Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
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
122242090
label
[11/12/1999 – 12/16/1999]
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
Source extras
naId
122242090
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-26444828-20150017F-Seg2-032-005-2017
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
2d27df155963cc66
ocrText
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (TRP NOTES MAIL) CREATOR: Rex Wockner (Rex Wockner [ UNKNOWN 1) CREATION DATE/TIME:12-NOV-1999 19:33:23.00 SUBJECT: NC11400: Gore, Bradley, us TO: Rex Wockner ( Rex Wockner [ UNKNOWN 1) READ:UNKNOWN Sean P. Maloney (CN=Sean P. Maloney/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TEXT: Do not publish this item in any form without permission from the originating media operation. Do not post this item in any online forum. This is a small, free mailing list open only to my friends. BOSTON GLOBE Boston, Massachusetts, USA November 12, 1999 http://www.boston.com/globe Bradley, Gore step up pursuit of gay voters Calif. Outcome could prove crucial By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff LOS ANGELES - During his 18 years in the Senate, Bill Bradley rarely mentioned gay and lesbian rights, and one of his last acts before retiring was to oppose gay leaders on a bill that would have recognized same-sex marriage. But this year, the Democratic presidential candidate has emerged as one of the nation's most forthright proponents of equal rights for gays and lesbians, urging a step even many activists are wary of - reopening the 1964 Civil Rights Act to encompass gays. Bradley's new emphasis led one leading gay-oriented magazine, The Advocate, to marvel that the former New Jersey senator has moved "to the left" of Representative Barney Frank, the openly gay Newton Democrat. It has moved Vice President Al Gore, concerned about losing a constituency that could swing the election in some key states, to ratchet up his bid for gay support. Gore has vowed to loosen the administration's "Don't Ask-Don't Tell" policy on gays in the military and said last week that "sexual orientation is a main topic for the expansion of freedom and human dignity." Nowhere is this unprecedented pursuit of the gay and lesbian vote more vividly on display than in California - and apparently for good political reason. On March 7, when Californians vote in a potentially decisive presidential primary, the ballot will include an initiative to ban marriage between gay partners. That is expected to spur one of the largest gay votes in US history, which in turn could affect who wins the primary and the nomination. "The gay vote has become a central part of the Democratic coalition. It is an astonishing yardstick of how far the gay and lesbian issue has come," said David Mixner, a leading California gay activist who is supporting Gore. "If there is a low Democratic turnout in March," Mixner said, "the one group that will turn out en masse will be the gay and lesbian community." As a result, Gore and Bradley have made frequent trips to California to meet with gay leaders, dueling over the constituency in a way that was unimaginable to gay activists earlier this decade. Some Republican presidential candidates, meanwhile, also are courting gays. On Monday, Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican, said he was "unashamed" to work with the Log Cabin Republicans, a group of gay and lesbian Republicans. But the Republicans generally aren't going nearly as far as Bradley and Gore. By some estimates, gay voters account for 5 percent of the electorate. But the number may be in the higher single digits in some of the most important political states, including California and New York - both of which Democrats believe they must win next fall, especially if the Republican presidential candidate captures Texas and Florida. While there has been no scientific survey of California gay voters, there is considerable evidence that Bradley has fast been making major inroads with gays and lesbians. Last June, Bradley spent several hours meeting with gay and lesbian activists in California. The event served as a wake-up call to Gore. Then, last September, in a move that surprised even many of Bradley's gay backers, the former senator told The Advocate that Congress "should add sexual orientation to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. " That would clearly indicate, he said, that discrimination against gays is every bit as serious as discrimination against other protected groups. The magazine contrasted Bradley's stance to that of many gay leaders, including Frank, who prefers a stand-alone antidiscrimination bill instead of reopening the landmark civil rights legislation. "In one fell swoop, he came close to erasing seven years of hard work by Gore within the gay community," said Chris Bull, the Washington correspondent for The Advocate, who recently was granted interviews with both Bradley and Gore about their stance on gay issues. "Bradley hadn't done particularly much. It was smart on Bradley's part." Bradley spokesman Eric Hauser said the former senator had "no epiphany" on gay rights but instead views it as a logical extension of his support for civil rights. Still, the effect on gay voters of Bradley's stance has been powerful. Bill Melamed, a West Hollywood personal agent who has been active in gay rights for 20 years, said that many gays and lesbians had presumed they would "jump on the Gore bandwagon." Melamed contributed $1,000 to the Gore campaign. But as Bradley's views on gay issues gained publicity - and after Bradley called Melamed to seek his support - Melamed became convinced the former New Jersey senator was a more fervent believer in equal rights. Next week, Melamed will come full circle: the former Gore contributor will be a cohost at a Hollywood fund-raiser for Bradley. "It is not an issue Bradley chose to champion," Melamed said, referring to Bradley's days in the Senate. "But the climate is very different in this country than six, 12, 18 years ago." Some observers, however, think that Bradley made a strategic mistake in calling for a reopening of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. A number of civil rights leaders, including the Rev. Jesse Jackson, questioned Bradley's proposal, worrying that a Republican-controlled Congress might weaken the Civil Rights Act if it was reopened. Frank said in an interview that reopening the Civil Rights Act would be impracticable. While the issue still is controversial, the public view of gay rights has shifted significantly during this decade. In 1992, a Gallup poll found that 57 percent of Americans deemed the gay lifestyle unacceptable, compared with 38 percent who called it acceptable. The same survey this year found a turnaround in views: those surveyed believe, 50-46, that the gay lifestyle is acceptable. That has translated into unprecedented political power for gays and lesbians. In the 1988 campaign, many presidential candidates, including Gore, put little emphasis on the issue. In 1992, Clinton sought the gay vote but ran into criticism when he backed a "Don't Ask-Don't Tell" policy. Some conservatives felt the policy went too far in allowing gays to serve in the military, while gay activists complained that it didn't allow gays to openly state their sexual orientation. Gore spent the years since trying to improve his relations with gays and took a major step in that direction earlier this year when he announced that he favored the legal protections for gay partners, such as the kind of health benefits that a married spouse can receive. Bradley also favors such benefits. Some of the leading Republican candidates also are courting the gay community, but none of them embrace nearly as much of the gay rights agenda as the Democrats. McCain has made the most determined overture, meeting on Monday with the Log Cabin Republicans, a group with 11,000 members. But a McCain aide said later the senator doesn't endorse key legislation favored by gay activists, such as a bill that would ban discrimination in employment. Texas Governor George W. Bush, the GOP front-runner, has been criticized by some gay activists for not embracing a hate-crimes bill in his state that would specifically include protections for gays. Steve Forbes said recently that he would hire qualified gays as long as they aren't trying to make "a political statement." GOP candidate Alan Keyes has had the harshest words for gays, saying that "homosexuality is an abomination the comparison between race and homosexuality is absurd." In California, with its large gay community, the ballot question that would ban same-sex marriage is being closely watched by the campaigners. Bradley and Gore have said that while they do not support same-sex marriage, they would vote against the ballot initiative because it is divisive. That has prompted Rob Glazier, a Sacramento spokesman for the Campaign to Defend Marriage, which is pushing for passage of the ballot measure, to charge that Bradley and Gore are being hypocritical. "Gore and Bradley are saying to the American people that they support the traditional definition of marriage being between a man and a woman, yet they both raise a lot of money from the gay community," Glazier said. "They are trying to convince Americans they are mainstream. They shouldn't have it both ways." But to longtime gay activists such as Frank, the larger message of the Democratic primary is that the candidates are arguing about how to expand gay rights, not whether to limit them. "My best hopes have been vindicated," Frank said, when asked about the effort by the Democratic candidates to win over gay voters. "This is the first time in American history that people have been treating gays and lesbians as if they were any other legitimate group." RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (TRP NOTES MAIL) CREATOR: JSOREF ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN 1) CREATION DATE/TIME:12-NOV-1999 15:36:43.00 SUBJECT: Gay/lesbian vote TO: Tflournoy ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN Minyon Moore ( CN=Minyon Moore/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TEXT: Tina, I think this is pretty much in line with what I told you--Bradley is a serious threat. The campaign has done relatively little yet in NY. BOSTON GLOBE, November 12, 1999 Bradley, Gore step up pursuit of gay voters Calif. Outcome could prove crucial By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff LOS ANGELES - During his 18 years in the Senate, Bill Bradley rarely mentioned gay and lesbian rights, and one of his last acts before retiring was to oppose gay leaders on a bill that would have recognized same-sex marriage. But this year, the Democratic presidential candidate has emerged as one of the nation's most forthright proponents of equal rights for gays and lesbians, urging a step even many activists are wary of - reopening the 1964 Civil Rights Act to encompass gays. Bradley's new emphasis led one leading gay-oriented magazine, The Advocate, to marvel that the former New Jersey senator has moved "to the left" of Representative Barney Frank, the openly gay Newton Democrat. It has moved Vice President Al Gore, concerned about losing a constituency that could swing the election in some key states, to ratchet up his bid for gay support. Gore has vowed to loosen the administration's "Don't Ask-Don't Tell" policy on gays in the military and said last week that "sexual orientation is a main topic for the expansion of freedom and human dignity." Nowhere is this unprecedented pursuit of the gay and lesbian vote more vividly on display than in California - and apparently for good political reason. On March 7, when Californians vote in a potentially decisive presidential primary, the ballot will include an initiative to ban marriage between gay partners. That is expected to spur one of the largest gay votes in US history, which in turn could affect who wins the primary and the nomination. "The gay vote has become a central part of the Democratic coalition. It is an astonishing yardstick of how far the gay and lesbian issue has come," said David Mixner, a leading California gay activist who is supporting Gore. "If there is a low Democratic turnout in March," Mixner said, "the one group that will turn out en masse will be the gay and lesbian community." As a result, Gore and Bradley have made frequent trips to California to meet with gay leaders, dueling over the constituency in a way that was unimaginable to gay activists earlier this decade. Some Republican presidential candidates, meanwhile, also are courting gays. On Monday, Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican, said he was "unashamed" to work with the Log Cabin Republicans, a group of gay and lesbian Republicans. But the Republicans generally aren't going nearly as far as Bradley and Gore. By some estimates, gay voters account for 5 percent of the electorate. But the number may be in the higher single digits in some of the most important political states, including California and New York - both of which Democrats believe they must win next fall, especially if the Republican presidential candidate captures Texas and Florida. While there has been no scientific survey of California gay voters, there is considerable evidence that Bradley has fast been making major inroads with gays and lesbians. Last June, Bradley spent several hours meeting with gay and lesbian activists in California. The event served as a wake-up call to Gore. Then, last September, in a move that surprised even many of Bradley's gay backers, the former senator told The Advocate that Congress "should add sexual orientation to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. That would clearly indicate, he said, that discrimination against gays is every bit as serious as discrimination against other protected groups. The magazine contrasted Bradley's stance to that of many gay leaders, including Frank, who prefers a stand-alone antidiscrimination bill instead of reopening the landmark civil rights legislation. "In one fell swoop, he came close to erasing seven years of hard work by Gore within the gay community," said Chris Bull, the Washington correspondent for The Advocate, who recently was granted interviews with both Bradley and Gore about their stance on gay issues. "Bradley hadn't done particularly much. It