Following is the full text of Sen. Edward Kennedy's (D-Mass.) speech at the National Press Club on the future of the Democratic party. Wednesday, January 12, 2005
 

  KENNEDY: Thank you, Sheila Cherry, for that gracious introduction and thank you to the Press Club for inviting me here today.

I'm honored to be joined on the dais by two outstanding young persons who represent a new generation of leadership for the Democratic party and our country. Grant Woodard is a junior at Grinnel College in Iowa, president of the College Democrats of America. He brilliantly organized students for John Kerry in the Iowa caucuses a year ago. And last fall he led a national effort to mobilize student voters. So I appreciate his presence.

And Andrew Gillum is the youngest person ever elected to the city commission in Tallahassee. He was elected while still a student at Florida A M and now, two years later, the commission has chosen him as mayor pro tem of the city.

Andrew served last fall as the Florida director of the Get Out The Vote campaign for People for the American Way. I'm pleased he's joined with us here today.

(APPLAUSE)

These two young leaders have a passion for public service and a talent for inspiring others. After spending a few minutes with them, you'll be reassured that the nation's future is in good hands.

Ten years ago almost to the day, I stood at this podium after another election in which Democrats lost ground, far too much ground, an unwelcome distribution of power with Republicans controlling both houses of Congress for the first time in nearly half a century.

2004 was nothing like that. It was more a replay of 2000. This time a switch of less than 60,000 votes in Ohio would've brought victory. Unlike 2000, it would've been a victory against an incumbent president in a time of war.

Small swings in other states could also have given Democrats control of the Senate or the House or even both.

Obviously it hurts to come so close in all three battles and then fail by so little. We did many things right, but there is no cause for complacency.

I categorically reject the deceptive and dangerous claim that the outcome last November was somehow a sweeping or even a modest or even a miniature mandate for reactionary measures like privatizing Social Security...

(APPLAUSE)

... redistributing the tax burden in the wrong direction or packing the federal courts with reactionary judges.

Those proposals were barely mentioned or voted on in an election dominated by memories of 9/11, fear of terrorism, the quagmire in Iraq and relentlessly negative attacks on our presidential candidate.

In truth, we do not shrink from that debate. There is no doubt that we must do a better job of looking within ourselves and speaking out for the principles we believe in and for the values that are the foundation of our actions. Americans need to hear more, not less, about those values.

We were remiss in not talking more directly about them, about the fundamental ideals that guide our progressive policies.

In the words of Martin Luther King, we must accept finite disappointment, but we must never lose infinite hope.

Unlike the Republican Party, we believe our values unite us as Americans instead of dividing us. If the White House idea of bipartisanship is that we have to buy whatever partisan ideas they send us, we are not interested.

(APPLAUSE)

In fact, our values are still our greatest strength. Despite resistance, setbacks and periods of backlash over the years, our values have moved us closer to the ideal with which America began, that all people are created equal.

And when Democrats say, all, we mean all.

We have an administration that falsely hypes almost every issue as a crisis. They did it on Iraq. And they are doing it now on Social Security.

In the face of their tactics, we cannot move our party or our nation forward under the pale colors and timid voices. We cannot play Republican clones. If we do, we will lose again, and deserve to lose.

As I have said on other occasions, the last things our country needs is two Republican Parties.

(APPLAUSE)

Today I propose a progressive vision for America; a vision that Democrats must fight for in the months and years ahead; a vision rooted in our basic values of opportunity, fairness, tolerance and respect for each other.

These founding beliefs are still the essence of the American dream today. That dream is the North Star of the Democratic Party; the compass that guides our policies and sets our course to freedom and opportunity, to fairness and justice, not just for the few, not just for some, but for all.

At our best in all the great causes for which our party has stood we have kept that dream alive for all Americans, even and especially in difficult times. And we will not fail to do so now.

Today, as we know too well, that dream is again in peril. The hopes of average Americans have faltered, as global forces cause the economy to shift against them. The challenge has been needlessly compounded because Republican Congresses and administrations have consciously chosen negative policies that diminish the American dream.

We cannot reclaim it by tinkering at the margins. No nation is guaranteed a position of lasting prosperity and security. We have to work for it, we have to fight for it and we have to sacrifice for it.

We have a choice. We can continue to be buffeted by the harsh winds of a shrinking world, or we can think anew and guide the currents of globalization with a new progressive vision that strengthens America and equips our citizens to move confidently to the future.

