO has helped the African Union troops with logistic support and training, but this has not stopped the killing. The fact that we have called what’s happening in Darfur a genocide but we’re standing by and watching it unfold, all of us. We have the — we — when we all of us do collectively have the power to stop it makes an absolute mockery of our institutions and our ideals and our values.

In the 1990’s the blood shed in the Balkans threatened to make NATO irrelevant. And, by finally acting in Bosnia and Kosovo, the alliance proved its enduring value. The same is true in Darfur, both in terms of the risk and the opportunities. We must act, and we must act now. My country must show stronger leadership as well. The world knows that America is willing to use its muscle. Here’s what they want to know from us, is America actually willing to lead on the great moral issues that face the world, because it is not just the American people who are hungry for something big and important to be inspired about. Something that they believe represents the true character of the American people. The world wants to know what America is made of, what our real character is. Along with working to end crises, we should also accelerate efforts to broaden NATO’s reach to seek new partners. This means strengthening ties to countries like Ukraine, and Georgia.

I also believe we should be exploring ways to upgrade Israel’s relationship with NATO. This could mean a closer strategic and operational relationship; it could mean more exchanges and planning cooperation. It could even someday mean membership. But, we need to do more than reform NATO; the United States must embrace a stronger role for the European Union. Even a new and improved NATO will prove too narrow to deal with a full range of global challenges. That’s why America needs the EU as a strong partner and welcomes the efforts to build and strengthen its capabilities in foreign and defense policy. This is not something we, America, should be ambivalent about. A more united Europe, and a more effective EU is good for the United States; in fact, it’s good for the world.

For too long many feared that a closer U.S.–EU relationship would undercut NATO or Europe’s own project, but given the new challenges we face we have to cast this kind of old thinking aside. We need an EU–U.S. relationship that is as close and durable as NATO was during the Cold War. It should focus on a different set of issues and be a compliment to the alliance.

It should take the lead to coordinate our homeland security strategies just as we coordinated on a common defense against the Soviet threat. That includes joint efforts to deal with everything from terrorists using WMD to the outbreak of diseases like avian flu. We ought to deeper our cooperation on counter-terrorism, too, and we should do more to develop a common U.S.–EU approach from a range of issues from fighting poverty to supporting democracy.

Along with transforming our institutions to meet 21st century realities, we also need to adjust our approach to the changes that are underway in key countries, and this brings me to Russia. For the past year I had the privilege of co-chairing along with Jack Kemp a bipartisan task force for the Council on Foreign Relations on U.S.’s, the U.S. relationship with Russia. We issued our report just a few months ago, earlier this spring.

I started and ended that work with the same conviction that Russia’s future is critically important to both the United States and to Europe and it is in our interest to have a strong relationship with Russia. Just as the U.S. and Europe need each other we need Russia to stand with us to help address the global challenges we all face.

But we concluded after a lot of work that Russia’s headed in the wrong direction and so is the U.S.–Russia relationship. Our report, endorsed by our taskforce, which is made up of both Democrats and Republicans, concluded that American policy needs to adapt. America’s approach of the past 15 years has been one of strategic partnership with Russia. This is still the right long-term goal but in the short run we need to see Russia for what it is and make the necessary changes in our policy.

The truth is there are many positive things, positive trends in Russia, especially in its economy and its society. It is undergoing tremendous economic growth, an increase of about 65 percent in the GDP since 1999. It has a growing middle class, which is critical over the long term to having a strong democracy.

Russia is a profoundly different place than it was as the Soviet Union. It’s not going back there and we're not going back to the Cold War, but during the past few years we've seen negative trends to overtake many of these positive developments. There’s been an erosion of democratic freedoms, increasing centralization of power, corruption, and organized crime penetrating the government. My concern is not with the pace of democracy in Russia it is with the direction.