was smart on Bradley's part." Bradley spokesman Eric Hauser said the former senator had "no epiphany" on gay rights but instead views it as a logical extension of his support for civil rights. Still, the effect on gay voters of Bradley's stance has been powerful. Bill Melamed, a West Hollywood personal agent who has been active in gay rights for 20 years, said that many gays and lesbians had presumed they would "jump on the Gore bandwagon." Melamed contributed $1,000 to the Gore campaign. But as Bradley's views on gay issues gained publicity - and after Bradley called Melamed to seek his support - Melamed became convinced the former New Jersey senator was a more fervent believer in equal rights. Next week, Melamed will come full circle: the former Gore contributor will be a cohost at a Hollywood fund-raiser for Bradley. "It is not an issue Bradley chose to champion," Melamed said, referring to Bradley's days in the Senate. "But the climate is very different in this country than six, 12, 18 years ago." Some observers, however, think that Bradley made a strategic mistake in calling for a reopening of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. A number of civil rights leaders, including the Rev. Jesse Jackson, questioned Bradley's proposal, worrying that a Republican-controlled Congress might weaken the Civil Rights Act if it was reopened. Frank said in an interview that reopening the Civil Rights Act would be impracticable. While the issue still is controversial, the public view of gay rights has shifted significantly during this decade. In 1992, a Gallup poll found that 57 percent of Americans deemed the gay lifestyle unacceptable, compared with 38 percent who called it acceptable. The same survey this year found a turnaround in views: those surveyed believe, 50-46, that the gay lifestyle is acceptable. That has translated into unprecedented political power for gays and lesbians. In the 1988 campaign, many presidential candidates, including Gore, put little emphasis on the issue. In 1992, Clinton sought the gay vote but ran into criticism when he backed a "Don't Ask-Don't Tell" policy. Some conservatives felt the policy went too far in allowing gays to serve in the military, while gay activists complained that it didn't allow gays to openly state their sexual orientation. Gore spent the years since trying to improve his relations with gays and took a major step in that direction earlier this year when he announced that he favored the legal protections for gay partners, such as the kind of health benefits that a married spouse can receive. Bradley also favors such benefits. Some of the leading Republican candidates also are courting the gay community, but none of them embrace nearly as much of the gay rights agenda as the Democrats. McCain has made the most determined overture, meeting on Monday with the Log Cabin Republicans, a group with 11,000 members. But a McCain aide said later the senator doesn't endorse key legislation favored by gay activists, such as a bill that would ban discrimination in employment. Texas Governor George W. Bush, the GOP front-runner, has been criticized by some gay activists for not embracing a hate-crimes bill in his state that would specifically include protections for gays. Steve Forbes said recently that he would hire qualified gays as long as they aren't trying to make "a political statement." GOP candidate Alan Keyes has had the harshest words for gays, saying that "homosexuality is an abomination the comparison between race and homosexuality is absurd." In California, with its large gay community, the ballot question that would ban same-sex marriage is being closely watched by the campaigners. Bradley and Gore have said that while they do not support same-sex marriage, they would vote against the ballot initiative because it is divisive. That has prompted Rob Glazier, a Sacramento spokesman for the Campaign to Defend Marriage, which is pushing for passage of the ballot measure, to charge that Bradley and Gore are being hypocritical. "Gore and Bradley are saying to the American people that they support the traditional definition of marriage being between a man and a woman, yet they both raise a lot of money from the gay community," Glazier said. "They are trying to convince Americans they are mainstream. They shouldn't have it both ways." But to longtime gay activists such as Frank, the larger message of the Democratic primary is that the candidates are arguing about how to expand gay rights, not whether to limit them. "My best hopes have been vindicated," Frank said, when asked about the effort by the Democratic candidates to win over gay voters. "This is the first time in American history that people have been treating gays and lesbians as if they were any other legitimate group." LOS ANGELES TIMES, November 12, 1999 Times Mirror Square, Los Angeles, CA, 90053 (Fax 213-237-7679 or 213-237-5319 (E-MAIL: [email protected]) (http://www.latimes.com) ACLU Threatens Suit if Gay School Club Is Blocked Civil liberties group says action would violate rights of expression, association. Orange Unified vote is Thursday. By MARISSA ESPINO, Special to The Times The American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California waded into the fray Thursday over the proposed Gay-Straight Alliance club at El Modena High, saying it would pursue legal action against the Orange Unified School District if trustees refuse to approve the club's formation. If the school board vetoes the club, the ACLU said in a statement, trustees would be violating the freedom of expression and association guaranteed by the Constitution. A denial by the board could also have a significant impact on the district's eligibility for federal education funds under a statute that prohibits public schools from discriminating against student clubs on the basis of a club's philosophical or political viewpoint, according to the statement. The ACLU's announcement comes on the heels of a similar statement by the People for the American Way Foundation, a nonprofit civil liberties, First Amendment rights organization. That group has also charged that the school board was violating federal law by stopping efforts to organize the club. Earlier this week, about 300 parents and students packed a four-hour, district-sponsored public forum on the issue. Proponents of the club said it would educate all students about tolerance and offer a haven for gay students who they say face harassment. Opponents quoted the Bible and said the club would only hurt students struggling with their sexual identity. The school board is scheduled to vote on the club at a meeting Thursday. RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (TRP NOTES MAIL) CREATOR: LGBT Activists List (LGBT Activists List [ UNKNOWN ]) CREATION DATE/TIME:13-NOV-1999 00:57:11.00 SUBJECT: Bradley, Gore step up pursuit of gay voters TO: queerpolitics ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN 1) READ:UNKNOWN Sean P. Maloney ( CN=Sean P. Maloney/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TEXT: BOSTON GLOBE, November 12, 1999 (http://www.boston.com/globe) Bradley, Gore step up pursuit of gay voters Calif. Outcome could prove crucial By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff LOS ANGELES - During his 18 years in the Senate, Bill Bradley rarely mentioned gay and lesbian rights, and one of his last acts before retiring was to oppose gay leaders on a bill that would have recognized same-sex marriage. But this year, the Democratic presidential candidate has emerged as one of the nation's most forthright proponents of equal rights for gays and lesbians, urging a step even many activists are wary of - reopening the 1964 Civil Rights Act to encompass gays. Bradley's new emphasis led one leading gay-oriented magazine, The Advocate, to marvel that the former New Jersey senator has moved "to the left" of Representative Barney Frank, the openly gay Newton Democrat. It has moved Vice President Al Gore, concerned about losing a constituency that could swing the election in some key states, to ratchet up his bid for gay support. Gore has vowed to loosen the administration's "Don't Ask-Don't Tell" policy on gays in the military and said last week that "sexual orientation is a main topic for the expansion of freedom and human dignity." Nowhere is this unprecedented pursuit of the gay and lesbian vote more vividly on display than in California - and apparently for good political reason. On March 7, when Californians vote in a potentially decisive presidential primary, the ballot will include an initiative to ban marriage between gay partners. That is expected to spur one of the largest gay votes in US history, which in turn could affect who wins the primary and the nomination. "The gay vote has become a central part of the Democratic coalition. It is an astonishing yardstick of how far the gay and lesbian issue has come," said David Mixner, a leading California gay activist who is supporting Gore. "If there is a low Democratic turnout in March," Mixner said, "the one group that will turn out en masse will be the gay and lesbian community." As a result, Gore and Bradley have made frequent trips to California to meet with gay leaders, dueling over the constituency in a way that was unimaginable to gay activists earlier this decade. Some Republican presidential candidates, meanwhile, also are courting gays. On Monday, Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican, said he was "unashamed" to work with the Log Cabin Republicans, a group of gay and lesbian Republicans. But the Republicans generally aren't going nearly as far as Bradley and Gore. By some estimates, gay voters account for 5 percent of the electorate. But the number may be in the higher single digits in some of the most important political states, including California and New York - both of which Democrats believe they must win next fall, especially if the Republican presidential candidate captures Texas and Florida. While there has been no scientific survey of California gay voters, there is considerable evidence that Bradley has fast been making major inroads with gays and lesbians. Last June, Bradley spent several hours meeting with gay and lesbian activists in California. The event served as a wake-up call to Gore. Then, last September, in a move that surprised even many of Bradley's gay backers, the former senator told The Advocate that Congress "should add sexual orientation to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. " That would clearly indicate, he said, that discrimination against gays is every bit as serious as discrimination against other protected groups. The magazine contrasted Bradley's stance to that of many gay leaders, including Frank, who prefers a stand-alone antidiscrimination bill instead of reopening the landmark civil rights legislation. "In one fell swoop, he came close to erasing seven years of hard work by Gore within the gay community," said Chris Bull, the Washington correspondent for The Advocate, who recently was granted interviews with both Bradley and Gore about their stance on gay issues. "Bradley hadn't done particularly much. It was smart on Bradley's part." Bradley spokesman Eric Hauser said the former senator had "no epiphany" on gay rights but instead views it as a logical extension of his support for civil rights. Still, the effect on gay voters of Bradley's stance has been powerful. Bill Melamed, a West Hollywood personal agent who has been active in gay rights for 20 years, said that many gays and lesbians had presumed they would "jump on the Gore bandwagon." Melamed contributed $1,000 to the Gore campaign. But as Bradley's views on gay issues gained publicity - and after Bradley called Melamed to seek his support - Melamed became convinced the former New Jersey senator was a more fervent believer in equal rights. Next week, Melamed will come full circle: the former Gore contributor will be a cohost at a Hollywood fund-raiser for Bradley. "It is not an issue Bradley chose to champion," Melamed said, referring to Bradley's days in the Senate. "But the climate is very different in this country than six, 12, 18 years ago." Some observers, however, think that Bradley made a strategic mistake in calling for a reopening of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. A number of civil rights leaders, including the Rev. Jesse Jackson, questioned Bradley's proposal, worrying that a Republican-controlled Congress might weaken the Civil Rights Act if it was reopened. Frank said in an interview that reopening the Civil Rights Act would be impracticable. While the issue still is controversial, the public view of gay rights has shifted significantly during this decade. In 1992, a Gallup poll found that 57 percent of Americans deemed the gay lifestyle unacceptable, compared with 38 percent who called it acceptable. The same survey this year found a turnaround in views: those surveyed believe, 50-46, that the gay lifestyle is acceptable. That has translated into unprecedented political power for gays and lesbians. In the 1988 campaign, many presidential candidates, including Gore, put little emphasis on the issue. In 1992, Clinton sought the gay vote but ran into criticism when he backed a "Don't Ask-Don't Tell" policy. Some conservatives felt the policy went too far in allowing gays to serve in the military, while gay activists complained that it didn't allow gays to openly state their sexual orientation. Gore spent the years since trying to improve his relations with gays and took a major step in that direction earlier this year when he announced that he favored the legal protections for gay partners, such as the kind of health benefits that a married spouse can receive. Bradley also favors such benefits. Some of the leading Republican candidates also are courting the gay community, but none of them embrace nearly as much of the gay rights agenda as the Democrats. McCain has made the most determined overture, meeting on Monday with the Log Cabin Republicans, a group with 11,000 members. But a McCain aide said later the senator doesn't endorse key legislation favored by gay activists, such as a bill that would ban discrimination in employment. Texas Governor George W. Bush, the GOP front-runner, has been criticized by some gay activists for not embracing a hate-crimes bill in his state that would specifically include protections for gays. Steve Forbes said recently