Our progressive vision is not just for Democrats or Republicans, for red states or blue states. It's a way forward for the nation as a whole to a new prosperity and greater opportunity for all; a vision not just of the country we can become, but the country that we must become: an America that embraces the values and aspiration of our people now and for coming generations.

It is a commitment to true opportunity for all, not as an abstract concept but as a practical necessity.

To find our way to the future, we need the skills, the insight and the productivity of every American, in a nation which each of us shares responsibility for the future and where the blessings of progress are shared fairly by all our citizens in return.

Obviously, we must deal with Iraq and the clear and present danger of terrorism. I intend to address that issue in greater detail after the elections there.

But I do not retreat from the view that Iraq is George Bush's Vietnam. At the critical moment in the war on terrorism, the administration turned away from pursuing Osama bin Laden and made the catastrophic choice instead that has bogged down America in an endless quagmire in Iraq.

(APPLAUSE)

Our misguided resort to war has created much more and much more intense anti-American feeling than Osama bin Laden ever dreamed of. And the sooner we reverse that distressing trend, the better.

I am convinced that John Kerry could have worked with the international community to end that war and bring our troops home with honor.

Our challenge now is to convince George Bush that there is a better way ahead in Iraq instead of continuing to sink deeper into the quagmire.

Here at home, but also for the sake of our future, in this rapidly globalizing world I strongly believe that our highest priority must be a world-class education for every American.

(APPLAUSE)

As Democrats, we seek a future where America competes with others, not by lowering people's pay and outsourcing their jobs, but by raising their skills.

We must open new doors and new avenues for all Americans, make the most of their God-given talents and rekindle the fires of innovation in our society.

Universities and school boards cannot master the challenge alone. We need a national education strategy to assure that America can advance, not retreat, in the global economy in the years ahead.

I welcome the president's remarks today on improving our high schools, but it's clear that unless we fund the reforms under the No Child Left Behind Act for earlier grades and younger children, what we do in high school will matter far less.

We are past the point where we can afford only to talk the talk without walking the walk. It's time for the White House to realize that America cannot expand opportunity and embrace the future on a tin cup education budget.

The No Child Left Behind Act was a start, but only a start. We need to do more, much more to see that students are ready for college, can afford college and can graduate from college.

I propose that every child in America, upon reaching the eighth grade, be offered a contract. Let students sign it along with their parents and Uncle Sam.

The contract will state that, If you work hard, if you finish high school, are admitted to college, we will guarantee you the cost of earning a degree. Surely we have reached a stage in America where we can say it and mean it. Cost must never again be a bar to a college education.

We must also inspire renaissance in the study of math and science, because America today is losing out in these essential disciplines. Two major studies last month ranked America's students 29th in math among leading industrial nations. Over the last 30 years we have fallen from third to 15th in producing scientists and engineers. Incredibly, more than half of all graduate students in science and engineering in American colleges today are foreign students.

National standards in math and science have existed for more than a decade. We need to raise those standards to be competitive again with the international norms and work with every school to apply them in every classroom. We should encourage many more students to pursue advanced degrees in math and science. We should make tuition and graduate school free for needy students in those disciplines. And we should make undergraduate tuition free for any young person willing to serve as a math or science teacher in a public school for at least four years.

We need an economy that values work fairly, that puts the needs of families ahead of excess profits, an economy whose goal is growth with full employment and good jobs and good benefits for all.

To create good jobs for both today and tomorrow's economy, the private and public sector must work together toward specific goals.

We should reduce our dependence on foreign oil, not by drilling in the priceless Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, but by investing in clean energy.

We should invest in new schools and modernize old ones to make schools the pride of their communities again.

We should invest in research and development to pave the way for innovation and growth.

We should invest in broadband technology so that every home, every school, every business in America has easy and comprehensive access to the Internet.

We should invest in mass transit to reduce the pollution in our air and the congestion on our roads.

We should stop the non-scientific, pseudo-scientific, anti- scientific nonsense emanating from the right wing and start demanding immediate action to reduce global warming and prevent the catastrophic climate change that may be on our horizon now.

(APPLAUSE)

We must not let the administration distort science and rewrite and manipulate scientific reports in other areas. We must not let it turn the Environmental Protection Agency into the Environmental Pollution Agency.

A progressive economy also recognize that Americans don't just want more, they want more of what matters in life, which is the American dream.

They want greater flexibility on the job, with more time for their families, more time for their children's schools, more time to volunteer in their communities and churches and synagogues and mosques. They want jobs that pay fairly and don't force them to work excessive hours without extra pay.