Internationally Russia faces a fundamental choice, will it be a partner in the international system or will it be a spoiler. Too often recently it’s been tempted to take the role of spoiler. On many important questions Russian policy is hurting not helping, it’s isolating itself. Russia is bullying its neighbors, as we've seen with its response to the color revolutions in Ukraine and Georgia and its support for the rigged election in Belarus.

Russia now poses American troops in Central Asia when after 9/11 it saw us working on a common cause. And the jury is still out on whether Russia will stand with us on Iran, we want them to, we need them to. But the signals from Moscow are mixed at best. It’s hard to see how our relationship with Russia can get better if they choose to work against us on such a vital issue as Iran.

There is no question that a more democratic, open, transparent Russia would be behaving differently. A more democratic Russia would not be on the fence regarding Iran. It would not be cracking down on dissent and free press. It would not play host to a Hamas. It would not work to keep the U.S. out of bases in Central Asia. It would not be using energy as a foreign policy weapon. It would not be supporting autocrats in Belarus or undermining democrats in Georgia or Ukraine. Solving the world’s problems will be harder without Russia. And, many of these problems will in fact become worse if this downward trajectory continues. And, there’s a larger trend that while it’s distant at this point, it’s not tomorrow deserves mention.

The souring of Russia’s relations with the U.S. and Europe raises the prospect of weakening the unity among the great powers and perhaps a newer line of division between democrats and authoritarians. So what do we do, what do we do now? Most important, we need to start by recognizing reality. Strategic partnership with Russia should still be our goal, but we can’t pretend that everything is OK. We can’t wish away serious disagreements with handshakes or happy talk at a summit meeting. We must be clear about our hopes for the relationship, but no less clear about the problems and the limitations.

The G8 meeting this summer in St. Petersburg is a huge test for Russia, for the United States, and for Europe. There’s a lot of controversy about whether Russia should be the chair of the G8, and whether there should even be a meeting at all. John McCain and I agree that this summit threatens to undermine the G8. We disagree about other things to do with Russia and their membership in the G8, but this summit is 11 weeks away and is going to happen. We can’t paper over the differences we have with President Putin. Leaders should not lead without raising concerns about Russia’s de-democratization, its behavior toward its neighbors, its cooperation in the war on terror, or its use of energy as a weapon.

If our leaders don’t stand up for what we believe, then we need to consider seriously whether we should continue to even have a G8. I don’t think that’d be good for us, but a future of meaningless G8 summits would be even worse. Russia’s entering a critical political phase. The parliament, parliamentary elections next year and presidential election in 2008. America and the EU should be working now to make clear what the criteria are for legitimate transition. We should communicate this publicly and privately. If today’s reality of Russian politics continues with opposition candidates kept off the ballot arbitrarily, unable to access the media or to raise funds, with opposition parties unable to form because of technicalities, or with independent domestic monitoring organizations kept out.

Then, there’s the real risk that Russian leadership will be seeing externally and internally is illegitimate. It is not up to any of us to decide whether Russia heads toward democracy, that’s for the Russian people to decide. But, we can make clear that their decisions matter and this will only work if U.S., the U.S. and Europe send the same message. One lesson we’ve learned is that Moscow pays attention when it sees the united western front. So we have to speak together. And, in dealing with a changing Russia, just as an ending weapons proliferation in transforming institutions like NATO. Trans-Atlantic cooperation is essential, that requires thoughtful leadership on both sides of the Atlantic. Let me close with a few words about the country that I know best, America and what these challenges mean for us. As an American I believe we have an extraordinary responsibility to show the world what my, that my country is doing all it can to fulfill its promise. Not just with our words, but actually with our actions. And, not just at home, but in the world. Americans live in a place built on the ideals of freedom and opportunity and the equal treatment of all.

We also believe that America should be engaged and work with others to help solve the world’s problems. I work everyday to ensure that my country lives up to those values. I’m proud of the United States, it’s blessed me and my family in ways that I could never have imagined. It’s often said that America is much, is as much an idea as it is a country. And, I want to live in a world that sees that promise too. But now, that promise is being tested at home and abroad, and especially in Iraq. Yet the outcome in Iraq matters greatly to the Trans-Atlantic partnership.

