Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
323150956
label
Interview with Jim Angle of National Public Radio 3/16/90 [OA 4727]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323150956
contentType
document
title
Interview with Jim Angle of National Public Radio 3/16/90 [OA 4727]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13524-001
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Draft Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323150956
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
4828e52317a34410
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Draft Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13524
Folder ID Number:
13524-001
Folder Title:
Interview with Jim Angle of National Public Radio. 3/16/90 [OA 4727]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
16
2
2
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
Embargoed for Release
Until 10:00 A.M. EST
Saturday, March 17, 1990
INTERVIEW OF THE PRESIDENT
BY JIM ANGLE OF NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO
The Oval Office
March 16, 1990
11:14 A.M. EST
Q
Why did you decide to meet with Peggy Say?
THE PRESIDENT: Because every day I'm President I have a
heavy heart when I think of the hostages. I've met with her before,
as you know. I've met with other hostage families. I think we can
-- I think we've got to be careful that we don't send a signal to the
hostage holders that make them feel that there's more advantage in
holding the hostages than in releasing them. So there's a very
delicate balance here.
But Peggy Say is a courageous woman. She has suffered
for five long years. And I just got thinking that Barbara and I
would like to hold her hand and say, stay with him; you're courageous
and we respect you.
Q
How do you keep from sending the signal that you're
worried hostage takers might interpret?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, there's a delicate balance here.
You don't overdo public comments, you don't have too many dramatic
meetings or call public attention to this. But on the other side of
the equation, if you feel something in your heart, then you try to
respond with compassion and understanding. It's delicate.
Q
Mr. President, it's been two days now since we had
the fire in Libya at the alleged chemical weapons plant in Rabta.
What can you tell us? What have you learned about that fire?
THE PRESIDENT: Very little, SO far. I know that the
fire is serious and it looks like the plant is out of action. I am
absolutely convinced that the plant was manufacturing bad chemicals
-- chemicals that would be used for killing people, chemicals to be
used for chemical warfare. And therefore, I don't lament what
happened, but I can't tell you I know the cause of it.
Q
Well, the White House, just before this happened,
called attention to the need for vigorous action to prevent the
chemical weapons plant from going any further. It looks like
someone, perhaps a close ally, took you up on that.
THE PRESIDENT: We're not sure of that. The best
intelligence that I've had, and I think it's the best in the world,
is uncertain as to whether this was an accident or some act -- some
incident of sabotage. I have stated without fear of contradiction
that the United States was not involved in any sabotage activity.
But I think it would be fruitless to speculate as to whether it was
an accident -- there are some highly inflammable chemicals in there
-- or whether somebody sabotaged it. I've heard what Mr. Gadhafi has
said, and he apparently is suggesting sabotage. But I don't think we
know enough about it yet.
MORE
- 2 -
And if your question somehow relates to the predicate
that we were concerned about this plant on-stream producing
chemicals, you are absolutely correct. And I have made this very
clear -- our concern -- when I met with the Italian Prime Minister.
I had a talk with Mr. Chissano of Mozambique on it. And I urged our
diplomats to spread the word that this plant was actually not making
aspirin, but producing chemicals --
Q
I understand.
THE PRESIDENT: -- for chemical weapons.
Q
Let me ask you about the hoax call in which someone
pretended to be President Rafsanjani. You said that we'll all be
surprised when it comes out. Can't you just tell us what it is you
think we'll eventually learn?
THE PRESIDENT: No, because there are some real sensitive
matters involved. Eventually I'll be able to, but all I'll say
related to that call is, it was screened enough that I felt I should
take the call, and I would do exactly the same thing. Maybe this is
a good day to mention it because of the Terry Anderson -- him being
held five years to the day. And I will go the extra mile. It
doesn't matter to me one bit if you take a few shots and people
needle you because you took a phone call that was unproductive. It
is my intention to continue to reach out as best I can to find any
lead whatsoever that will lead to the release of these Americans and
the return of Higgins' body, and hopefully Buckley's someday.
