Battered by recession and weary of Washington politicians with pockets full of promises, Chicago area residents said Wednesday night they would nevertheless give President Clinton a chance to resolve the nation’s problems.
“Are the politicians going to stand behind what he’s saying? He told them this is the reality . . . and it’s not just the fault of Democrats and Republicans. But now, will everybody work together to bring a change?”
The question was posed by Delores Fitzpatrick, 42, as she watched the speech at her home in the Chicago Housing Authority’s Ida B. Wells Homes.
The same concern was voiced by Ann Durkin, 41, a Libertyville homemaker:
More Top Picks Best Dimmable Smart Bulbs For Light Sensitivity
“Can he get Congress to pass things? I think maybe Republicans have seen the error of their ways and Democrats also. . . . I’m hoping everyone will pull together.”
Early polls showed Americans in favor of Clinton’s plan by roughly 4 to 1.
“It’s a very large undertaking,” said Harold Workman, 49, an electrical engineer in Naperville. “Despite the sincerity, he left us with the magnitude of what needs to take place and the uncertainty of how to get there.”
Workman said he doubted that Congress would buy the program whole, as Clinton wants.
“The comprehensive idea won’t work. He will have to sell each one of those items,” he said.
Workman’s wife, LuRay, 48, a preschool teacher, said she would be willing to sacrifice, as Clinton asked, “if it helps the country and the economy.”
At the mention of sacrifice, Charlene Campbell said, “That’s all we’ve been doing.”
Campbell, 42, who is raising her four grandchildren, watched the speech with Fitzpatrick at the Wells Homes on Chicago’s South Side. Fitzpatrick is a family training coordinator for a community program at the homes, and Campbell works for Soft Sheen Products.
Both women said life under the Reagan and Bush administrations was “rough” and expressed the thought that a Democratic president would bring some hope.
Campbell agreed with the president’s calls to put people back to work, reform the health care system and improve education. She and Fitzpatrick especially agreed with his idea of a tough anti-crime bill.
They also agreed changes were needed in the welfare system, especially to provide jobs and training for people on welfare.
When Clinton mentioned raising taxes, Campbell watched tensely. “What will that mean to the average person?” she asked aloud. For her, it apparently will not mean much.
But in Libertyville, Richard Durkin, 42, Ann Durkin’s husband and senior vice president of Hamilton Investments, had no doubts about Clinton’s tax message. He said:
“I think we have just seen the biggest tax increase in history sugar-coated for us. I can’t believe that only 2 percent of the population will be hit by the increase. The middle class will be writing a bigger check to the government.”
“You create more jobs by cutting taxes rather than by increasing them,” Durkin added.
Durkin guessed that the tax increase won’t hurt him as much as people who makes less than he does, but even so, he wanted to know where the extra money he expects to pay will go.
“I could be more comfortable if the president shows me some success in cutting government spending,” Durkin said. “I wish I could have heard more about the 150 budget cuts” that Clinton said he would make.
At the Benchmark Retirement Community in Hoffman Estates, Phyllis Brown, 76, a widow, said:
“I admire the president for his guts. I think he means what he says. If he has the leadership ability, I kind of think he’ll put it through.”
Albert Amster, 83, who also lives at Benchmark, said he thought Clinton’s plan was “a little overly ambitious. I didn’t think he was specific enough, particulary when he talked about Social Security.”
But Amster, who said he and his wife life at Benchmark on personal investments, said he was willing to pay his share as long as it is fair.
“Everyone should cooperate and do what they can,” he said.
Bill Cherry, 36, of Frankfort, a maintenance welder for Material Service Co. with five children, cheered the proposal of a two-year limit on receiving welfare without returning to work.
“I think it’s great. I think it’s great for them to get out and go to work.”
“If you are physically and mentally able, you should work,” agreed his wife, Cheryl, who is a customer service clerk at Sears in Orland Park and moonlights as a baby-sitter.
More Top Picks Best Portable Bottle Warmers For Travel
Regarding the energy tax, which Clinton said would cost a family like the Cherrys $17 a month, Cheryl Cherry said, “I don’t think the $17 a month is going to blow us away. If it causes a change in the government, I’m willing to do my share.”
The Cherrys’ 13-year-old son, Jason, cheered Clinton’s idea of receiving money to attend college in return for working in a national service job.
“I think it’s a real good incentive,” he said.
In Washington, Sen. Carol Moseley-Braun (D-Ill.) said, “The most difficult thing always is the taxes. The approach of shared sacrifice is going to be important.”
Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.) called Clinton’s plan “a poor plan with a massive tax increase” that threatens to “strangle any economic recovery in the crib.”
At the AFL-CIO meeting in Bal Harbour, Fla., President Lenore Miller of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union said: “I represent a lot of low-wage workers, and this speech represents a lot more hope than they have heard in a long time.”
United Steelworkers President Lynn Williams called the plan “very courageous, very gutsy and spectacular.”