They want safe workplaces and the right to join with fellow employees to bargain for a fair workplace.

They want companies to stop marketing cigarettes and unhealthy foods to young Americans.

They want workplaces free from all forms of bigotry and discrimination, including discrimination against gay and lesbian Americans.

For too many Americans, an illness means a cruel choice between losing their job or neglecting their sick child or sick spouse at home.

I intend to introduce legislation early in the next Congress to end that cruelty. And I urge the Republican leadership to bring it to a vote on the Senate and House.

(APPLAUSE)

I also propose that companies which create good jobs with good benefits should receive new tax advantages, because their mission is so important to our cause. But companies that choose not to do so, that ship jobs overseas, should be denied those new incentives.

In addition, we must act at long last to raise the federal minimum wage. Overwhelming numbers of our citizens in Nevada and Florida showed the way last November by voting for a higher minimum wage in their states. It's time for the Republican Party to stop obstructing action by Congress and raise the minimum wage for all employees across the nation.

We must do more to reduce poverty. It is shameful that in America today, the richest and the most powerful nation on Earth, nearly a fifth of all children go to bed hungry at night, because their parents are working full time and still can't make ends meet.

For the millions who can't find work and the millions more unable to work at all we need a strong safety net.

Social Security is fundamental to the integrity of that safety net. Never before, until now, has any president, Republican or Democrat, attacked the basic guarantee of Social Security.

Yet President Bush is talking, not just about a cut, but an incredible 33 percent cut.

We must oppose it, and we will defeat it. We will not let any president turn the American dream into a nightmare for senior citizens and a bonanza for Wall Street.

(APPLAUSE)

The biggest threat to Social Security today is not the retirement of the baby boomers, it's George Bush and the Republican Party.

(APPLAUSE)

To revitalize the American dream, we also need to renew the battle to make health care affordable and available to all our people.

In this new century of the life sciences, breakthrough treatments and miracle cures are steadily revolutionizing the practice of medicine and the quality of life. The mapping of the human genome enables us to understand far more about the molecular basis of disease and to plan far-reaching cures that were inconceivable only a few years ago.

Sadly, in America today, the miracles of modern medicine are too often the province only of the wealthy. We need a new guarantee for the years ahead that the cost of these life-saving treatments and cures will not be beyond the reach of the vast majority of the American people.

An essential part of our progressive vision is an America where no citizen of any age fears the cost of health care and no employer refuses to create new jobs or cuts back on current jobs because of the high cost of providing health insurance.

The answer is Medicare, whose 40th birthday we will celebrate in July.

I propose that, as a 40th birthday gift to the American people, we expand Medicare over the next decade to cover every citizen from birth to the end of life.

It's no secret that America is still dearly in love with Medicare. Administrative costs are low, patient satisfaction is high, unlike with many private insurers, they can still choose their doctor and their hospital.

For those who prefer the private insurance, we will offer comparable coverage under the same range of private insurance plans already available to Congress.

(APPLAUSE)

I call this approach Medicare for all, because it will free all Americans from the fear of crippling medical expenses and enable them to seek the best possible care when illness strikes.

The battle to achieve Medicare for all will not be easy. Powerful interests will strongly oppose it, because they profit immensely from the status quo.

Right-wing forces will unleash false attack ads, ranting against socialized medicine and government-run health care. But those attacks are a generation out of date, retreads of the failed campaign that delayed Medicare in the 1950s and '60s.

Today we are immunized against such attacks by the obvious success of Medicare. It is long past time to extend that success to all.

The Democratic Party's proudest moments and greatest victories have always come when we would stand up against powerful interests and fight for the common good. And this coming battle can be another of our finest achievements.

To make the transition from the current splintered system, I propose to phase in Medicare for all age group-by-age group, starting with those closest to retirement, between 55 and 65. Aside from senior citizens themselves, they have the greatest health needs and the highest health costs and need our help the most.

The first stage of the phase-in should also guarantee good health care to every young child. We made a start with the Children's Health Insurance Program in 1997. It does a major part of the job. But it's time to complete the job now.

As we implement this reform, financing must be a shared responsibility. All will benefit; all should contribute.

Payroll taxes should be part of the financing, but so should general revenues, to make the financing as progressive as possible.

By moving to electronic medical records for all Americans when they go to the hospital or doctor, we can save hundreds of billions of dollars a year in administrative cost while improving the quality of care.