Q
On another foreign policy issue, Mr. President, you
have discouraged everyone from looking for a peace dividend just yet
from the defense budget. But you declared one this week in order to
give aid to Nicaragua and Panama. There are a lot of other countries
-- emerging democracies and free markets -- that are lining up at the
U.S. door, if you will, for aid -- everyone from Czechoslovakia,
Romania -- possibly Lithuania someday -- Mozambique -- as well as
Poland and Hungary. Are you going to declare a peace dividend for
them as well or will you find it necessary to cut other programs?
THE PRESIDENT: I don't think I declared any peace
dividend. Peace dividend implies that you have earnings and you have
profitability, and therefore you take the extra money and pass it
out. That isn't the case here. The case is that we have two
countries in Central America in which the United States has a vital
stake -- a vital stake in seeing that their democracies, often denied
their people, now succeed.
So this isn't the concept of a peace dividend, it's the
concept of prioritizing the use of available funds. And I want to
see the Congress move fast to pass my requests on Nicaragua, I want
to see them move fast to pass my requests on Panama. And does that
mean I feel happy about the levels that we can give to countries like
Jamaica or other countries that are trying to help their people? No,
it doesn't.
Q
Well, that's one of the problems, though. But you
asked for a set amount for defense spending at one point, and you
have since decided that it was safe to take some money out of that
for other purposes. Isn't that a peace dividend?
THE PRESIDENT: No, it's not a dividend, it's a
reordering of priorities. As the world changes -- and it's changing
every single day -- and one reassesses the threats and the risks, one
can reorder priorities. And that's what I've done. Dividend -- the
context, the way peace dividend is used is, take money from defense
because there's no more threat of war and spend it all on some good
cause here at home. And that is a concept that I would resist only
because it raises the hopes of the American people beyond
fulfillment.
MORE
- 3 -
Q
Let me ask you about what appears to be an
administration position. Do you want to prevent the Soviet Union
from being able to borrow money from an Eastern European Development
Bank?
THE PRESIDENT: No, but I think they should only borrow
money up to the extent of their paid-in capital. And that bank,
Eastern European Development Bank, was set up, the concept being help
the smaller countries in Eastern Europe who are going down
democracy's road.
The Soviet Union has a long way to go before sound loans
can be made there. I think they probably would admit this.
And I salute Mr. Gorbachev as he is trying to reform the
economy. Their first steps ought to be reform, and our first steps
ought to be trying to help them with these reforms and these
institutions.
Q
So you're saying he hasn't reached the threshold of
change?
THE PRESIDENT: He isn't coming in asking for large
industrial loans through any bank that I know of. And this concept
that we ought to go loaning money or giving money to the Soviet Union
now, I don't accept that. I don't agree with that. That is not
administration policy. I have a different vote from Majority Leader
in the House on this, who proposed giving money now to the Soviet
Union. And I don't think that's in America's interest. And I don't
think it's needed to encourage reform and perestroika and glasnost in
the Soviet Union.
Q
Let me ask you about a proposal from another member
of Congress. Illinois Congressman Dan Rostenkowski raised the
proposal to reduce the deficit with a combination of spending
freezes, some tax increases on alcohol, tobacco among other things.
I'm a little confused about your position. For instance, Budget
Director Darman now says that you won't accept any taxes that hurt
economic growth. Are there taxes that don't hurt economic growth?
THE PRESIDENT: I don't think that's what he literally
said. I read that in the paper a day or so ago and then asked him
what he was talking about -- growth-oriented revenues increases. And
that obviously leads me to my pitch to you and your listeners to
enthusiastically endorse and support a capital gains tax cut.
Because there, you cut the tax and you stimulate economic activity,
you create jobs and you bring in revenue. That's what Dick intended
to say. So I'm glad to clarify it for him.