that he would hire qualified gays as long as they aren't trying to make "a political statement." GOP candidate Alan Keyes has had the harshest words for gays, saying that "homosexuality is an abomination the comparison between race and homosexuality is absurd." In California, with its large gay community, the ballot question that would ban same-sex marriage is being closely watched by the campaigners. Bradley and Gore have said that while they do not support same-sex marriage, they would vote against the ballot initiative because it is divisive. That has prompted Rob Glazier, a Sacramento spokesman for the Campaign to Defend Marriage, which is pushing for passage of the ballot measure, to charge that Bradley and Gore are being hypocritical. "Gore and Bradley are saying to the American people that they support the traditional definition of marriage being between a man and a woman, yet they both raise a lot of money from the gay community," Glazier said. "They are trying to convince Americans they are mainstream. They shouldn't have it both ways." But to longtime gay activists such as Frank, the larger message of the Democratic primary is that the candidates are arguing about how to expand gay rights, not whether to limit them. "My best hopes have been vindicated," Frank said, when asked about the effort by the Democratic candidates to win over gay voters. "This is the first time in American history that people have been treating gays and lesbians as if they were any other legitimate group." The item above is being distributed as a free, non-profit informational service to a limited number of individuals who have expressed interest in this topic for educational and research purposes only. Please do not redistribute or post copyrighted material anyplace on the Internet accessible to the public without attribution and permission from the author. Please note that distribution of this item does not necessarily constitute endorsement of the content; in fact, often items are distributed as "opposition research." RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (TRP NOTES MAIL) CREATOR: LGBT Activists List (LGBT Activists List [ UNKNOWN ]) CREATION DATE/TIME:13-NOV-1999 01:05:00.00 SUBJECT: McCain meets with Gays TO: queerpolitics ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN Sean P. Maloney (CN=Sean P. Maloney/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TEXT: Washington Blade November 12, 1999 http://www.washblade.com McCain meets with Gays Log Cabin members encouraged by senator's positions by Nick Napolitano Leaders of Log Cabin Republicans, a national Gay organization, addressed a range of Gay and AIDS-related issues during a half-hour meeting Monday with John McCain, a candidate for the GOP presidential nomination. According to Log Cabin's director of public affairs, Kevin Ivers, the meeting, which was closed to the press, took place in a conference room near McCain's office on Capitol Hill and covered a range of issues, including Gay-related legislation, anti-Gay violence, Gays in the military, AIDS funding, adoption and foster care policy, and "other family issues important to Gay Americans." McCain, a U.S. senator from Arizona, "seemed receptive to everything," said Log Cabin's executive director Rich Tafel, who added that he was "exceptionally pleased" with the meeting. Openly Gay U.S. Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.), who attended the meeting, agreed. "It could not have been more positive if I had tried to imagine it," said Kolbe, who serves on the McCain campaign's national steering committee. "He knows and says that discrimination [against Gays] does occur, that it's an everyday occurrence, that it's wrong, and that it's his goal to eliminate it," said Ivers, who also attended the meeting. Ivers quoted McCain as saying, "All my life, I've had a visceral dislike for discrimination, for people picking on other people or using their power to harm other people. We need, as the Republican Party, to enter into a dialogue with people we have alienated, like African Americans and Gay Americans." Tafel said the meeting with McCain marked the first time that a leading candidate for the Republican presidential nomination has met with Gay community representatives during a campaign. Log Cabin members met with U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and with campaign staffers for former U.S. Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kansas) during their respective bids for president in 1996, he said. McCain's decision to meet with Log Cabin did not come completely out of the blue. At an Oct. 28 Republican candidates' forum in Hanover, N.H., McCain was asked, "Why would someone Gay vote for you?" He replied, "We're the party of Abe Lincoln and will not tolerate discrimination." When asked to comment on anti-Gay remarks made by Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), McCain replied, "I don't believe in discrimination of any kind." McCain has also said Log Cabin Republicans "should be a part of our party." And for the last several years, McCain has asserted that the "big tent" that is his Republican Party most certainly welcomes Gays, as well as members of the religious right. McCain did not offer any specific policy promises during his meeting with Log Cabin, said Ivers, other than his general intention to help end discrimination against Gays. Asked if the meeting would change any of the anti-Gay positions the Arizona senator has already taken - such as voting against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, supporting the Defense of Marriage Act, and opposing adding sexual orientation to the Hate Crimes Prevention Act - McCain campaign spokesperson Howard Opinksy immediately replied, "No." "His votes are his votes and cannot be taken back," Opinsky said, In terms of future votes, he has clear positions on many of those issues already that I don't anticipate will change." Ivers said that Log Cabin is not discouraged by McCain's opposition to ENDA, a bill they support. "[McCain] has yet to be convinced that there is a need for federal law" to protect Gays in the workplace, said Ivers, not because he believes that Gays don't suffer from discrimination, but because he believes that existing legislation might, in fact, be adequate. For McCain, said Ivers, it is merely "a matter of what is the remedy." As for the rest of McCain's record, Tafel said, "The beginning of changing anyone's position is that first step. I feel [the meeting] was a good first step toward that kind of discussion." Arizona State Rep. Steve May, a Republican who is openly Gay, recently told a Gay publication in his state, Echo Magazine, that, once McCain is educated on the issues, he will take more pro-Gay positions in his voting. "I think if we can convince him our cause is just, he will be on our side," said May. Log Cabin representatives say they are not holding a grudge against McCain about a June 1998 incident in which the senator told a joke at a Republican fundraiser that many interpreted as anti-Gay. The Washington Post broke the story but claimed the joke was "too vicious to print." According to other news sources, including the Phoenix Gazette, McCain asked his Republican colleagues, "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno." McCain later apologized to the president, but not to Chelsea Clinton, Janet Reno, or the Gay community, according to Salon.com. Though Tafel agreed that the joke was in poor taste, he said he also believes that it, in fact, revealed one of McCain's strengths: his candor. "I find it refreshing that he doesn't calculate every single thing that he says," Tafel told the Blade. Such candor, said Tafel, makes McCain appear to be sincere when he says he wants to help end discrimination against Gays. Tafel said Log Cabin is ready to go ahead and start fundraising for McCain. His endorsement hasn't been clinched yet, said Tafel, but Monday's successful meeting with McCain, contrasted with Texas Gov. George W. Bush's "mixed message" to Gay Americans, "bodes well for McCain." In the spring, Bush expressed a willingness to meet with Log Cabin, said Tafel, and the group would still like to meet with him, but no meeting has yet been scheduled. Other Gay political groups are not as impressed with McCain. "He has sort of a mixed voting record and has not been terribly supportive of Lesbian and Gay equal rights issues," said David Smith of the Human Rights Campaign. "However, we obviously applaud the Log Cabin Republican's efforts to reach out to him and all Republican candidates." There are also those who believe that McCain might pay the price at the Republican primary for breaking with more conservative Republicans on issues like campaign finance and Gay civil rights and that he might feel pressure to backpedal. "His instincts are to run left," a former GOP strategist told the Washington Post earlier this month. "That is what's gotten him this tremendous press and the huge boosts in the polls. But in January, it's the primary voters who matter and they will want to hear a conservative message. That's McCain's real challenge." But Ivers said Log Cabin has faith that McCain will not abandon his Gay supporters. "He does everything based on core principles," said Ivers. "He's not a man who's going to pander to anyone." The item above is being distributed as a free, non-profit informational service to a limited number of individuals who have expressed interest in this topic for educational and research purposes only. Please do not redistribute or post copyrighted material anyplace on the Internet accessible to the public without attribution and permission from the author. Please note that distribution of this item does not necessarily constitute endorsement of the content; in fact, often items are distributed as "opposition research." RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (TRP NOTES MAIL) CREATOR: Jennifer_M._Palmieri ([email protected] [ who ) CREATION DATE/TIME:13-DEC-1999 03:11:02.00 SUBJECT: EMBARGOED: Radio Interview of the President By CBS News TO: "/R=OPUS/R=MRP/PR-L=AVUOEOB/PR-U=TDIXON/FFN=Timothy Dixon/"@mr.eop.gov ( "/R=OPUS/R=MRP/PR-L=AVUOEOB/PR-U=TDIXON/FFN=Timothy Dixon/"@mr.eop.gov [ UNKNOWN D READ:UNKNOWN TO: Alejandro G. Cabrera ("Alejandro G. Cabrera"@Ingate4.eop.gov [ @LNGATE] READ:UNKNOWN TO: Brian A. Reich ("Brian A. Reich"@OVP.eop.gov [OVP]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Christopher S. Lehane ("Christopher S. Lehane"@lngate4.eop.gov @LNGATE] READ:UNKNOWN TO: Eli G. Attie ("Eli G. Attie"@Ingate4.eop.gov @LNGATE] READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jim Kohlenberger ("Jim Kohlenberger"@Ingate4.eop.gov @LNGATE]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Nathan B. Naylor ("Nathan B. Naylor"@Ingate4.eop.gov @LNGATE ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Thomas M. Rosshirt ("Thomas M. Rosshirt"@Ingate4.eop.gov (@LNGATE]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: [email protected] ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: backup ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: BARTHOLOW_T([email protected][UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: carolmast ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Abigail C. Smith ( CN=Abigail C. Smith/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Abigail L. McDermott ( CN=Abigail L. McDermott/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Adrian E. Miller ( CN=Adrian E. Miller/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Adrienne K. Elrod ( CN=Adrienne K. Elrod/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Alberto O. Feraren ( CN=Alberto O. Feraren/OU=OA/O=EOP [OA]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Andrew J. Mayock CN=Andrew J. Mayock/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Ann C. Hertelendy (CN=Ann C. Hertelendy/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Ann F. Lewis (CN=Ann F. Lewis/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Anna Richter ( CN=Anna Richter/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Anne M. Edwards (CN=Anne M. Edwards/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Anne W. Bovaird (CN=Anne W. Bovaird/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Antony J. Blinken ( CN=Antony J. Blinken/OU=NSC/O=EOP [ NSC ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Aprill N. Springfield (CN=Aprill N. Springfield/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO D READ:UNKNOWN TO: Barbara D. Woolley ( CN=Barbara D. Woolley/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO D READ:UNKNOWN TO: Barry J. Toiv (CN=Barry J. Toiv/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Beth Nolan (CN=Beth Nolan/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Bradley M. Campbell ( CN=Bradley M. Campbell/OU=CEQ/O=EOP [ CEQ ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Brian A. Barreto ( CN=Brian A. Barreto/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Brian S. Mason (CN=Brian S. Mason/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Bridget T. Leininger ( CN=Bridget T. Leininger/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Brooke B. Livingston ( CN=Brooke B. Livingston/OU=WHO/O-EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Brooks E. Scoville ( CN=Brooks E. Scoville/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Carmen B. Fowler (CN=Carmen B. Fowler/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Carolyn T. Wu ( CN=Carolyn T. Wu/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Catherine T. Kitchen (CN=Catherine T. Kitchen/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Charles J. Payson ( CN=Charles J. Payson/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Christine L. Anderson ( CN=Christine L. Anderson/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Christopher K. Scully ( CN=Christopher K. Scully/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Dag Vega (CN=Dag Vega/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Dana C. Strand ( CN=Dana C. Strand/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Daniel W. Burkhardt (CN=Daniel W. Burkhardt/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Dario J. Gomez ( CN=Dario J. Gomez/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: David E. Kalbaugh ( CN=David E. Kalbaugh/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: David T. Johnson ( CN=David