1                          SPEECH 
 2                            OF 
 3                        JANET RENO 
 4                     San Antonio, Texas 
 5                  Thursday, January 30, 1997 
 6       Speech of Janet Reno at the Marriott Hotel, 711 
 7  East Riverwalk, San Antonio, Texas, at 1:30 p.m., 
 8  January 30, 1997, and the proceedings being taken down 
 9  by Stenotype by Marsha N. Yarberry and transcribed 
10  under her direction. 
 1                   P R O C E E D I N G S 
 3            MS. RENO:  Thank you, Justice.  You've 
 4  always been there in some of the more difficult 
 5  moments in my life and some of the more challenging 
 6  moments, and I'm so proud to be here with you today. 
 7  I thank you all for inviting me.  I am delighted to be 
 8  here with Bill Black, the justice attorney for the 
 9  Western District of Texas.  And I appreciate your 
10  efforts. 
11            But you honor me by asking me to be here 
12  because this is a subject very dear to my heart, and 
13  it is one of the highest priorities of the Department 
14  of Justice.  Why, may you ask?  Well, in 1962 I took 
15  federal civil procedure from Roger Fisher.  I don't 
16  think I heard anything about negotiation.  I heard 
17  about litigation. 
18            And I came home to Miami and became involved 
19  in this practice representing landowners, in a small 
20  condemnation practice, and I would look at these 
21  people hold out for a higher settlement, go to trial, 
22  and get less, and I thought, "There is a better way to 
23  work it out." 
24            I went off on my own in a small practice, 
25  and I handled custody matters, and I watched the 
 1  bruised way that people came out of litigating custody 
 2  matters.  I saw the scars, emotional and otherwise, 
 3  and I said, "There's got to be a better way to do 
 4  it."  I litigated personal injury cases and saw them 
 5  come back, not really resolved, costs eating up a lot 
 6  of the verdict. 
 7            And then, as Ben points out, in 1978 I 
 8  became a prosecutor, and I know that we were 
 9  negotiating over 90 percent of the cases, and I know 
10  that the people negotiating them were trial lawyers 
11  who had no training in negotiation, didn't understand 
12  how to do it, and it all seemed wrong to me. 
13            At the time I reached out to see if there 
14  were people who could train my young lawyers, and 
15  there weren't too many around.  We tried.  But during 
16  all of this I realized that advocacy and pliability 
17  are extraordinarily important.  There were people that 
18  would try to run over me, and I litigated, and I won, 
19  and they stopped running over me.  But still I kept 
20  looking for ways to resolve and solve the problem 
21  rather than just win or lose. 
22            As I went through these years Roger Fisher 
23  stopped talking about the Federal Rules of Civil 
24  Procedure and started talking about negotiation.  I 
25  don't think he would remember me, but that man has 
 1  been an influence on me because I kept thinking, 
 2  "There has got to be a better way to do it."  Sandy 
 3  Dalenburg from the house judiciary committee started 
 4  talking about dispute settlement programs that would 
 5  get cases out of the courts and resolve the problem 
 6  rather than provide for a win or a loss. 
 7            And then about ten years ago I started 
 8  hearing about your work and what you have done, and 
 9  all I can say is, you, as far as I am concerned, are 
10  the leaders of the bar.  I cannot thank you enough for 
11  what you have done in these ten years, because what 
12  you have done by leading the way is to show others 
13  that dispute resolution programs can work, that we can 
14  solve problems rather than just win or lose. 
15            You have shown so many people that there are 
16  alternatives to litigation, that they can be 
17  successful.  You have spread the word.  You have made 
18  people believers.  You have made lawyers problem 
19  solvers.  You have made lawyers peacemakers.  And I 
20  think that you are a little lower than the angel. 
21            And because of you I came to Washington 
22  committed to negotiation and to mediation.  I realized 
23  that there would be other appropriate dispute 
24  resolution programs, and I wanted the department to 
25  explore every one, and I wanted attention paid to 
 1  problem solving.  I didn't want our components coming 
 2  into town and suing without sitting down first and 
 3  saying, "This is what the law requires.  This is the 
 4  reason it requires it.  This is how we can comply and 
 5  we'll help you comply.  If you have questions, let us 
 6  work with you.  But if you thumb your nose at us we're 
 7  going to litigate with you until you reach the 
 8  understanding that we're here to try to solve a 
 9  problem and work it out, whether it be environmental 
10  hazard, a civil rights violation, some 
11  discrimination."  And it just is marvelous to watch 
12  people respond, because at first he said it is the 
13  Department of Justice's account. 
14            Now bankers, instead of grinning to people 
15  when we talk about lending discrimination, say, "How 
16  can we work with you," to let people understand that 
17  there may be inadvertent discrimination and if we work 
18  together we can bear it out and ensure that for all 
19  Americans they can have equal opportunity to own their 
20  own home. 