Equally important, we should pay for health care based on value and results, not just the number of procedures performed or days in a hospital bed.

We must also expand our investments in medical research so that we can realize even more of its extraordinary promise.

We must confront and defeat the misguided ideology that in the name of life denies lifesaving cures by blocking stem cell research.

(APPLAUSE)

Above all, as we face the forces of globalization, we must inspire a stronger sense of national purpose among our citizens in a wide variety of areas that serve the public interest.

We must affirm anew what it means to be an American. Citizenship is far more than just voting every two years or every four years. The strengthen and genius of our democracy depends on the caring and involvement of our people, and we cannot truly secure our freedom without appealing to the character of our citizens.

If we fail, we open the way for abuses of power in the hands of the few, for neglect of poverty and bigotry and for arrogant foreign policies that shatter our alliances and make enemies of our friends.

Our founders made the values of justice, equality and civic responsibility the cornerstones of America's strength and its future.

If we are serious about reducing the number of abortions, we must be serious about reducing unwanted pregnancy. We must accept policies with a proven track record of reducing abortion.

History teaches that abortions do not stop because they are made illegal. Indeed half of all abortions in the world are performed in places where abortions are illegal.

We do know, however, that the number of abortions is reduced when women and parents have education and economic opportunity. Our progressive vision is of an America where parents have the opportunity and the resources, including good prenatal care, to bring healthy children into the world.

We want every child to be welcomed into a loving home and to be part of the American dream. This fundamental vision is at the heart of who we are as Democrats and we must do everything in our power to make it a reality.

(APPLAUSE)

On the issue of gay rights, I continue strongly to support civil marriage. We cannot and should not require any religion or any church to accept gay marriage.

But it is wrong for our civil laws to deny an American the basic right to be a part of a family, to have loved ones with whom to build a future and share life's joys and tears and to be free from the stain of bigotry and discrimination.

The true American spirit and the basic generosity of the American people here never been more in evidence than in the spontaneous outpouring of support by millions of our fellow citizens for the victims of the deadly tsunami that caused such tragedy and devastation across South Asia.

We are a compassionate and caring people, and in times like this we are never separated by borders or oceans or politics or faith. The people of Indonesia, Sri Lanka and India and Thailand, and other suffering nations are our brothers and sisters.

Sustained action by America and other nations will be essential in the ongoing mission of reconstruction and rehabilitation. The people of South Asia need our help now and they need our long-term support, and so do other peoples struggling desperately to deal with the overwhelming poverty and disease. Their nations can be our friends or be the breeding ground of our enemies.

As President Kennedy said in his inaugural address, If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few how are rich.

America is strongest in the world when we use our superpower status to join with other nations to achieve great goals.

Instead of bullying them to salute us, more than ever our strength today depends on pursuing our purposes in cooperation with others, not in ways that anger them or ignore them or condescend to them.

Franklin Roosevelt said of America in 1945, We have learned that we cannot live along at peace, that our own well-being is dependent on the well-being of nations far away. We have learned to be citizens of the world, members of the human community.

If only President Bush would heed those words.

Our fragile planet is not a Republican or Democrat or American community; it is a world community.

And we cannot -- and we forget that truth at our very, very peril.

I welcome the opportunity and the obligation to debate our values and our vision. A new American majority is ready to respond to our call for a revitalized American dream grounded firmly in our Constitution and in the endless adventure of lifting this nation to ever new heights of discovery and prosperity and progress and service to all our people and to all humanity.

We, as Democrats, may be in the minority in Congress, but we speak for the majority of Americans. If we summon the courage and the determination to take our stand and state it clearly, I'm convinced the battles that lie ahead will yield our greatest victories.

Thank you.

(APPLAUSE)

MODERATOR: We're going to try to get through as many questions as we possible can.

And the first one, Senator Kennedy, this person writes, You say no president has proposed a Social Security benefits cut. Do you believe, however, that any long-term solution to Social Security has to result in benefit reductions?

And also, what steps are the Democrats taking to modernize Social Security? Young and middle-aged Americans seem to have the perception that Social Security is a welfare program for old people. How might the Democrats overcome this misinformed image to better defend against Republican reform attacks?

KENNEDY: Well, Social Security represents a very fundamental and basic and continuing obligation and commitment by the American people to our seniors. And that is an absolutely indelible commitment that we made when that was passed and signed into law. And the financial situation with the Social Security now, until the mid- or late 2040s, is secure.