T. Johnson/OU=NSC/O=EOP [ NSC ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: David Vandivier ( CN=David Vandivier/OU=OMB/O=EOP [ OMB ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Dawn M. Chirwa ( CN=Dawn M. Chirwa/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Deanne E. Benos ( CN=Deanne E. Benos/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Deborah Akel ( CN=Deborah Akel/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Debra D. Alexander (CN=Debra D. Alexander/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Debra D. Bird ( CN=Debra D. Bird/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Debra S. Wood ( CN=Debra S. Wood/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Delia A. Cohen ( CN=Delia A. Cohen/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Denver R. Peacock ( CN=Denver R. Peacock/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO D READ:UNKNOWN TO: Dorinda A. Salcido ( CN=Dorinda A. Salcido/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Douglas B. Sosnik ( CN=Douglas B. Sosnik/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Elizabeth J. Potter ( CN=Elizabeth J. Potter/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Elizabeth R. Newman ( CN=Elizabeth R. Newman/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Ellen E. Olcott ( CN=Ellen E. Olcott/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Elliot J. Diringer ( CN=Elliot J. Diringer/OU=CEQ/O=EOP [ CEQ ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Emily Karcher ( (CN=Emily Karcher/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Eric P. Liu (CN=Eric P. Liu/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Essence P. Washington ( CN=Essence P. Washington/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD D READ:UNKNOWN TO: Evan Ryan ( CN=Evan Ryan/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Fern Mechlowitz (CN=Fern Mechlowitz/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Francisco J. Sanchez ( CN=Francisco J. Sanchez/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: G. Timothy Saunders (CN=G. Timothy Saunders/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: George G. Caudill ( CN=George G. Caudill/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Gilbert S. Gonzalez ( CN=Gilbert S. Gonzalez/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO READ:UNKNOWN TO: Gina N. Dennis (CN=Gina N. Dennis/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Heather F. Hurlburt ( CN=Heather F. Hurlburt/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Heather M. Riley ( CN=Heather M. Riley/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Hildy Kuryk ( CN=Hildy Kuryk/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Irma L. Martinez ( CN=Irma L. Martinez/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jackson T. Dunn ( CN=Jackson T. Dunn/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Janice H. Vranich ( CN=Janice H. Vranich/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jason E. Hartke ( CN=Jason E. Hartke/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jason H. Schechter (CN=Jason H. Schechter/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO D READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jeannetta P. Allen ( CN=Jeannetta P. Allen/OU=OA/O=EOP [ OA 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jeffrey A. Shesol (CN=Jeffrey A. Shesol/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jenni R. Engebretsen ( CN=Jenni R. Engebretsen/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jennifer Ferguson ( CN=Jennifer Ferguson/OU=OMB/O=EOP [ OMB 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jennifer H. Smith ( CN=Jennifer H. Smith/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jennifer M. Palmieri ( CN=Jennifer M. Palmieri/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Joel Johnson (CN=Joel Johnson/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: John A. Gribben (CN=John A. Gribben/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: John H. Corcoran III ( CN=John H. Corcoran III/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jonathan M. Prince ( CN=Jonathan M. Prince/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Joseph P. Lockhart ( CN=Joseph P. Lockhart/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Joshua S. Gottheimer ( CN=Joshua S. Gottheimer/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Julia M. Payne ( (CN=Julia M. Payne/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: June G. Turner (CN=June G. Turner/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO D READ:UNKNOWN TO: June Shih ( CN=June Shih/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Justin G. Cooper (CN=Justin G. Cooper/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Justin L. Coleman ( CN=Justin L. Coleman/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Karen C. Burchard ( CN=Karen C. Burchard/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Karen L. Barbuschak ( CN=Karen L. Barbuschak/OU=OA/O=EOP [ OA 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Karen Tramontano ( CN=Karen Tramontano/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Katharine Button ( CN=Katharine Button/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Kathleen K. Ahn ( CN=Kathleen K. Ahn/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Kris M Balderston ( CN=Kris M Balderston/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Kymberly M. Escobar ( CN=Kymberly M. Escobar/OU=CEQ/O=EOP [ CEQ ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Laura D. Schwartz ( CN=Laura D. Schwartz/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Laura S. Marcus ( CN=Laura S. Marcus/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Lauren M. Supina ( CN=Lauren M. Supina/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Laurie P. Kelleher ( CN=Laurie P. Kelleher/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Leanne A. Shimabukuro ( CN=Leanne A. Shimabukuro/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Leslie Bernstein (CN=Leslie Bernstein/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Linda Ricci ( CN=Linda Ricci/OU=OMB/O=EOP [ OMB D READ:UNKNOWN TO: Lindsay R. Drewel ( CN=Lindsay R. Drewel/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Lindsey E. Huff ( CN=Lindsey E. Huff/OU=NSC/O=EOP [ NSC ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Lisa Ferdinando (CN=Lisa Ferdinando/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Lisel Loy ( CN=Lisel Loy/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Loretta M. Ucelli ( CN=Loretta M. Ucelli/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Lowell A. Weiss (CN=Lowell A. Weiss/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Margaret M. Suntum ( CN=Margaret M. Suntum/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO READ:UNKNOWN TO: Maria E. Soto ( CN=Maria E. Soto/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Mark A. Kitchens (CN=Mark A. Kitchens/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Mark C. Sheppard ( CN=Mark C. Sheppard/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Mark D. Magana ( CN=Mark D. Magana/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Mark H. Bartholomew (CN=Mark H. Bartholomew/OU=OA/O=EOP [ OA 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Mark J. Bernstein (CN=Mark J. Bernstein/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Marsha E. Berry ( CN=Marsha E. Berry/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO READ:UNKNOWN TO: Martha Foley ( CN=Martha Foley/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Marty J. Hoffmann (CN=Marty J. Hoffmann/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Mary E. Cahill (CN=Mary E. Cahill/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Mary L. Smith ( CN=Mary L. Smith/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Matthew T. Schneider ( CN=Matthew T. Schneider/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Maureen A. Hudson ( CN=Maureen A. Hudson/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Megan C. Moloney ( CN=Megan C. Moloney/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Melissa G. Green ( CN=Melissa G. Green/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Melissa M. Murray ( CN=Melissa M. Murray/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Michael A. Hammer ( CN=Michael A. Hammer/OU=NSC/O=EOP [ NSC D READ:UNKNOWN TO: Michael J. Sullivan ( CN=Michael J. Sullivan/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Michael K. Gehrke ( CN=Michael K. Gehrke/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Michele Ballantyne ( CN=Michele Ballantyne/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Minyon Moore ( CN=Minyon Moore/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Nanda Chitre (CN=Nanda Chitre/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Nicole L. Davison (CN=Nicole L. Davison/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Nicole R. Rabner (CN=Nicole R. Rabner/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Patrick E. Briggs ( CN=Patrick E. Briggs/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO READ:UNKNOWN TO: Patrick M. Dorton ( CN=Patrick M. Dorton/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Paul D. Glastris ( CN=Paul D. Glastris/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Peter Rundlet ( CN=Peter Rundlet/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Rachel A. Redington ( CN=Rachel A. Redington/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Ralph Alswang (CN=Ralph Alswang/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Rebecca J. Salay ( CN=Rebecca J. Salay/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Renee Sagiv ( CN=Renee Sagiv/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Reuben L. Musgrave Jr ( CN=Reuben L. Musgrave Jr/OU=OSTP/O=EOP [ OSTP D READ:UNKNOWN TO: Richard L. Siewert ( CN=Richard L. Siewert/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO D READ:UNKNOWN TO: Robert B. Johnson (CN=Robert B. Johnson/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Robert S. Weiner (CN=Robert S. Weiner/OU=ONDCP/O=EOP [ ONDCP 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Robin M. Roland ( CN=Robin M. Roland/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Ruby Shamir ( CN=Ruby Shamir/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sally Katzen ( CN=Sally Katzen/OU=OMB/O=EOP [ OMB ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Samir Afridi ( CN=Samir Afridi/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sara M. Latham ( CN=Sara M. Latham/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sarah E. Gegenheimer ( CN=Sarah E. Gegenheimer/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sarah S. Knight (CN=Sarah S. Knight/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sean P. Maloney ( CN=Sean P. Maloney/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sean P. OShea ( CN=Sean P. O'Shea/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sean R. Dobson (CN=Sean R. Dobson/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Serena C. Torrey ( CN=Serena C. Torrey/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Setti D. Warren ( CN=Setti D. Warren/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sharon Farmer (CN=Sharon Farmer/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sharon H. Yuan ( CN=Sharon H. Yuan/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sheyda Jahanbani ( CN=Sheyda Jahanbani/OU=NSC/O=EOP [ NSC ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sonya N. Hebert ( CN=Sonya N. Hebert/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Stephanie A. Cutter ( CN=Stephanie A. Cutter/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Stephen N. Boyd ( CN=Stephen N. Boyd/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Steven J. Naplan ( CN=Steven J. Naplan/OU=NSC/O=EOP [ NSC ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sylvia M. Mathews (CN=Sylvia M. Mathews/OU=OMB/O=EOP [ OMB ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Terry Edmonds (CN=Terry Edmonds/OU=WHO/O=EOP: [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Thomas D. Janenda ( CN=Thomas D. Janenda/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Thurgood Marshall Jr ( CN=Thurgood Marshall Jr/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Toby C. Graff ( CN=Toby C. Graff/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Todd A. Bledsoe (CN=Todd A. Bledsoe/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Tracy F. Sisser ( CN=Tracy F. Sisser/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Victoria L. Valentine ( CN=Victoria L. Valentine/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Wayne C. Johnson ( CN=Wayne C. Johnson/OU=OA/O=EOP [OA]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: William C. Haymes ( CN=William C. Haymes/OU=OA/O=EOP [ OA ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: William Hadley ( CN=William Hadley/OU=OA/O=EOP [OA]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Woyneab M. Wondwossen ( CN=Woyneab M. Wondwossen/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: CUTLER_L ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: deborah.charles ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: DICKEY_L [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: dmilbank ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Erica_Lepping ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: FORDE_R [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: GlynnME ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: GRAY W [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: INFOMGT ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: john_see ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: jonathan.kaplan ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jordanindc ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Julia G. Bataille (Julia G. Bataille@OVP [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: kit.judge ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: klasky helaine ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: KTORPEY ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: masonjulie ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: MichaelT ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: MOFFETT_J ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: NAPLAN S ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: newsdesk ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: pcaplan ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Pub_Arch ( Pub_Arch [ UNKNOWN 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: pubs_backup ( pubs_backup [ UNKNOWN D READ:UNKNOWN TO: Releases ( [email protected]. [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: releases ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: sean.carr ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: skgmd ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: SMITH_BD ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: SUNTUM_M [email protected] [ UNKNOWN 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: tingen-terri ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ] ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: usia01 ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: wh-outbox-distr ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: WOZNIAK_N ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN 1) READ:UNKNOWN TEXT: THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary (Miami, Florida) - Embargoed until 12:01 am EST Monday, December 13, 1999 RADIO INTERVIEW OF THE PRESIDENT BY CBS NEWS December 11, 1999 Wyndham Palace Resort Orlando, Florida 11:25 A.M. EST Q President Clinton, thank you very much for joining us for this special interview with CBS News. Heading into the next century, beyond your immediate goals for the rest of your term, what do you think are the one or two top domestic challenges facing the country? THE PRESIDENT: I think the aging of America and the children of the country. It's ironic that we seem to be growing at both ends. We're going to double the number of people over 65, and yet, we have the largest group of schoolchildren in our country's history in our schools, the first group bigger than the baby boomers and they're much, much more diverse. They come from more different ethnic and racial and religious backgrounds. And I think that dealing with them are the two biggest things that ought to be on the front burner. I also believe that, related to that, obviously, as you've heard me say many times, is the challenge of continuing to grow the economy while reaching out into poor areas, continuing to improve the environment and paying the debt off. I think those are the big, big challenges. Q Mr. President, one of the things I've noticed about these celebrations that the White House, you and the First Lady are planning is that it's propagating the myth that January 1st is the start of the new millennium and the new century. Are you guilty of creating that erroneous impression? THE PRESIDENT: Yes. I mean, I think basically, by common consent, everybody decided that we ought to celebrate the millennium on January the 1st, 2000, even though most of the strict correctionists say that it's January 1st, 2001. Q Well, they're right, aren't they? THE PRESIDENT: Well, apparently, that was the prevailing view among the experts, but the people have expressed a different wish, so we're going with the folks. We've got a democracy here, and that's the way we're going. It will be nice for me, maybe I can do it twice and I'll be a President of two millennial changes. Well, looking ahead into the next century, whenever it begins, where do you see the power of the presidency itself evolving? Is it going to change? THE PRESIDENT: Oh, yes, it's always changing. But I think it will always at least for the future that I can foresee - will continue to be an extremely important office. I think that a lot of the executive actions will be important, along with getting along with Congress. I think that building partnerships with the private sector will become more important. It will become more important to mobilize the American people and to organize them to meet the challenges in the future the way we've done. For example, maybe a good example would be the way we've worked on wiring the schools, where we did the main government thing we did was to change the law so that we have this e-rate now in poorer schools and hospitals. You mean wiring for the Internet? THE PRESIDENT: Yes, wiring for the Internet -- poorer schools and hospitals can get a discount rate. Then we go out and try to hustle up all the equipment and the Internet connections and get everybody to do that. So I think you'll see a lot more of that. The other thing I think you will see is, I believe the world is growing ever more interdependent, so I think the President, in order to effectively lead the world, will have to be an increasingly effective negotiator, conciliator, bringing people together, working people together. And I think it will be just as important 30 years from now for America to be involved in the rest of the world as it is now. But I think it will be an increasingly interdependent world that will require powers of persuasion and not just unilateral power. Q Next year is also, as you well know, the final year of your presidency. Do you find that in any way liberating to try and do things that you weren't able to do in the first years of your presidency? THE PRESIDENT: I don't know if I find it liberating. I find it -- it's concentrated my attention and my energies. And obviously, since I'm not running, I could do things in an election year that might be difficult to do otherwise. But if you go back, I mean, we've taken a lot of controversial decisions. That's one of the reasons we lost the Congress in '94 -- we took on the gun lobby and the health care lobby and the deficit issue at the same time, and it was more than the system could bear, I think. But I do think that I am acutely mindful of the fact that I have 14 months left, and that I need to be out there squeezing the most out of every day. And I need to get as much done as I can for the American people, to try to leave our country in the best-possible shape so that the next president and the next Congress will be even freer than they are to basically look with a visionary eye to the future and take on the big issues. That's the theme that I had today in Florida; that's the theme that I try to echo everywhere. I believe that this really is the only time in my lifetime we've had so much prosperity, social cohesion and national self-confidence, with the absence of internal crisis or external threat. I will get as much done on these big challenges as I can. But after I'm out of office and there is a new team in, I still think it's very important that they keep the American people focused on these big issues in the 21st century, because a society rarely has the luxury of having the tools and the space to deal with these long-term challenges that we now have. And I think it's very important that we seize it. Q Let me ask you one specific, if I may, on the question of gays in the military. As you no doubt know, the First Lady this past week was critical of the don't ask, don't tell policy. She said it just doesn't work. You weren't going to institute that at the beginning of your presidency, anyway. Why not use the last year of your presidency to institute an end to discriminatory discharges against gays in the military? And what do you think of what the First Lady said this week? THE PRESIDENT: First of all, I'm quite sympathetic with what she said. I think -- that was the position that both of us brought to the White House. But I think -- there's one thing that may be not clearly understood. The reason that I went for don't ask, don't tell is that it's all I could do because I had a clear signal from the Congress that if I implemented my policy, they would reverse it by overwhelming majorities. I didn't implement don't ask, don't tell until the Senate voted 68-32 against the policy that I wanted. So I think it's very important -- for me, what's important is that the policy, as implemented, does not work as I announced it and as the leaders of our military at that time in '93 pledged to implement it. I can only hope this last brutal beating death of a gay soldier will give some sobering impetus to a reexamination about how this policy is implemented and whether we can do a better job of fulfilling its original intent. Let me remind you that the original intent was that people would not be rooted out, that they would not be questioned out, that this would be focused on people's conduct, and if they didn't violate the code of conduct, and they didn't tell, that their comings and goings, the mail they got, the associates they had, that those things would not be sufficient to kick them out of the military, or certainly subject them to harassment. So what I would like to do is to focus on trying to make the policy that we announced back in '93 work the way it was intended to, because it's way -- it's out of whack now, and I don't think any serious person can say it's not. Q How are you going to do that, sir? THE PRESIDENT: Well, we're working with the Pentagon now to do it. I mean, I think there's a greater awareness now that it's just not -- it's not being implemented as it was announced and as it was intended. Now, as for -- but I don't have any problem with what she says, because that's -- after all, that's what I said back in '93, and if anybody -- you know, if there's a sense in the Congress or in the next White House that that ought to be done, then maybe together they'll have enough votes to do it. Q You mentioned earlier the importance of future presidents becoming even more mediators and conciliators on the world scene. This coming week, of course, Syria and Israel are going to be at the White House. And I know you told us at the news conference you've taken a blood oath to avoid discussing details of those long-stalled talks, the renewal of them, but how do you plan -- just in general, since you don't want to go into details -- how do you plan to get this process moving and keep it moving when you get these gentlemen sitting down again? THE PRESIDENT: Well, I want to get them together, let them talk, and get them to try to agree on an agenda and a timetable. They know what the issues are, and they know what the options are for resolving the issues. And my experience has been that competent people -- and you're dealing with two highly competent people here -- I mean, these people are good in what they do and representing the interests of their countries -- and that when -- they don't go into these negotiations without some idea about where they want to finish and some idea about where they'll have to give, and whether the other person will give, and how it will all play out. So on the other hand, it is difficult, but not as complex, in my view, as the Palestinian negotiations with Israel. So I would like to see them get together, talk together, get to know each other a little better, and agree on an agenda and a timetable, and then take a couple of days off and go back and meet with their respective teams to decide where they're going to start and where they're going to stop, and come back here and just look to burn through it, just keep going until we get the thing done. Q Why is the time right now? THE PRESIDENT: I think because both leaders, for different reasons, finally have this sense of urgency, and I think they should have a sense of urgency. And I think they know that the enemies of the peace process are gearing up, they want to try to derail it, and not just for the Palestinians. I think that they know that there is a sense of hope and possibility now, and I think they believe that Prime Minister Barak is committed to trying to resolve all this, just like he said he was. Q Mr. President, is there any doubt in your mind, sir, that Russia is responsible for the listening device that was discovered at the State Department? And to what extent are you disturbed by it? Don't we all do the same things -- spy on each other? THE PRESIDENT: I think when -- we have always taken spying seriously and taken appropriate action, and I think they will take appropriate action in this regard. And I have no reason to believe that the press accounts on this are not accurate. Q You must be concerned, though, about this big security breach in the State Department. THE PRESIDENT: Well, I certainly wish it hadn't happened, but I think they learned something about this. I think now they'll figure out how to deal with this technology and it won't happen again. And I think we just have to -- look, the consequences of all this, while certainly not good, are not as dire as they were in the dark days of the Cold War when both of us were spying on each other in a much more sweeping way. And we had ways of dealing with it. And there's sort of an established protocol for dealing with this kind of thing and I think we ought to do it. And the main thing we ought to do is learn whatever we can from the incident -- how did they do this, how did they get away with it, how can we prevent it from happening again. Q What effect will it have on American relations with Russia? THE PRESIDENT: Based on what I now know, I think we should proceed where it's in our interest to do so in our relations with Russia, and where we have differences of opinion, we ought to proceed to articulate them. You can't let every spy case affect the larger national interests in the country. Q Mr. President, a couple more reflective questions. Based on your own experiences over the years, going back to your first campaign, to what extent do you think a politician's private life should become part of the public record? THE PRESIDENT: Oh, I don't know. I think I'll let the press and the people decide that. I think -- let me say it in a different way -- I think that what I have seen too often is that the politics of personal destruction become the preferred option only when people think they can't win the old-fashioned way, they can't win on the issues or whatever. Now, a person -- I'm not talking about whether somebody's robbed a bank or something like that, but I think that the pendulum swung pretty far over in the last three or four elections, and I think it's swinging back now. And I think that's what the voters are saying, and they'll try to get it right. But something ought to be genuinely relevant, and we ought not just target people for no good reason and just pound on them, and use that because they couldn't win the old-fashioned way. I think that both the politicians and the press should be mindful of that. But it will get sorted