21            It is wonderful when we go to a state to 
22  enforce the Civil Rights Institutionalized Persons Act 
23  and the governor and the attorney general, instead of 
24  saying, "Oh, my goodness.  Here comes the Civil Rights 
25  Division," welcomes us and says instead, "How can we 
 1  sit down and work out this problem together?"  It's 
 2  problem solving.  And you have made it possible as 
 3  more of an accepted function than ever before in 
 4  litigation in this country. 
 5            But at the same time I want the lawyers with 
 6  the Department of Justice to be prepared to litigate. 
 7  But what have we done?  The first thing I said is I 
 8  want to make sure that our lawyers are trained to be 
 9  negotiators.  We are training our attorneys to be 
10  better negotiators by recognizing that we must address 
11  the interest of the parties that lie behind the 
12  positions they take. 
13            We are teaching our litigators to be problem 
14  solvers by asking them to step into the shoes of the 
15  other party in order to better understand why they 
16  take positions against us.  We are asking our lawyers 
17  to be more creative in finding solutions to disputes 
18  that may not be apparent to any party unless and until 
19  all the parties engage in candid bargaining over their 
20  real interests and their real needs. 
21            In addition, we are asking our attorneys to 
22  be candid with themselves and with their client 
23  agencies by evaluating that case carefully to 
24  determine its true value.  And through their general 
25  counsels we are asking our client agencies, the 
 1  various agencies in the federal government, to look at 
 2  a case before they bring it to us, to evaluate it 
 3  carefully, to understand that if they take steps to 
 4  resolve it there and negotiate it at that point, 
 5  monies can be saved down the road, and it is exciting 
 6  to see how that effort is catching hold.  At first 
 7  people are somewhat dubious. 
 8            But we're also exploring how we might 
 9  provide incentives.  I came to Washington to discover 
10  that a client agency oftentimes has a judgement paid 
11  out of a judgment fund rather than its regular 
12  appropriation.  It doesn't hurt.  So there's not that 
13  much of an incentive.  Let the Justice Department 
14  worry about it.  How can we work together to develop 
15  incentives for people to focus on the issue early on, 
16  resolve it early on, and resolve the problem that 
17  created the issue in the first place? 
18            Unless we have made realistic assessments of 
19  what really is the best alternative of the negotiated 
20  agreement, we should not go to trial.  But unless we 
21  make realistic assessments, we are not going to be 
22  able to negotiate through an informed procedure. 
23  Smart, tough, interspace negotiation is more likely to 
24  produce lasting results. 
25            When we focus on a solution to the dispute 
 1  instead of engaging in fault finding or blaming, 
 2  someone else is creating the problem in the first 
 3  place, we have taken a very major step in becoming 
 4  better problem solvers.  When we engage in active 
 5  listening instead of reflexively responding to the 
 6  other side, we create a much better environment for 
 7  reaching understanding. 
 8            When our opponent makes an angry statement 
 9  and we refrain these hard words into a positive 
10  excursion, we then have started to look at their 
11  thoughts to understand and work together for a 
12  solution that all can support and that everyone 
13  benefits from.  And from personal experience I can 
14  assure you that these skills work just as effectively 
15  in your own workplace as they do when you engage an 
16  opposing party in settlement negotiations. 
17            I hope that you all will someday be able 
18  each to visit the conference room of the attorney 
19  general.  It is a very imposing room with beautiful 
20  murals, nice at the head of the table.  The Civil 
21  Rights Division will be on one side, the Civil 
22  Division on the other, the Solicitor General's Office 
23  down at the end.  There may be three different views 
24  or five different views, all strongly held by 
25  splendid, wonderful lawyers. 
 1            It is so fascinating if we take the time to 
 2  hear them out.  And then when I discover that one side 
 3  isn't listening, make sure that they're listening. 
 4  And if I've got the time and they talk it out, we 
 5  reach such a much better position representing the 
 6  federal government.  And, again, it is you and your 
 7  colleagues and others who have taught me the skills of 
 8  listening, of mediating, of negotiating, of solving a 
 9  problem rather than winning a war. 