But what this administration wants to do is to have a crisis in Iraq, a crisis in the federal judiciary, a crisis in Social Security, and they want a crisis everywhere so they can give the benefits of the Social Security or a third of all of the Social Security fund to Wall Street. We're not going to permit it. And the American people aren't either. We're going to win this.

(APPLAUSE)

QUESTION: Why did Congress add 20,000 more H1B visas into the omnibus budget bill when American middle-level engineers need those jobs? And what do you think should be the Democratic position about massive illegal immigration, which takes low-income Americans' jobs and outsourcing, which takes middle-class American jobs?

KENNEDY: Well, first of all, I think we should put the whole issue of immigration on the table, and we ought to deal with it, rather than in piecemeal, which we have in the past, even as we try to, in a bipartisan way, on the Ag jobs issue, in the last Congress, and how we tinkered with various numbers in the past.

We ought to recognize that it isn't open borders or closed borders; it's smart borders. It's smart borders. And we ought to try to find a way to deal with that issue.

We can do our part, but I think Mexico and the countries of Central America have to do their part, and to date there hasn't been their willingness.

But I think if we were able to have their willingness for President Fox, the countries of Central America, to work with us, particularly with regards to, one, the whole border issues, and secondly, with regards to development -- there's about $14 billion or $15 billion that are repatriated every year -- there's been some willingness with some of the repatriation to help in economic development along borders areas.

We could take ideas like that and see what kind of expansion (ph) would be. We're going to need a partnership in Mexico to be able to do it. But we ought to be willing to do it. It's not only because I think it's the right thing to do, because it's a national security issue as well.

We have the southern border. It's a tragedy. We had more than 530 people that died there last year. And the idea for those that say about a temporary work group, we already have 8 million undocumented here. We already have workers in this country.

I see that the president has announced his interest in doing this. John McCain has indicated a strong interest. I think there is the framework for bipartisan movement on the issue, and we ought to try and take advantage, but that will be a very difficult, emotional fight about it.

MODERATOR: (OFF-MIKE) mention about the visas?

KENNEDY: The increase in terms of -- this is on the highly skilled visas, which we have capped at I think it was 65,000 in the legislation we passed probably four or five years ago. We've raised that cap to 120,000. But that cap was eliminated and it went back to 65,000.

The question was because of that extraordinary kind of reversal whether we would include in this the 20,000 which are the masters and PhDs. That's the group that'll be eligible for it.

And the issues always on immigration are two: one, can the individual expand employment and jobs in this country, and secondly, the reunifications of families.

I think you could make a pretty good case that that particular number, with those particular kind of credentials, expand employment, although that's a position that my good friend John Sweeney who's over here would not agree with.

MODERATOR: One area in which you have led bipartisan work is in federal efforts to bring health care into the digital age. Do you plan to continue your efforts in this Congress?

And do you think your successor has been born yet?

The next question is: What would be the cost of a medical program that covers all Americans, and do you think caps on awards for medical practice are the way to lower those costs for the American people?

KENNEDY: You've got them all here on this.

(LAUGHTER)

Medical malpractice, less than two cents out of every health care dollar is spent. The idea that this is a part of the crisis.

But the rest of it is basically a protection for the profits of the pharmaceutical industry and the insurance industry.

If this administration was so interested in protecting patients, which they talk about, why didn't they sign the patients' bill of rights? That's the one that really reaches out and protects patients in all aspects of it.

So that's where you have the whole question -- I can continue on caps if you want, but let me just say we have -- half the states have caps, the other states don't. There is really no difference in the premiums between those states that have it and those states that do not.

Always the pressure comes from caps when the insurance industries have had bad investments. You find that in the Congress.

On the electronics (inaudible), 32 cents out of every health dollar is nonclinical. There isn't a business that's represented here, or a businessman that's watching this program, that could possibly believe that. Maybe they have 10 or 12 cents in terms of administrative costs or in terms of business costs -- 33 cents?

If you bring this -- we have a 21st century health care system and a 19th century accounting processing system. And if we bring that 33 cents down to 27 cents, we save $110 billion a year. That isn't just my estimate. That's the Institute of Medicine that's saying we are wasting $400 billion a year.

Well, Senator, those are studies. Let's get to practical realities.

Practical reality -- look at the cost of a hospital bed in the V.A. In the period the last five years, they have actually declined in the cost per patient.