America’s role there is very much in question, as it should be. We cannot stay forever; I’ve argued since the last year that we need to begin reducing our troop presence dramatically. I’ve also long argued that we need a brighter international effort in Iraq with a greater European role. The global partnership that we’ve been talking about should not ignore Iraq. Some think that this is unrealistic and we can understand that, but I believe with the right kind of leadership it is still possible. There is no question that this harder, America’s credibility has been tarnished during the past five years and that in many places here in Europe and elsewhere.

The very idea of American leadership seems like a contradiction. Reversing this is one of the most important challenges that America faces. It’s not about getting other people to like us; we all understand that with leadership comes responsibility. And that at time tough decisions can be difficult to make and implement. But, because it is hard, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try. The truth is, when America acts as if our friends don’t matter, it’s easier for some of our friends to avoid the hard choices too. A stronger partnership requires both sides to take more responsibility.

For America’s part, I want the world to see a country that works everyday to live up to our founders’ aspirations. That all people are created equal and that we’re all endowed with certain inalienable rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This is what we started more than two centuries ago; a great experiment in the history of mankind. Ordinary citizens gathered in their churches, in their stores, in their homes to pursue a greater good. Both civic in its promise and human in its hope, it gave the farmer the same rights as the President. It gave the blacksmith the same chance as the ship merchant. And, it gave the men and women who said we had not honored our ideals the right to speak out in the great cause of change. America’s a place that believes in ascension and the dignity of hard work.

We also believe in a world where nations can come together to meet the great challenges and do great things to give the next generation the same opportunities that we’ve had, and the chance to do better. The foundation for this is the Trans-Atlantic relationship, this is what we believe. And, everyday we give a person the chance the lift themselves up, whether they live in Boston, Brussels, or Bangkok, we increase the changes of a just world, a world where our greatest security challenges are met. This is what we must never forget as we move forward together. Thank you.

Filed under Speeches by John Edwards for President: Speeches

Permalink Print

The Transatlantic Partnership in an Age of Global Challenges

Thank you, Mark, very much. Let me say before I even begin that I have no expectation that this speech will compare with the last panel.

I’m very proud to be with all of you. It’s an honor to be with you and to be a part of this very important conference. And truthfully, there's no better organization than the German Marshall Fund to organize the Brussels Forum and I want to thank Craig Kennedy and Ron Asmus from GMF and their partners, all those who are sponsoring the event: DaimlerChrysler, Bertelsmann, Monitor Group, the Belgium government, for bringing us together.

This conference actually comes at a very important moment for the world. For the past few years it’s been hard to focus on our common challenges and how we have to work together to meet them. Instead, we spend an awful lot of energy looking backward and looking at the differences that we have.

Debate among friends is natural, sometimes important and sometimes necessary, especially when the issues are so important. But sometimes our disagreements overshadow the things that bind us, the things that we actually share and the new problems and the new challenges that we all face together.

I think that leadership always plays an important role. And I know John McCain was here to open this conference and it won't come as a shock to any of you that I believe that the current administration of the United States can do much better and should be doing much better than they are doing. Our leaders have a responsibility, a responsibility to understand global challenges and to prepare for them, and so do all of us.

How do we strengthen our partnership in a way that deals with the challenges like the global environment, prevention of infectious disease, or the spread of Islamic extremism? How do we begin to narrow the extraordinarily growing divide between the haves and the have-nots, both in America and around the world?

And in my — Craig mentioned this just a few minutes ago, but in my own country I’ve been working to do something about 37 million Americans who live in poverty every day to try to shine a light on it, try to get the American people and the American leadership to address the issue. I think it’s the great moral issue facing America today.