10            At the same time we must recognize that 
11  regardless of how skillful we may be as negotiators, 
12  there will be times when negotiating one on one with 
13  the other side will not work.  There may be too much 
14  hostility or distrust, anger or suspicion between the 
15  parties.  The disputes may have lasted so long or been 
16  so costly that negotiating one on one with the other 
17  side is a guarantee for gridlock. 
18            That's when mediation has become extremely 
19  valuable to the department as a technique for avoiding 
20  the tribulations of trials.  Mediation is valuable 
21  because it directly involves the parties to a dispute 
22  as well as their attorneys, and it creates an attitude 
23  of cooperation in an otherwise adversarial 
24  environment. 
25            To some here it's like preaching to the 
 1  choir.  I don't have to tell you why what you do is so 
 2  important.  To others who are here today thinking 
 3  about pursuing dispute resolution more far into the 
 4  future, all I can tell you is that it has made such a 
 5  wonderful difference in the very brief time in the 
 6  Department of Justice.  If you talk to the young 
 7  people who I had a chance to hear from earlier today, 
 8  they are learning what a difference they can make in 
 9  their school in terms of conflict resolution. 
10            So we have focused on alternative dispute 
11  resolutions, particularly mediation.  Peter 
12  Steenland is my senior counsel for alternative dispute 
13  resolution, and I have raised it up to that level. 
14  Peter is a very experienced advocate with the 
15  Department of Justice, but he has been through so many 
16  cases that he knows how important ADR is. 
17            And I've asked Peter to make sure that the 
18  lawyers for the Department of Justice are trained in 
19  ADR techniques.  We are taking it area by area across 
20  the country so the assistant United States attorneys 
21  will all be trained.  Peter has taken the extra step 
22  of bringing the client agency in on occasion to be 
23  trained with the lawyers, improving our opportunity to 
24  resolve disputes even short of filing lawsuits. 
25            At the department we have spent almost 
 1  $400,000 during the past year to retain the services 
 2  of mediators and other dispute resolution providers. 
 3  We are working closely with the courts, both at the 
 4  trial and appellate levels, to take advantage of their 
 5  case settlement programs. 
 6            I meet on a quarterly basis with the 
 7  executive committee of the judicial conference, and 
 8  this is one of the areas that we regularly address. 
 9  We strongly support these court case settlement 
10  programs.  In one year, using both court sponsored 
11  mediation and private providers, we have tripled the 
12  number of cases in dispute resolution from less than 
13  400 to more than 1,200.  Preliminary reports indicate 
14  that more than half of these cases have resulted in 
15  settlement, and even when the case has not been fully 
16  settled some benefits have been paying in terms of 
17  reducing discovery, dismissing issues, and simplifying 
18  the litigation.  We are making progress, for it's 
19  changing the culture at the Department of Justice at 
20  the federal government level. 
21            In many cases mediation is cheaper and 
22  faster than litigation; it produces better results 
23  than the litigation.  Let me give you an example where 
24  the federal government has used mediation to obtain a 
25  settlement of a dispute that truly involves problem 
 1  solving.  Recently the Air Force had a contract 
 2  dispute with a corporation performing maintenance at a 
 3  certain Air Force base.  There was one year to go on 
 4  the contract and the question of renewal unresolved. 
 5  The maintenance firm filed ten claims for additional 
 6  payments totaling more than a half a million dollars 
 7  that they asserted were due under the contract.  All 
 8  claims were denied by the contracting officer, and the 
 9  matter proceeded to an administrative tribunal. 
10            Before the tribunal ruled, the courts agreed 
11  to mediation.  After several hours of hard work, the 
12  claims were settled for 45 cents on the dollar, 
13  including interest and attorneys' fees, and the 
14  parties agreed to modify the contract by revising the 
15  ambiguous provision that had provoked the dispute in 
16  the first place.  Mediation and a skillful third party 
17  helped the parties turn a nasty dispute into a sound, 
18  working relationship for the future. 
19            Other similar stories could be told in the 
20  context of disputes over employment and workplace 
21  issues, tax disputes, and environmental claims.  We 
22  use mediation when the United States is a plaintiff in 
23  enforcement cases and when we are the defendant.  We 
24  use mediation both to settle cases and to avoid filing 
25  them in the first place. 
 1            When parties remain adversarial to each 
 2  other, we miss the opportunity to resolve disputes 
 3  that could benefit both parties, and the Justice 
 4  Department does not want to be in that position.  Of 
 5  course, the Department of Justice sees only a small 
 6  percentage of all the disputes involving the federal 
 7  government. 