out. These things come and go. You know, early in the 1800s, we had several years where this sort of thing was all the rage, completely dominated the political debate. And then it sort of faded away again. And these things come and go, and the underlying health of our democracy and the common sense of our people have always been enough to see us through, and I think they will be here. Q What do you make of the recent statement by Ken Starr that he thinks you ought to get right with the law by admitting in a public way that you were not truthful in your statements under oath? THE PRESIDENT: I'm not sure that I know what to make of Mr. Starr. You know, he's giving interviews, he's doing talk shows? THE PRESIDENT: No, but it's a free country. Q Why do you think he's still pursuing this after he's resigned his office? THE PRESIDENT: I just don't think I can serve any useful purpose by commenting on it now. Maybe I should follow his lead; when I don't have a job, I can comment on it more. Q Speaking of that as we wind up here, besides getting your presidential library off the ground, what is Bill Clinton going to do with the rest of his life? THE PRESIDENT: Well, I hope I'll be a member of the Senate Spouses Club. That's one of the things I really hope I'll be. And I say that -- we're laughing, but I'm dead serious about that. I want to do what I can to help Hillary. And getting this library and public policy center up and going and having it continue the best missions of my presidency I think will be quite time-consuming. I hope I'll have a little more time for my family and my friends, but I still want to be a good citizen. I really admire what Jimmy Carter's done with his life. I wouldn't necessarily choose the same endeavors, although I've supported Habitat for Humanity and I certainly believe that if someone needed me in the future to monitor an election or something like that, I ought to be willing to do it. But the main thing I want to say is that he has said -- the life he has lived has been a life of service. And he said -- he's also had a very interesting life. I mean, he's had time to go climb up to the base camp of Mount Everest, he goes fishing and does the things that he loves to do -- he goes skiing. But he has lived a life of service. And he has recognized that it is an incredible gift to have the chance to be President, and that when you have this gift for four or eight years, you learn things, you know things, you have a perspective that no one else has the chance to develop. And you can't just walk away from it and not at least make yourself available. If people don't want you to do anything, that's one thing. But at least you ought to be available for public service. And Jimmy Carter has lived a life of public service. I admire that and I hope that when I leave here, I will be able to do a lot of the personal things I'm interested in, but, fundamentally, help in a way I don't want to be under foot for the next president, I don't want to get in anybody's way, but I do think there's a lot of good things I can do for the world and for our country, and I intend to try to do what I can. Q Finally, sir, I know it's 14 months away, but what advice do you have for your successor and your successors as the last President of this century? What thoughts do you have to pass on to them? THE PRESIDENT: I think it's very important for a President to have a sense of history and a sense of the future. You have to know where your country is at this moment in our journey. You have to know what the lives of the American people are like. Then you have to have a vision of what you think it ought to be. And once you do that, once you're grounded in the facts and the history and you have a vision of what you think you ought to be, then you need to have a lot of ideas and a lot of energy and a lot of interpersonal skills. And you just need to go to work every day and never forget your mission. Because all the pressures in political life on the Chief Executive is at the center of the vortex of all of these things are designed to make you forget your mission. And those who remember their mission and stay on it tend to do very well, even under the most adverse circumstances. You know, Lincoln once said in the Civil War, he said, my policy is to have no policy, I am controlled by events. And to some extent that was true. He was being very flexible and the government was a much more rudimentary enterprise than it is today. But to some extent, he was being disingenuous, because his policy was: I am going to save the Union; if I have to burn every wheat field in this country and if I have to give up my own life to do it, we will not be split. Okay, so he knew where he was in history you know, if you listened to him, he talked about George Washington a lot, he had this sense of -- he knew about the future. He signed the Moral Land Grant Act. He was all for the railroads and the public improvements. He had a lot of imagination about the future, Lincoln did, and he said, there won't be any future unless we hold together, no that's my policy, and I'm willing to try anything or anybody or any general to get it done. The thing that made him great was, he never forgot what his mission was. He was grounded in history, he had the vision of the future. He used to say he kept regular office hours -- my office in the White House on the second floor is in Lincoln's waiting room, which was later the Office of the President through Theodore Roosevelt. But Lincoln used to keep regular office hours with people that wanted a job in a post office or something, because he said he wanted to be reminded on a regular basis of what the daily concerns of people were, and he wanted the war to be over so everybody could be restored to pursuing those daily concerns. So, anyway, that's one specific, very big example of what I think the general rule is. You've got to understand your country's history, have some idea of your country's future, have a vision of where you want it to go, come up with a set of ideas and a good team, and just pursue it with all the energy and focus you can and have a good time doing it. That's my advice. Don't forget the mission, don't forget who you work for. Q We're honor bound to break this off, sir, but we're very grateful for your time. Q Thank you very much for doing this. THE PRESIDENT: I've enjoyed it. Thank you. END 11:47 A.M. EST RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (TRP NOTES MAIL) CREATOR: Margaret_M._Suntum ([email protected] who ) CREATION DATE/TIME:14-DEC-1999 19:20:24.00 SUBJECT: Lockhart briefing TO: "/R=OPUS/R=MRP/PR-L=AVUOEOB/PR-U=TDIXON/FFN=Timothy Dixon/"@mr.eop.gov ( "/R=OPUS/R=MRP/PR-L=AVUOEOB/PR-U=TDIXON/FFN=Timothy Dixon/"@mr.eop.gov [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Christopher S. Lehane ("Christopher S. Lehane"@Ingate4.eop.gov [ @LNGATE READ:UNKNOWN TO: [email protected] [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Adrian E. Miller ([email protected] [who]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: backup ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: BARTHOLOW T ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: carolmast ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Christine_L._Anderson ([email protected] who ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Abigail C. Smith (CN=Abigail C. Smith/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ] ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Abigail L. McDermott (CN=Abigail L. McDermott/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Adrienne K. Elrod ( CN=Adrienne K. Elrod/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Alberto O. Feraren ( CN=Alberto O. Feraren/OU=OA/O=EOP@EOP [ OA ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Alejandro G. Cabrera ( CN=Alejandro G. Cabrera/O=OVP@OVP [ OVP ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Andrew J. Mayock ( CN=Andrew J. Mayock/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Ann C. Hertelendy ( CN=Ann C. Hertelendy/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Ann F. Lewis (CN=Ann F. Lewis/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Anna Richter (CN=Anna Richter/OU=OPD/O=EOP@EOP [ OPD ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Anne M. Edwards (CN=Anne M. Edwards/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Anne W. Bovaird (CN=Anne W. Bovaird/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Antony J. Blinken ( CN=Antony J. Blinken/OU=NSC/O=EOP@EOP [ NSC 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Aprill N. Springfield (CN=Aprill N. Springfield/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Barbara D. Woolley ( CN=Barbara D. Woolley/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Barry J. Toiv (CN=Barry J. Toiv/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Beth Nolan (CN=Beth Nolan/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Bradley M. Campbell ( CN=Bradley M. Campbell/OU=CEQ/O=EOP@EOP CEQ READ:UNKNOWN TO: Brian A. Barreto (CN=Brian A. Barreto/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Brian A. Reich ( CN=Brian A. Reich/O=OVP@OVP [OVP]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Brian S. Mason (CN=Brian S. Mason/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Bridget T. Leininger ( CN=Bridget T. Leininger/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Brooke B. Livingston ( CN=Brooke B. Livingston/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Brooks E. Scoville ( CN=Brooks E. Scoville/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Carmen B. Fowler ( CN=Carmen B. Fowler/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Carolyn T. Wu ( CN=Carolyn T. Wu/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP[ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Catherine T. Kitchen ( CN=Catherine T. Kitchen/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Charles J. Payson (CN=Charles J. Payson/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Christopher K. Scully ( CN=Christopher K. Scully/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Dag Vega ( CN=Dag Vega/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Dana C. Strand ( CN=Dana C. Strand/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Daniel W. Burkhardt ( CN=Daniel W. Burkhardt/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Dario J. Gomez (CN=Dario J. Gomez/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: David E. Kalbaugh ( CN=David E. Kalbaugh/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: David T. Johnson ( CN=David T. Johnson/OU=NSC/O=EOP@EOP NSC 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: David Vandivier ( CN=David Vandivier/OU=OMB/O=EOP@EOP [ OMB ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Dawn M. Chirwa ( CN=Dawn M. Chirwa/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Deanne E. Benos ( CN=Deanne E. Benos/OU=OPD/O=EOP@EOP [ OPD 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Deborah Akel ( CN=Deborah Akel/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Debra D. Alexander ( CN=Debra D. Alexander/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Debra D. Bird ( CN=Debra D. Bird/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Debra S. Wood ( CN=Debra S. Wood/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Delia A. Cohen ( CN=Delia A. Cohen/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Denver R. Peacock ( CN=Denver R. Peacock/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Dorinda A. Salcido ( CN=Dorinda A. Salcido/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Douglas B. Sosnik ( CN=Douglas B. Sosnik/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Eli G. Attie (CN=Eli G. Attie/O=OVP@OVP[OVP ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Elizabeth R. Newman ( CN=Elizabeth R. Newman/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Ellen E. Olcott (CN=Ellen E. Olcott/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO READ:UNKNOWN TO: Elliot J. Diringer (CN=Elliot J. Diringer/OU=CEQ/O=EOP@EOP [ CEQ ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Emily Karcher ( CN=Emily Karcher/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO READ:UNKNOWN TO: Eric P. Liu (CN=Eric P. Liu/OU=OPD/O=EOP@EOP [ OPD ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Essence P. Washington ( CN=Essence P. Washington/OU=OPD/O=EOP@EOP [ OPD ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Evan Ryan (CN=Evan Ryan/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Fern Mechlowitz (CN=Fern Mechlowitz/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP. [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Francisco J. Sanchez ( CN=Francisco J. Sanchez/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: G. Timothy Saunders (CN=G. Timothy Saunders/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: George G. Caudill ( CN=George G. Caudill/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Gina N. Dennis (CN=Gina N. Dennis/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP WHO ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Heather M. Riley ( CN=Heather M. Riley/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Hildy Kuryk (CN=Hildy Kuryk/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO READ:UNKNOWN TO: Irma L. Martinez (CN=Irma L. Martinez/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jackson T. Dunn ( CN=Jackson T. Dunn/OU=WHO/O-EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: James E. Kennedy (CN=James E. Kennedy/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Janice H. Vranich (CN=Janice H. Vranich/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jason E. Hartke (CN=Jason E. Hartke/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jason H. Schechter ( CN=Jason H. Schechter/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jeannetta P. Allen ( CN=Jeannetta P. Allen/OU=OA/O=EOP@EOP [ OA ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jeffrey A. Shesol (CN=Jeffrey A. Shesol/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jenni R. Engebretsen ( CN=Jenni R. Engebretsen/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jennifer Ferguson ( CN=Jennifer Ferguson/OU=OMB/O=EOP@EOP [ OMB ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jennifer H. Smith ( CN=Jennifer H. Smith/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jennifer M. Palmieri ( CN=Jennifer