But I also think that America has a responsibility to lead and to lead on the issue of extreme poverty around the world, not just addressing the millions of Americans who live in poverty everyday. As everyone here knows, almost half of the world’s population — three billion people — lives on $2 or less a day. How do we, collectively, address this kind of human suffering? How do we win the hearts and minds of young people, especially the millions who are struggling in the Middle East and in Africa who feel that the modern world offers them absolutely nothing? How do we reach them and give them an opportunity to climb out of hopelessness and into a better life just as we did here with the Marshall Plan after World War II?

These challenges don’t face a single country or a single region, they face all of us. We have to ask ourselves are we doing enough together to meet these challenges. I think the answer is clearly no.

And today, especially with this ongoing war and conflict in Iraq, some ask whether America and Europe should and can work together to ensure the spread of freedom and opportunity. The answer to that question should be yes.

The current administration in Washington speaks, and I’m quoting now, of “spreading freedom and democracy” and they speak of it so casually that you’d think it was a mundane or very easy thing to do. I want to be absolutely clear about something, the idea that America stands for freedom is not new. Freedom and democracy are not commodities that belong to one political party and they don’t belong to one country, nor are they easy to come by.

Spreading democracy is not about knocking regimes down; it’s about building, building democratic institutions and communities that will protect basis freedom. Just as poverty and disillusionment isolate and drain hope from our people in our own cities it does exactly the same thing for every person around the world who feel like they have no chance. Ordinary men and women from Egypt to Morocco to Indonesia need to be convinced that democracy and liberty are the pathways to hope for them. So together we have to achieve these goals.

The question is how, how can we be working together to make the world more secure? How can we strengthen our existing institutions or create new ones to meet these new challenges? How should we be responding to the changes under waiting key countries like China, India, Russia?

The Brussels Forum has been focused on these issues and addressing them. It’s an effort that we ought to continue. This afternoon I want to focus on three strategic challenges that we face. First, what should we be doing together to address the threat of weapons of mass destruction? Second, how do we continue to transform our core alliance, NATO, and strengthen America’s partnership with the EU? And third, how should we adapt to a transforming Russia, a country that’s going to be absolutely critical in addressing every global challenge that we face from energy security and regional stability to non-proliferation, to the environment, HIV/AIDS and the future of democracy.

Let me begin by talking about the issue of the spread of weapons of mass destruction. Nearly everyone agrees about this threat. We know that many of these weapons and bomb-making materials are not secure, especially in Russia and the other states of the former Soviet Union. We know that those who wish us harm want access to them yet we are still, knowing that, not doing enough to stop it.

The international community needs new tools to fight proliferation. Instead of accepting the weaknesses of the global non-proliferation regime we ought to work to fix it. For example, I believe that we should create a new global nuclear compact to reinforce the NPT. This compact would be a new international agreement to close the loophole that allows civilian nuclear programs to go military. The new nuclear deal with India, in fact, is an opportunity to embark on a wider international effort.

The United States should work with Europe to take the lead. We need a global ban on the production of material for nuclear weapons and we have to establish global standards to safeguard this material.

America and Europe also must ensure that the know-how to build nuclear weapons never reaches the hands of terrorists. We should strengthen existing plans that ensure that nuclear scientists are employed for peaceful purposes. And we can provide safety and security to those scientists who are working on weapons programs in rogue nations.

There's some things that we can do to stem future threats but we also must look together to meet specific non-proliferation challenges. And it is Iran’s nuclear ambitions that pose the single greatest security threat to the United States and Europe.

Now for years I’ve argued that my government has not been doing enough to deal with the Iranian threat. While they talk that talk of the dangers of nuclear terrorism, they largely stood on the sidelines as Iran marched forward and this problem got worse. The EU3 deserve credit for its work and its leadership in this area. But American disengagement is not the right way to deal with such an extraordinary threat.

Iran’s recent actions, beginning with the reprocessing and enrichment of uranium and its refusal to cooperate with international inspections in open defiance of the UN Security Council make clear that it intends to secure nuclear weapons. And the Iranian president’s statements such as his despicable description of the holocaust as a myth or his ugly pledge to wipe Israel off the map, illustrates the seriousness of the threat.