 8            Last year Congress went a step further and 
 9  enacted the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act to 
10  promote greater use of ADR throughout the federal 
11  government.  This law now permanently authorizes 
12  federal agencies to use dispute resolution to resolve 
13  disputes before they reach the courts. 
14            I am pleased that the Department of Justice 
15  took the lead in supporting this litigation 
16  legislation on behalf of the administration, and now 
17  we are working very closely with the other federal 
18  agencies, through their general counsel and otherwise, 
19  to ensure that they take maximum advantage of these 
20  provisions. 
21            I cannot think of a better example of good 
22  government than providing a process so that citizens 
23  who have disputes with their government can sit down 
24  at a table with a responsible official and a 
25  third-party neutral to negotiate a fair resolution of 
 1  their disputes.  But we have much, much, much to do. 
 2  We haven't trained all of our attorneys yet.  We have 
 3  some real callous attorneys who just like to try 
 4  cases. 
 5            And they tell me something very 
 6  interesting.  They said, "Ms. Reno, you don't 
 7  understand.  It's easier to try the case than to go up 
 8  through all the levels of the department to get 
 9  approval for the settlement."  So we're trying to 
10  change that to make sure that people understand that 
11  if we trust them to try the case, we trust them to 
12  settle the case in the best interest of the government 
13  and the people of the United States. 
14            But we still have some real callous 
15  attorneys.  And so whenever anybody will indicate to 
16  me who the real callous attorney is, I will push them 
17  a little bit.  We try to do it gently so that people 
18  will know that we are being supportive, but we want to 
19  do everything we can to make sure that the culture of 
20  dispute resolution is part and parcel of that 
21  magnificent institution, the Department of Justice. 
22  But we have still much to do. 
23            I talked to you about those cases, those 90 
24  percent of the cases that we negotiated.  Most 
25  cases -- most criminal cases in this country, both at 
 1  the state and federal level, have some degree of 
 2  negotiation.  But plea bargaining is a bad word.  Plea 
 3  bargaining done only to clear crowded calendars and to 
 4  handle overwhelming caseloads is wrong, and all of us 
 5  have a special responsibility, even if we do not 
 6  practice in the criminal area, to make sure that our 
 7  criminal courts of this nation have the wherewithal, 
 8  the resources, the personnel, the judges, the 
 9  prosecutors, and the public defenders to ensure that 
10  everybody has the right to a fair trial. 
11            But at the same time it is very, very 
12  frustrating to see a young lawyer prosecute a case, 
13  get a conviction, and think he has won the battle when 
14  he sees the guy go off to prison for five years, 
15  knowing full well that he will only serve 20 percent 
16  of the sentence because we don't have enough prison 
17  cells to house people for the length of time the 
18  courts are sentencing. 
19            It is very frustrating to see that person go 
20  off to prison with a drug problem and not get drug 
21  treatment and end up back out on the streets, the same 
22  problem unsolved, but the prosecutor thought he or she 
23  won.  It is equally as frustrating to see the public 
24  defender feel that he has won when he prevails on a 
25  motion to dismiss or a motion to suppress and his 
 1  client, a crack addict, walks out of the courtroom 
 2  allegedly a free man but in worse bondage through 
 3  crack than any prison will ever create for him, and 
 4  the public defender does nothing to address the crack 
 5  problem that caused the problem in the first place. 
 6            That is why in Dade County and now in the 
 7  Department of Justice we are trying to focus on drug 
 8  courts which provide a carrot and stick approach and 
 9  say to nonviolent first offenders charged with 
10  possession of a small amount of drugs, "We will work 
11  with you in treatment and job training replacement, 
12  and we'll get you off on the right foot.  And if you 
13  stay clean, we'll help you and support you along the 
14  way, but you face a certain sanction if you come back 
15  with a positive test for drugs." 
16            It is problem solving.  It is working out 
17  problems, negotiating problems or mediating problems 
18  to solve the problem rather than to let it perpetuate 
19  itself through the merry-go-round of our criminal 
20  courts that see people come back again and again and 
21  again because the legal system hasn't focused on 
22  solving the problem.  It's only focused on guilt or 
23  innocence. 