M. Palmieri/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jim Kohlenberger ( CN=Jim Kohlenberger/O=OVP@OVP [ OVP ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Joel Johnson ( CN=Joel Johnson/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: John A. Gribben ( CN=John A. Gribben/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: John H. Corcoran III (CN=John H. Corcoran III/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jonathan M. Prince ( CN=Jonathan M. Prince/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Joseph P. Lockhart ( CN=Joseph P. Lockhart/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Joshua S. Gottheimer ( CN=Joshua S. Gottheimer/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Julia M. Payne ( CN=Julia M. Payne/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: June G. Turner (CN=June G. Turner/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: June Shih ( CN=June Shih/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Justin G. Cooper ( CN=Justin G. Cooper/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Justin L. Coleman ( CN=Justin L. Coleman/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Karen C. Burchard ( CN=Karen C. Burchard/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Karen L. Barbuschak ( CN=Karen L. Barbuschak/OU=OA/O=EOP@EOP [OA]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Karen Tramontano (CN=Karen Tramontano/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Katharine Button (CN=Katharine Button/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Kathleen K. Ahn ( CN=Kathleen K. Ahn/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO D READ:UNKNOWN TO: Kris M Balderston ( CN=Kris M Balderston/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Kymberly M. Escobar ( CN=Kymberly M. Escobar/OU=CEQ/O=EOP@EOP [ CEQ ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Laura D. Schwartz (CN=Laura D. Schwartz/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Laura S. Marcus ( CN=Laura S. Marcus/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Laurie P. Kelleher (CN=Laurie P. Kelleher/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Leanne A. Shimabukuro ( CN=Leanne A. Shimabukuro/OU=OPD/O=EOP@EOP [ OPD ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Leslie Bernstein ( CN=Leslie Bernstein/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Linda Ricci (CN=Linda Ricci/OU=OMB/O=EOP@EOP [ OMB ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Lindsay R. Drewel ( CN=Lindsay R. Drewel/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Lindsey E. Huff CN=Lindsey E. Huff/OU=NSC/O=EOP@EOP[NSC READ:UNKNOWN TO: Lisa Ferdinando (CN=Lisa Ferdinando/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Lisel Loy (CN=Lisel Loy/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Loretta M. Ucelli (CN=Loretta M. Ucelli/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Lowell A. Weiss ( CN=Lowell A. Weiss/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP[ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Margaret M. Suntum ( CN=Margaret M. Suntum/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Maria E. Soto ( CN=Maria E. Soto/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Mark A. Kitchens (CN=Mark A. Kitchens/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO D READ:UNKNOWN TO: Mark C. Sheppard ( CN=Mark C. Sheppard/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Mark H. Bartholomew (CN=Mark H. Bartholomew/OU=OA/O=EOP@EOP [OA]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Mark J. Bernstein (CN=Mark J. Bernstein/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Marsha E. Berry (CN=Marsha E. Berry/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Martha Foley ( CN=Martha Foley/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Marty J. Hoffmann ( CN=Marty J. Hoffmann/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Mary E. Cahill (CN=Mary E. Cahill/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO READ:UNKNOWN TO: Mary L. Smith (CN=Mary L. Smith/OU=OPD/O=EOP@EOP [ OPD ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Matthew T. Schneider ( CN=Matthew T. Schneider/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP WHO READ:UNKNOWN TO: Maureen A. Hudson ( CN=Maureen A. Hudson/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Megan C. Moloney ( CN=Megan C. Moloney/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Melissa G. Green ( CN=Melissa G. Green/OU=OPD/O=EOP@EOP OPD READ:UNKNOWN TO: Melissa M. Murray ( CN=Melissa M. Murray/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Michael A. Hammer ( CN=Michael A. Hammer/OU=NSC/O=EOP@EOP [NSC] ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Michael J. Sullivan ( CN=Michael J. Sullivan/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Michael K. Gehrke ( CN=Michael K. Gehrke/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Michele Ballantyne ( CN=Michele Ballantyne/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP. [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Minyon Moore ( CN=Minyon Moore/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Nanda Chitre (CN=Nanda Chitre/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Nathan B. Naylor (CN=Nathan B. Naylor/O=OVP@OVP [ OVP READ:UNKNOWN TO: Nicole L. Davison ( CN=Nicole L. Davison/OU=OPD/O=EOP@EOP OPD READ:UNKNOWN TO: Nicole R. Rabner (CN=Nicole R. Rabner/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO] ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Patrick E. Briggs ( CN=Patrick E. Briggs/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Patrick M. Dorton (CN=Patrick M. Dorton/OU=OPD/O=EOP@EOP [OPD]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Paul D. Glastris (CN=Paul D. Glastris/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Peter Rundlet (CN=Peter Rundlet/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Rachel A. Redington ( CN=Rachel A. Redington/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Ralph Alswang (CN=Ralph Alswang/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Rebecca J. Salay (CN=Rebecca J. Salay/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Renee Sagiv ( CN=Renee Sagiv/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Reuben L. Musgrave Jr ( CN=Reuben L. Musgrave Jr/OU=OSTP/O=EOP@EOP [ OSTP ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Richard L. Siewert ( CN=Richard L. Siewert/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Robert B. Johnson (CN=Robert B. Johnson/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Robert S. Weiner ( CN=Robert S. Weiner/OU=ONDCP/O=EOP@EOP [ ONDCP 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Robin M. Roland ( CN=Robin M. Roland/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Ruby Shamir ( CN=Ruby Shamir/OU=OPD/O=EOP@EOP [ OPD 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sally Katzen ( CN=Sally Katzen/OU=OMB/O=EOP@EOP [ OMB ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Samir Afridi ( CN=Samir Afridi/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sara M. Latham (CN=Sara M. Latham/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sarah E. Gegenheimer (CN=Sarah E. Gegenheimer/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sarah S. Knight (CN=Sarah S. Knight/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO D READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sean P. Maloney (CN=Sean P. Maloney/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sean P. Oshea ( CN=Sean P. O'Shea/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Serena C. Torrey ( CN=Serena C. Torrey/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO D READ:UNKNOWN TO: Setti D. Warren ( CN=Setti D. Warren/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sharon Farmer (CN=Sharon Farmer/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sharon H. Yuan (CN=Sharon H. Yuan/OU=OPD/O=EOP@EOP [ OPD ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sheyda Jahanbani ( CN=Sheyda Jahanbani/OU=NSC/O=EOP@EOP NSC ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Stephanie A. Cutter ( CN=Stephanie A. Cutter/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Steven J. Naplan ( CN=Steven J. Naplan/OU=NSC/O=EOP@EOP[ NSC ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sylvia M. Mathews ( CN=Sylvia M. Mathews/OU=OMB/O=EOP@EOP [ OMB ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Terry Edmonds (CN=Terry Edmonds/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Thomas D. Janenda ( CN=Thomas D. Janenda/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Thomas M. Rosshirt ( CN=Thomas M. Rosshirt/O=OVP@OVP OVP 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Thurgood Marshall Jr ( CN=Thurgood Marshall Jr/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Toby C. Graff (CN=Toby C. Graff/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Todd A. Bledsoe (CN=Todd A. Bledsoe/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Tracy F. Sisser (CN=Tracy F.Sisser/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP[WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Victoria L. Valentine ( CN=Victoria L. Valentine/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Wayne C. Johnson (CN=Wayne C. Johnson/OU=OA/O=EOP@EOP [OA]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: William C. Haymes (CN=William C. Haymes/OU=OA/O=EOP@EOP [ OA ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: William Hadley (CN=William Hadley/OU=OA/O=EOP@EOP [OA]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Woyneab M. Wondwossen ( CN=Woyneab M. Wondwossen/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: CUTLER_L ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: DICKEY_L ([email protected] UNKNOWN] ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: dmilbank ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Elizabeth J. Potter ([email protected] [ who ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Erica_Lepping ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN] ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: FORDE_R [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Gilbert_S._Gonzalez ( [email protected] [ who ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: GlynnME ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: GRAY_W [email protected] UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Heather_F. Hurlburt ([email protected] [ who ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: INFOMGT ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: john_see ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: jonathan.kaplan ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Jordanindc ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Julia_G._Bataille (Julia_G_Bataille%[email protected]. [oa]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: kit.judge ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN D READ:UNKNOWN TO: klasky_helaine ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: KTORPEY ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Lauren_M._Supina ( [email protected] [ who ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Mark D. Magana ( [email protected] [ who ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: masonjulie ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: MichaelT ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: MOFFETT J [email protected] [ UNKNOWN 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: NAPLAN_S ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: newsdesk ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Pamela P. Carpenter ( Pamela P. [email protected] [ who ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: pcaplan ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Pub_Arch ( [email protected] [ oa ] ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: pubs backup ( [email protected] [ oa ] ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Releases ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: releases ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: sean.carr ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sean R. Dobson ( [email protected] [opd]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: skgmd ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN D READ:UNKNOWN TO: SMITH_BD ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Sonya_N. Hebert ([email protected]. [ who ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Stephen_N._Boyd ([email protected] [ who 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: SUNTUM_M ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ] ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: tingen-terri ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: usia01 ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: wh-outbox-distr ([email protected]. [ UNKNOWN 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: WOZNIAK_N ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TEXT: THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release December 14, 1999 PRESS BRIEFING BY JOE LOCKHART The Briefing Room 1:10 P.M. EST MR. LOCKHART: It feels like it's been a long time since we've been together. No wonder I've been in such a good mood. Anyway, let me start with, first, one personnel announcement -- worst kept secret in Washington. As many of you know, Mr. Barry Toiv will be leaving our service at the end of the week. It says here on this paper that we are amending our national monuments list -- we left one off and it's Barry. (Laughter.) But I'm going to, actually, have more to say on that on Friday, which is his last day. But, as has been reported a few places, I do want to make a good announcement that Jim Kennedy has agreed to join my staff as a Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy Press Secretary. Many of you know him as the Special Advisor to the White House Counsel, someone who was fully employed over the last year, but thankfully has seen a decline in his part of his economy. He's done a great job for the President for Chuck Ruff, for Beth Nolan, and everyone in the Counsel's Office, and will be joining us beginning after the new year, officially. Those of you who still have an interest in those old, boring subjects that he sometimes trafficked in, he'll be able to continue to help you. Q On Monica and all? MR. LOCKHART: Yes, you've got questions he'll be able to help. Q And who is replacing