When he says things like this we should take him at his word. The international community must confront Iran with a clear choice, give up your nuclear ambitions or suffer the consequences. Right now this means UN Security Council actions to impose sanctions.

But we have more options than doing nothing or using force. That’s a false choice. We have many more diplomatic tools to use and we already use every single one of them. For the United States, this means more active and creative diplomacy, including a willingness to engage the Iranian leadership directly. For the Europeans, it means standing strong to confront Iran in the Security Council with meaningful sanctions, and a willingness to implement those sanctions. A common effort to stop the proliferation, to stop proliferation is important. But, cooperation cannot end there. Also need to be finding new ways to help end conflicts and create stability. A key place to start would be to continue to reform critical organizations like NATO.

Nearly 60 years ago leaders on both sides of the Atlantic showed tremendous foresight by creating the alliance that stood secure during the Cold War. Then a decade ago, Trans-Atlantic leaders again made the right decision to enlarge and transform the alliance to take on new members and missions. Looking back on the successes, it’s hard to remember how controversial they were at the time. Now NATO is entering a third phase, to take on a more global role. It is the world’s greatest democratic security alliance. It now has a mission far beyond the borders of Europe, such as the important work it is doing in Afghanistan. I believe that NATO needs to embrace this kind of mission leap. While it can’t be the solution for all the world’s problems, it is the foundation for our common action. This November summit in Riga is an opportunity for the alliance to embrace this new global role.

But, NATO’s new outlook must go beyond summit statement and words. I believe that we ought to be acting right now to end some of the world’s most dire emergencies. For example, NATO should step in today to end the genocide in Sudan. It’s good that NATO has helped the African Union troops with logistic support and training, but this has not stopped the killing. The fact that we have called what’s happening in Darfur a genocide but we’re standing by and watching it unfold, all of us. We have the — we — when we all of us do collectively have the power to stop it makes an absolute mockery of our institutions and our ideals and our values.

In the 1990’s the blood shed in the Balkans threatened to make NATO irrelevant. And, by finally acting in Bosnia and Kosovo, the alliance proved its enduring value. The same is true in Darfur, both in terms of the risk and the opportunities. We must act, and we must act now. My country must show stronger leadership as well. The world knows that America is willing to use its muscle. Here’s what they want to know from us, is America actually willing to lead on the great moral issues that face the world, because it is not just the American people who are hungry for something big and important to be inspired about. Something that they believe represents the true character of the American people. The world wants to know what America is made of, what our real character is. Along with working to end crises, we should also accelerate efforts to broaden NATO’s reach to seek new partners. This means strengthening ties to countries like Ukraine, and Georgia.

I also believe we should be exploring ways to upgrade Israel’s relationship with NATO. This could mean a closer strategic and operational relationship; it could mean more exchanges and planning cooperation. It could even someday mean membership. But, we need to do more than reform NATO; the United States must embrace a stronger role for the European Union. Even a new and improved NATO will prove too narrow to deal with a full range of global challenges. That’s why America needs the EU as a strong partner and welcomes the efforts to build and strengthen its capabilities in foreign and defense policy. This is not something we, America, should be ambivalent about. A more united Europe, and a more effective EU is good for the United States; in fact, it’s good for the world.

For too long many feared that a closer U.S.–EU relationship would undercut NATO or Europe’s own project, but given the new challenges we face we have to cast this kind of old thinking aside. We need an EU–U.S. relationship that is as close and durable as NATO was during the Cold War. It should focus on a different set of issues and be a compliment to the alliance.

It should take the lead to coordinate our homeland security strategies just as we coordinated on a common defense against the Soviet threat. That includes joint efforts to deal with everything from terrorists using WMD to the outbreak of diseases like avian flu. We ought to deeper our cooperation on counter-terrorism, too, and we should do more to develop a common U.S.–EU approach from a range of issues from fighting poverty to supporting democracy.