24            We need your help to learn more about how we 
25  use the process of negotiation and mediation in the 
 1  criminal justice system.  We need your help in making 
 2  sure that we do not have to plea bargain because of 
 3  crowded calendars but that we can negotiate the right 
 4  way to solve the problem in the interest of all the 
 5  American people. 
 6            I think the legal profession and those 
 7  involved in dispute resolution can do so much to ease 
 8  the tensions in the workplace of America.  Employing 
 9  assistance professionals will tell you that the 
10  workplace is becoming a more violent place.  Tensions 
11  are enhanced between employer and employees.  People 
12  are concerned about their jobs.  They wonder what 
13  their future is.  They see a rapidly changing 
14  technology make their jobs become obsolete, and the 
15  pressures are on everyone.  You see the results.  You 
16  see tension when somebody tries to discipline an 
17  employee or you see the person say, "Well, it's too 
18  hard to make the discipline stick so I'm just going to 
19  promote them, then I'm not going to worry about it, 
20  and I'm going to give them an excellent evaluation 
21  every time the evaluation comes up." 
22            Lawyers as problem solving experts in the 
23  area of employer/employee relations can do so much in 
24  bringing the employer and employee together to solve 
25  the problems, to work them out, to understand each 
 1  other, and they can also advise clients on how to 
 2  build a better record so that we can promote 
 3  excellence and that we can correct failure whenever 
 4  appropriate and that we can do it fairly, yet firmly, 
 5  with regard to the due process of all concerned. 
 6            And I'm so pleased to hear from Jack Hannah 
 7  that you're doing another -- that you're undertaking 
 8  another initiative, because I think one of our great 
 9  challenges is how we use the information agent in 
10  resolving disputes.  All of you have probably been 
11  involved in dispute resolution, or most of you feel 
12  like I do, that it's much better to be in the same 
13  room with the person that you're negotiating with 
14  rather than on the telephone or certainly over a video 
15  screen. 
16            But the world of cyberspace will bring us 
17  together as never before, and we've got to learn how 
18  to use this marvelous instrument, this marvelous tool 
19  to resolve conflict.  If we don't watch out, that 
20  marvelous instrument that provides such an opportunity 
21  for education, for knowledge, for communication 
22  worldwide can also become a tool for spreading hate 
23  and dissension and conflict.  Let us make sure that we 
24  use this marvelous instrument for problem solving and 
25  for peacemaking and not for dissension. 
 1            Before I came to Washington, not only did I 
 2  focus on the courts, but I focused on the streets of 
 3  Miami, a community I love, and beginning in 1984 I saw 
 4  a dramatic increase in youth violence.  I saw young 
 5  people resolving conflicts, not with fists but with 
 6  knives and guns, and I saw the results and increased 
 7  victimization of our young people. 
 8            At the same time I began to see awkward 
 9  steps being taken, a teacher who developed a peer 
10  mediation program.  She didn't know exactly what she 
11  was doing, but she knew she was on the right track.  A 
12  key club would come together and develop the peer 
13  mediation program.  They didn't know exactly how to do 
14  it, but they were on the right track. 
15            There was such hope in what these young 
16  people were doing and what these teachers were doing, 
17  and we were beginning to see the results across the 
18  nation.  This afternoon I had a wonderful opportunity 
19  to meet with young students from Churchill High School 
20  and with representatives of the ABA who have helped 
21  spread the word that dispute resolution is not just a 
22  way to avoid the courtroom, that dispute resolution is 
23  not just a tool for lawyers, but dispute resolution, 
24  properly done, is a tool for every single American. 
25            And I hope you take some time to talk to 
 1  these young people because both their teachers and the 
 2  people who train them will tell you that young people 
 3  are probably better at mediating and resolving 
 4  disputes than anybody else because they don't think 
 5  they know it all.  It was a wonderful opportunity for 
 6  me to hear the enthusiasm with which they were 
 7  approaching the effort. 
 8            But I want to tell you how proud I am of the 
 9  bar, of the young lawyers section, the section on 
10  dispute resolution, everybody coming together to reach 
11  out and spread the word.  This is what lawyering is 
12  all about.  It's not just about making money.  It's 
13  not just about what firm you're in.  It's not just 
14  about what kind of a hobby you're doing.  It's how you 
15  help other people solve their problems.  And to hear 
16  the young people talk about the skills that they have 
17  developed because of the outreach of the bar 
18  association is a great tribute to all the lawyers 
19  here. 
20            I want, though, to look beyond and to think 
21  about what more we can do.  I want us to look to the 
22  future of lawyers as problem solvers, as peacemakers, 
23  and as advocates.  We can never stop being advocates. 
24  We can never stop being prepared to go to court to 
25  defend the rights that we hold dear, because the 
 1  moment we do, they'll try to run over us and we won't 
 2  be prepared. 