Q
So you're saying only capital gains is the --
THE PRESIDENT: That is what I am supporting.
Q
Mr. President, if Rostenkowski --
THE PRESIDENT: That's the difference in the Rostenkowski
plan.
Q
Right. If he's talking about a package that
includes spending freezes and revenue increases of various kinds, if
you're not willing to consider those things, then why even
contemplate discussion on the Rostenkowski plan? It isn't just a
waste of time?
THE PRESIDENT: Look, I'm not going to sit there and say
that a seasoned member of Congress like Dan Rostenkowski, who put
forward a plan, ought not to do it. He did it and it's got some very
interesting concepts in there as to how he thinks the budget should
be brought down. We've put our proposal on the table, now he's put a
MORE
- 4 -
proposal on the table. Now it's the Democrat-controlled budget
committees that ought to put their proposal on the table, and then
we'll talk about it.
α
Let me ask you one --
THE PRESIDENT: That's the way it is. And so I salute
him. I have some big differences with the Rostenkowski plan,
obviously, but he did it without rancor; he did it without critics
trying to --
Q
I understand.
THE PRESIDENT: -- being highly critical of the
President, or something like that.
Q
Let me ask you one other point on Darman's remarks.
It's been widely interpreted he's suggesting some sort of movement
here. He seems to say maybe; you say, absolutely no. Is this a
presidential version of a good cop-bad cop routine?
THE PRESIDENT: I don't think SO. I don't think there
are any differences between me and Mr. Darman, at all, on it. I
think there's been misinterpretation of what he said. But who knows,
we're living in a changing world. And I would be remiss if I didn't
talk to Dick Darman and all our people as to whether there were some
fine-tuning or something we might do different in terms of our budget
proposals. But we put forward a sound proposal; now let Congress say
what they're for. They've all been quite critical, or a lot of them
have. And now let's see what their best thinking is, and then we'll
talk. I'm not saying everything has to be done exactly the way I
want it done. And it won't be, so I'm glad I'm not saying that.
(Laughter.)
Q
Mr. President, you have ended your first year with
extraordinarily high popularity ratings. Why do you think you're so
popular?
THE PRESIDENT: Jim, I hate to put anything in terms of
the polls -- popularity ratings, because the more I talk about that,
the more chagrin I'll have to write off my face when those numbers
change. But I do -- we have tried hard. I've tried to do my best.
I've tried to show concern for the American people and some of those
who are less fortunate. We've tried to put forward ideas on
education and antinarcotics that I think have captured the
imagination and earned the support of a lot of Americans.
I think we've managed to take proper roles of leadership
in the changing world. I think our policy that resulted in
unprecedented free and democratic elections in Nicaragua was
sensible. I feel I had strong support from the American people on
what we had to do in Panama. And so I think to the degree there is a
feeling that this administration is functioning well, it relates to
those things. And there's other things as well: the economy, though
soft in some areas, continues to perform.
Q
But you're looking down the road at some enormous
problems. Hundreds of billions of dollars worth of things that are
left over from the last few years. Are you worried at all about
what's going to happen to the economy if you have to spend hundreds
of billions to clean up nuclear waste, to clean up the environment?
THE PRESIDENT: I think we've got all of these things in
a proper perspective. But yes, I'm concerned about all of it.
There's enormous demands from the past that are going to have to be
taken care of. You put your sights on one of them, I could add the
-- cleaning up savings and loans mess. There are plenty. But,
fortunately, we've got an enormous Gross National Product. And if we
manage the economy properly and lead properly on fiscal matters, that
powerful engine of economic dynamism can solve a lot of the problems.
MORE
- 5 -
Or
Okay. I'd like to ask you more, but I think --
THE PRESIDENT: Fifteen minutes. You don't want to bore
your listeners too much, Jim. (Laughter.)
Q
Well, I think I've got some more things that would
probably keep them from getting bored.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, thank you.
END
11:28 A.M. EST