Along with transforming our institutions to meet 21st century realities, we also need to adjust our approach to the changes that are underway in key countries, and this brings me to Russia. For the past year I had the privilege of co-chairing along with Jack Kemp a bipartisan task force for the Council on Foreign Relations on U.S.’s, the U.S. relationship with Russia. We issued our report just a few months ago, earlier this spring.

I started and ended that work with the same conviction that Russia’s future is critically important to both the United States and to Europe and it is in our interest to have a strong relationship with Russia. Just as the U.S. and Europe need each other we need Russia to stand with us to help address the global challenges we all face.

But we concluded after a lot of work that Russia’s headed in the wrong direction and so is the U.S.–Russia relationship. Our report, endorsed by our taskforce, which is made up of both Democrats and Republicans, concluded that American policy needs to adapt. America’s approach of the past 15 years has been one of strategic partnership with Russia. This is still the right long-term goal but in the short run we need to see Russia for what it is and make the necessary changes in our policy.

The truth is there are many positive things, positive trends in Russia, especially in its economy and its society. It is undergoing tremendous economic growth, an increase of about 65 percent in the GDP since 1999. It has a growing middle class, which is critical over the long term to having a strong democracy.

Russia is a profoundly different place than it was as the Soviet Union. It’s not going back there and we're not going back to the Cold War, but during the past few years we've seen negative trends to overtake many of these positive developments. There’s been an erosion of democratic freedoms, increasing centralization of power, corruption, and organized crime penetrating the government. My concern is not with the pace of democracy in Russia it is with the direction.

Internationally Russia faces a fundamental choice, will it be a partner in the international system or will it be a spoiler. Too often recently it’s been tempted to take the role of spoiler. On many important questions Russian policy is hurting not helping, it’s isolating itself. Russia is bullying its neighbors, as we've seen with its response to the color revolutions in Ukraine and Georgia and its support for the rigged election in Belarus.

Russia now poses American troops in Central Asia when after 9/11 it saw us working on a common cause. And the jury is still out on whether Russia will stand with us on Iran, we want them to, we need them to. But the signals from Moscow are mixed at best. It’s hard to see how our relationship with Russia can get better if they choose to work against us on such a vital issue as Iran.

There is no question that a more democratic, open, transparent Russia would be behaving differently. A more democratic Russia would not be on the fence regarding Iran. It would not be cracking down on dissent and free press. It would not play host to a Hamas. It would not work to keep the U.S. out of bases in Central Asia. It would not be using energy as a foreign policy weapon. It would not be supporting autocrats in Belarus or undermining democrats in Georgia or Ukraine. Solving the world’s problems will be harder without Russia. And, many of these problems will in fact become worse if this downward trajectory continues. And, there’s a larger trend that while it’s distant at this point, it’s not tomorrow deserves mention.

The souring of Russia’s relations with the U.S. and Europe raises the prospect of weakening the unity among the great powers and perhaps a newer line of division between democrats and authoritarians. So what do we do, what do we do now? Most important, we need to start by recognizing reality. Strategic partnership with Russia should still be our goal, but we can’t pretend that everything is OK. We can’t wish away serious disagreements with handshakes or happy talk at a summit meeting. We must be clear about our hopes for the relationship, but no less clear about the problems and the limitations.

The G8 meeting this summer in St. Petersburg is a huge test for Russia, for the United States, and for Europe. There’s a lot of controversy about whether Russia should be the chair of the G8, and whether there should even be a meeting at all. John McCain and I agree that this summit threatens to undermine the G8. We disagree about other things to do with Russia and their membership in the G8, but this summit is 11 weeks away and is going to happen. We can’t paper over the differences we have with President Putin. Leaders should not lead without raising concerns about Russia’s de-democratization, its behavior toward its neighbors, its cooperation in the war on terror, or its use of energy as a weapon.