Do you think that Great Britain has just invested $15 billion to $20 billion to make sure that their whole system is doing it? Every other country in the world. Australia has just done this and they're seeing remarkable savings. Every one is doing this, except the United States.

There was $50 million proposed by Secretary Thompson in the omnibus and that was struck. We have to get with it. This is hundreds of billions of dollars that could be used in terms of the coverage.

Now, let me just say finally on it that we have bipartisan -- Senator Frist is very interested in this, Senator Grassley, Senator Baucus, who's got joint jurisdiction between our Finance Committees. We've talked to him. Newt Gingrich has written a book about it.

I think it is an area that I just wish the administration would grasp ahold of, because the savings would be extraordinary. They may want to use the money one way, I might want to use it another, but let's move ahead and try and make some progress.

That's two out of three. I don't know what the -- a long enough answer.

MODERATOR: This person asks, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois was elected with over 80 percent of the vote, and over a million of those voters were also President Bush voters. What did Senator Obama do that Senator Kerry and other Democrats not do?

And do you think the Democrats need to move toward the center to recapture the majority position?

And finally, If a Democrat wins the next presidential election, what are the most difficult problems he or she will face in 2008?

KENNEDY: There you go.

Why don't we just ask Osama bin -- Osama Obama -- Obama what -- since he won by such a big amount. Seriously, Senator Obama is really unique and special.

He was a community activist. He was out there on the streets pulling different groups together in Chicago. He was working with families out there about family needs and he rang the bell in Illinois.

He talked about that, but he also talked about bringing people together. You'll all have a good chance to hear him, I'm sure, often.

But I think -- I would hope that Senator Obama would agree with most of what I had to say today. I'll send him a copy. I'll let you know.

I think what do we need to do to get to the majority position? I tried to outline that today. I think we have to speak to the -- we are facing this whole quest of globalization.

The question is are we going to be consumed by it with outsourcing, lower wages, people losing their jobs, their health care, part-time workers concerned about the deterioration in the schools, or are we going to grasp it?

And my suggestion today is we grasp it and equip every American to be able to deal with it and our country to deal with it. But I think that is an issue that has to be debated. I think it'll be, myself, will be an important issue.

I'm not sure what that third one -- if a Democrat wins the next election what'll be the most difficult problems? Well, I tried to outline some of them earlier.

MODERATOR: One quick question, Will you vote to confirm Condoleezza Rice and Albert Gonzalez? Why or why not?

KENNEDY: Well, I'm going to wait with the Condoleezza Rice. We haven't had any hearings on Condoleezza Rice. She obviously comes highly recommended and highly regarded. I think she'll have questions about her role in terms of what was represented to the American people on the buildup of the Iraq war.

I found that Mr. Gonzalez before the Judiciary Committee left a lot to be desired in terms of his response to the questions. He couldn't remember when he met with the Central Intelligence Agency.

He couldn't remember what he did when they redistributed the memoranda to him, even though it was directed to him. He was thinking a lot about it.

And I've sent him follow-up questions to be able to help clarify this.

I think there's a general desire to let the president have his own advisers. We have one standard for those that are going to be the president's advisers.

You have a second standard, obviously, for judges, a higher standard for circuit court judges, which will start to interpret constitutional issues, and the highest standard for the Supreme Court.

And so there's a general disposition in favor of the president having the advisers that he wants, and I think that's the way that it should be.

But the whole issue of torture has been such a blot on everything this country stands for and what we represent, it's very important that the American people know that for the chief law enforcement official -- exactly what his role was and how he explains it. I think the American people are entitled to it. I hope we get the answer.

MODERATOR: Senator Kennedy, I'd like to thank you for coming and speaking with us today. And I'd like to present to you our certificate of appreciation, suitably framed. And also I'd like to present to you the coveted National Press Club mug.

KENNEDY: Oh, my God.

(APPLAUSE)

That is beautiful. Look at this. Beautiful. Just beautiful.

MODERATOR: He likes it. He really, really likes it.

(LAUGHTER)

OK, I have a last question. Something happened last year that few people thought possible: The Red Sox won the pennant. What odds do you give the Congress amending the Constitution to allow non- naturalized Americans to run for president?

(LAUGHTER)

KENNEDY: You hear that, Eunice? You hear that?

(LAUGHTER)

Meanwhile, I'm looking forward to the New England Patriots and what they're going to do with the Indianapolis Colts this weekend up in Foxboro.

Thank you very much. It's an honor to be with you.

(APPLAUSE)