 3            But we can all learn from what you have 
 4  started in dispute resolution in this country, and we 
 5  can make sure, through your efforts, that every lawyer 
 6  has the opportunity in law school to know the skill. 
 7  Law schools are teaching advocacy.  They're teaching 
 8  trial practice.  Let's make sure that every law school 
 9  has course work in negotiation and alternative dispute 
10  resolution.  Let us make sure that every teacher in 
11  this country learns the skills of negotiation and 
12  mediation and problem solving in school as they regain 
13  their teacher's certificate and it is enhanced as they 
14  go to their school.  Let us make sure that every 
15  community police officer who is working to build trust 
16  in the community understands and is talented in the 
17  skills of conflict resolution. 
18            And lawyers can do it.  Just think of what 
19  would happen if every lawyer in this room went back to 
20  their community and reached out to make sure that a 
21  neighborhood, a school, was on its way, 
22  trainer/trainee, the trainee training others, the 
23  domino effect, until what you have done for a legal 
24  profession is spread across this land. 
25            And let us think about community justice 
 1  where the judge may be the arbitrator in terms of 
 2  solving the problem as opposed to the person who calls 
 3  it one way or the other.  Let us think about community 
 4  justice where lawyers volunteer their time in 
 5  communities of children and family at risk to solve 
 6  problems rather than to litigate them. 
 7            It's going to take the lawyer because in 
 8  some schools you will find a situation, as you work 
 9  with the young person training them, they will explain 
10  to you that their mother is having a problem with the 
11  landlord.  You'll take it upon yourself to inquire, 
12  and she will say, "He won't fix any of the plumbing. 
13  He won't do anything.  He just tells me he's going to 
14  kick me out if I don't pay my rent, and I don't know 
15  what to do, and I can't afford a lawyer." 
16            You go to the man.  He thumbs his nose at 
17  you.  You get prepared to sue him or you sue him, and 
18  he understands you mean business, and then he starts 
19  talking to you, and he says, "Look, I inherited this 
20  from my father.  I don't have enough money to make an 
21  investment.  I don't know what to do." 
22            And the good lawyer/problem solver is going 
23  to be the one that works with HUD, with community 
24  development grant monies, with other sources, and say, 
25  "Why don't you go check on this, this, and this. 
 1  This may be a source of some investment because what 
 2  everybody is trying to do is to ensure affordable 
 3  housing." 
 4            The lawyer who is both the advocate and the 
 5  informed problem solver is what we need today, and it 
 6  is what is represented in this room.  The lawyer who 
 7  comes to a community and finds an environmental hazard 
 8  that might need changed in the town that is more 
 9  affluent but no one knows in this particular 
10  neighborhood where to go to get this environmental 
11  hazard corrected, and even if they do, doors are 
12  slammed in their face, that lawyer is, again, the 
13  advocate.  But after he catches or she catches 
14  people's attention by their advocacy, then they switch 
15  to the problem solving and to the peacemaking mode, 
16  and they start saying, "Here is the technology.  Here 
17  is what we need.  These are the experts.  This is what 
18  we can do to solve the problem, to reduce the hazard, 
19  to make sure it never happens again, and to benefit 
20  the community as a whole." 
21            The young people of America are a tremendous 
22  resource.  They want so to participate.  They want so 
23  to make a difference.  They want to be involved.  They 
24  want to be heard.  And if you can reach out to them, 
25  as the members of the bar have reached out to these 
 1  young people today and in these weeks that have 
 2  passed, you can make such an incredible difference. 
 3            You have the legal profession, and I look 
 4  forward to working together with you to make sure we 
 5  make a difference for all America, in our communities, 
 6  in our neighborhoods, and in our schools.  Thank you. 
 1                  REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 
 3  COUNTY OF TRAVIS      * 
 4            I, Marsha N. Yarberry, Certified Shorthand 
 5  Reporter in and for the State of Texas, do hereby 
 6  certify that the speech of Janet Reno appearing in the 
 7  foregoing transcript was taken by me to the best of my 
 8  ability and thereafter reduced to typewriting under my 
 9  direction. 
12       WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE, this the 3rd 
13  day of February, 1997. 
16                           __________________________ 
17                           MARSHA N. YARBERRY, CSR 
18                           Certification No. 5100 
19                           Expiration:  12/31/97 
20                           1617-A West 6th Street 
21                           Austin, Texas  78703 
22                           (512) 482-0828