If our leaders don’t stand up for what we believe, then we need to consider seriously whether we should continue to even have a G8. I don’t think that’d be good for us, but a future of meaningless G8 summits would be even worse. Russia’s entering a critical political phase. The parliament, parliamentary elections next year and presidential election in 2008. America and the EU should be working now to make clear what the criteria are for legitimate transition. We should communicate this publicly and privately. If today’s reality of Russian politics continues with opposition candidates kept off the ballot arbitrarily, unable to access the media or to raise funds, with opposition parties unable to form because of technicalities, or with independent domestic monitoring organizations kept out.

Then, there’s the real risk that Russian leadership will be seeing externally and internally is illegitimate. It is not up to any of us to decide whether Russia heads toward democracy, that’s for the Russian people to decide. But, we can make clear that their decisions matter and this will only work if U.S., the U.S. and Europe send the same message. One lesson we’ve learned is that Moscow pays attention when it sees the united western front. So we have to speak together. And, in dealing with a changing Russia, just as an ending weapons proliferation in transforming institutions like NATO. Trans-Atlantic cooperation is essential, that requires thoughtful leadership on both sides of the Atlantic. Let me close with a few words about the country that I know best, America and what these challenges mean for us. As an American I believe we have an extraordinary responsibility to show the world what my, that my country is doing all it can to fulfill its promise. Not just with our words, but actually with our actions. And, not just at home, but in the world. Americans live in a place built on the ideals of freedom and opportunity and the equal treatment of all.

We also believe that America should be engaged and work with others to help solve the world’s problems. I work everyday to ensure that my country lives up to those values. I’m proud of the United States, it’s blessed me and my family in ways that I could never have imagined. It’s often said that America is much, is as much an idea as it is a country. And, I want to live in a world that sees that promise too. But now, that promise is being tested at home and abroad, and especially in Iraq. Yet the outcome in Iraq matters greatly to the Trans-Atlantic partnership.

America’s role there is very much in question, as it should be. We cannot stay forever; I’ve argued since the last year that we need to begin reducing our troop presence dramatically. I’ve also long argued that we need a brighter international effort in Iraq with a greater European role. The global partnership that we’ve been talking about should not ignore Iraq. Some think that this is unrealistic and we can understand that, but I believe with the right kind of leadership it is still possible. There is no question that this harder, America’s credibility has been tarnished during the past five years and that in many places here in Europe and elsewhere.

The very idea of American leadership seems like a contradiction. Reversing this is one of the most important challenges that America faces. It’s not about getting other people to like us; we all understand that with leadership comes responsibility. And that at time tough decisions can be difficult to make and implement. But, because it is hard, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try. The truth is, when America acts as if our friends don’t matter, it’s easier for some of our friends to avoid the hard choices too. A stronger partnership requires both sides to take more responsibility.

For America’s part, I want the world to see a country that works everyday to live up to our founders’ aspirations. That all people are created equal and that we’re all endowed with certain inalienable rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This is what we started more than two centuries ago; a great experiment in the history of mankind. Ordinary citizens gathered in their churches, in their stores, in their homes to pursue a greater good. Both civic in its promise and human in its hope, it gave the farmer the same rights as the President. It gave the blacksmith the same chance as the ship merchant. And, it gave the men and women who said we had not honored our ideals the right to speak out in the great cause of change. America’s a place that believes in ascension and the dignity of hard work.

We also believe in a world where nations can come together to meet the great challenges and do great things to give the next generation the same opportunities that we’ve had, and the chance to do better. The foundation for this is the Trans-Atlantic relationship, this is what we believe. And, everyday we give a person the chance the lift themselves up, whether they live in Boston, Brussels, or Bangkok, we increase the changes of a just world, a world where our greatest security challenges are met. This is what we must never forget as we move forward together. Thank you.

Filed under Speeches by One America Committee: Speeches

Permalink Print

February 8, 2006

Senator John Edwards Speaks at the United Against Poverty Conference

Senator John Edwards speaks at the United Against Poverty conference in Burlington, Vermont on February 8, 2006.

Filed under Speeches by John Edwards for President: Speeches

Permalink Print