Jim in the Counsel's Office? MR. LOCKHART: Well, I think, given the fact that the press in Washington are interested in the budget and the issues that the President is going to move forward on to make this country a better place, thankfully, no one. Q Does that mean there will never be another scandal again in this administration? MR. LOCKHART: That's what it means. (Laughter.) We're confident. Q Did the President get a flu shot? MR. LOCKHART: Yes. Q When? MR. LOCKHART: November 3rd. The reason we know that is that it was one of the first questions in the "Ask the White House" series on the Internet last week, was did he get a flu shot. Q But I guess it didn't work. MR. LOCKHART: Well, I don't know if he had a full-blown case of the flu. It was a bad cold combined with a bad -- the normal seasonal allergies, with all of the Christmas trees and decorations around, with some flu-like symptoms. You never know with these whether it keeps it from being a worse case, or whether it has no bearing. But this was, for him, who rarely misses a day of work, a pretty bad case. Q So Christmas trees bother him? MR. LOCKHART: Yes, the Christmas trees tend to flare up his allergies. What he does for the season. Q Joe, the New York Times, in reporting that Panama feels slighted when Albright cancels date at Canal, notes that the President said scheduling conflicts prevented him from attending. But the perception among many here and in Washington was that the administration was loath to revive conservative resentment over the handover in the presidential campaign next year. And I have a two-part question. First, in order to prove that the President's absence was in no way political, can you tell us what the scheduled events today are that were more important than his being present with the Panamanians? MR. LOCKHART: You want to give me the second one, so we can get it all -- so I can do it quickly? Q Well, why don't we -- MR. LOCKHART: Give me the follow-up. It's just easier that way. Q All right, fine. It's more of the same. MR. LOCKHART: Okay. (Laughter.) Q When the President, the Vice President, the Secretary of State, and Senator Sarbanes, the floor manager for these treaties, all join the President in absenting themselves, how can you blame Panama's former President Calderon for saying, it shows the United States has lowered their estimation of us even more? MR. LOCKHART: Let me deal with the second one first, because it doesn't indicate any lowering of estimation. We have an important relationship with Panama. We've worked closely with them over the last 22 years to reach this day. I think if you look at what the President has said when he's been asked on this on a couple of occasions, he was talking about his schedule in general. I think we've taken 12 foreign trips this year; that puts a heavy load on both the President and the staff. A nd there are many trips that he wants to take that he believes are important that we just can't do; this fits that category. So this decision is not made based on the politics. The President supported this treaty in 1977 -- '79 -- I think they started debating it '77 or '78 -- supported it then, supports it now, believes that this is the right thing to do. I think some of the somewhat hysterical comments coming from the right, notwithstanding, that seek to distort the record, just have to be ignored, as is oftentimes the best way to deal with some comments. But we can't do every trip that's important, but our commitment to that region of the world is unparalleled by any President. I think we've traveled there more than any recent President, and that commitment remains the same and remains strong. Q The Vice President said that you never asked him to go. Is that true? And why, if it's true, didn't you ask him to go? MR. LOCKHART: Well, the President thought it was most appropriate to have the former President, Jimmy Carter, and the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State, in turn, because of the breakthrough in the Middle East peace talks, needed to be here. Q Well, it's not until tomorrow. MR. LOCKHART: Well, I think enterprising reporters will note that her role begins today. Q You don't deny really that the U.S. doesn't look so great on this. After all, we're making a major change here. We built the canal. I don't know how many people died in building it and so forth. It's represented so much in terms of the Monroe Doctrine and World War II, and so forth. Q 5,607 died. MR. LOCKHART: Thank you. What's the question? Q My point is, don't you think that the U.S. -- the President will be remiss -- MR. LOCKHART: No, I think the U.S. is well represented at this ceremony. We have a number of Cabinet officers there. It's unfortunate in one sense that the Secretary of State couldn't go, but in another sense, it's quite fortunate that we have these historic discussions that will begin tomorrow. So you take it as it comes. Q Joe, is the United States letting the Taliban know that they will be held responsible for any acts of terrorism against U.S. citizens by the bin Laden network, and if so, how? MR. LOCKHART: The head of the counterterrorism unit at the State Department, Michael Sheehan, met with the Taliban yesterday and delivered a message that any terrorist activities by the bin Laden group we would hold the Taliban responsible for. Q And what does that mean? Does that mean if there were terrorist acts by his associates that we would reserve the same rights we did earlier to bomb his installations? MR. LOCKHART: Well, I'm not going to get into specifics. We just wanted to make sure they understood that their support and harboring of the bin Laden organization was noted here in the United States and that any activity that moved forward, we would hold them responsible for. Q And what did Mullah Omar say in response to that? MR. LOCKHART: I'll let them characterize their own response. But can you tell us what Mr. Sheehan saw as the response? MR. LOCKHART: No. Q Did you have a good reason to give this kind of warning -- not you, per se, but did the U.S. -- MR. LOCKHART: Well, I think that you are all aware that there is a travel advisory from the Department of State that was issued over the weekend. I can tell you that, recently, there were some suspects arrested and that we believe that they belong to the bin Laden organization and were planning terrorist acts. But beyond that, I really can't go into any more detail, because we consider this work that we're doing to combat terrorism in this group and other groups to be an ongoing effort. Q Is that in the United States? MR. LOCKHART: I'm not going to get into where this happened. Q Can you give us any indication at all of what kind of effort they were planning against Americans? MR. LOCKHART: No. I can only tell you that I think the warning is clear about the cautions that we believe Americans should take. But beyond that, I don't think it would be productive to go into the details. Q Joe, the President is quoted by The New York Times saying about the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, "the policy, as implemented, does not work as I announced, and as the leaders of our military, at that time in 1993 pledged to implement it." Does he believe General Colin Powell deliberately broke the 1993 pledge? And I have a follow-up. MR. LOCKHART: No, I think as the Pentagon themselves have looked through in their review that they've done this year, there have been problems in implementation. There were recommendations out of the review that came -- that was released I think in August, and Secretary Cohen took further steps yesterday. So I think as the President was clear, there's problems with implementation that we need to address quickly. Q And he's also quoted as saying, "I'm quite sympathetic with what she said," regarding Mrs. Clinton's statement, "fitness to serve should be based on an individual's conduct, not their sexual orientation." And my question is, this means that the President believes in recruiting all sexual orientations into our armed forces, doesn't it? MR. LOCKHART: Well, if you look at the interview, which is quite clear, he said he was quite sympathetic to the statements she made because those were statements that were in the same vein as -- let me finish. Q Oh, sure. MR. LOCKHART: -- when he campaigned in 1992. Clearly, when the President assumed office, there was massive opposition on Capitol Hill, within some quarters in the Pentagon. We did the best we could, and the President believes that his focus for the next year should be trying to take the steps necessary to ensure the best implementation of the policy. Q But the question is, if she says, "fitness to serve should be based on an individual's conduct, not their sexual orientation," and he agrees with this, this means he feels that they should recruit any sexual orientation, doesn't it, Joe? Or would he discriminate? Are you saying he would discriminate against some? MR. LOCKHART: You know, you've had your shot today. Let's go around the room. Q It's six years into the policy. Where and how does the President think it went wrong? MR. LOCKHART: I'd suggest you go and look at the interview. He went into some detail about some of the issues, about the rooting out of people. But I think he was very clear there, and I don't think I can really expand on it. Q Yes,, but he was talking about the symptoms of it going wrong. What I'm asking is, how does he think it went off-track? Was it that commanders were not paying attention to people above them? Was it the Pentagon wasn't telling people that they need to work on this? Was it they didn't -- MR. LOCKHART: Listen, I can't really reflect on that, only to say that he thinks it hasn't been implemented well, the Pentagon agrees, and we're taking steps to address that. Q So what's he going to do to try to make it work better, then? MR. LOCKHART: Well, we have been working, for some time before you got interested in this in the last few days. We've been working with the Pentagon for much of this year to look at it, look at how it was implemented, see if there are things we can do to improve it. That's the process we've undertaken. Q Just to clarify, Joe. It is not the policy of don't ask, don't tell that he's criticizing, it is the implementation of the policy? MR. LOCKHART: The President -- it depends on what you're looking at here. He indicated in an interview that he had sympathy for those who criticize don't ask don't tell, because he campaigned on something different. But we couldn't get that through. And we live in the real world here in Washington, and when the vast majority of Congress is against something, it's not likely to implement new policy. We've done the best we could. But within the context of don't ask don't tell, the President believes, and I believe the leadership of the Pentagon believes, that we need to do more as far as implementing that to accurately reflect the intent of the policy at the time when it was announced. Q Joe, back to the terrorist arrest in the Middle East. Is it your understanding that they were in the late stages of planning, or the early stages? MR. LOCKHART: Again, it would not be productive to get into the operational details of this. Q Joe, it's been made clear by some people that there are some areas of the world that perhaps would be more dangerous, if they do follow through on these threats, than others. Isn't there some kind of obligation to let the American people know where the real danger spots would be, so they can plan accordingly? MR. LOCKHART: I think we've made very clear in our warning that Americans who are planning to travel overseas around the time of the millennium should check in with the relevant embassies and consuls. And they will be given the information that they need. Q Joe, what was the President's reaction to the Hawaiian Supreme Court decision? MR. LOCKHART: I don't know, I haven't talked to him about it. Q On same-sex marriage? MR. LOCKHART: Haven't talked to him about it. Q They upheld the referendum -- MR. LOCKHART: Haven't talked to him about it. April? Q Will you ask him about that, Joe? MR. LOCKHART: No, I think we've done enough today. April? Q Joe, the environmental -- MR. LOCKHART: Anytime anyone else wants to jump in. I mean -- (laughter.) Q I want to ask a question. MR. LOCKHART: Okay. Q The environmental event that the President just had, one of the sites is the King Center. There was a fight with the National Park Service and the King Center back in -- well, the feud began in '94. Do you know what kind of resolved that? Because I understand the National Park Service -- MR. LOCKHART: I don't know how it was resolved, but I understand, for the sites that we put forward, we now have the money to buy them, and we have sellers. So I think the process we need to go through is consulting and working with the appropriators on Capitol Hill. But I'm not aware of any particular problem. Q Does the National Park Service have anything to do with this proposal the President is sending out, as far as the King Center is concerned? MR. LOCKHART: Well, you'd have to go to the Park Service and Interior; I just don't know. Q Joe, on the don't ask, don't tell again, the President's going to work hard to try to get this to work better in the next year. Why not just propose to Congress that they drop the ban altogether? MR. LOCKHART: Because we make judgments from time to time about what we think we can get done and what we think we can't get done, and the President's made the judgment that at this point, the most appropriate use of our time and energy is to try to have this policy implemented in the best way possible. Q You mean, there's not support on the Hill to get something passed? MR. LOCKHART: In our judgment. Q Joe, last week, the President indicated he was very willing to do almost anything it took to get the Syrians and the Israelis to come to a peace agreement. Would that include a trip to Syria while they're still listed by the State Department as a country that supports terrorism? MR. LOCKHART: You're way down the road. We have an historic opportunity tomorrow to open -- I mean, I think that the Prime Minister of Israel has never sat down to talk with the Foreign Minister of Syria on any subject, much less a broad peace agreement. That's the important thing. The important thing tomorrow is to get this process begun in a positive way, find a way to get through the issues that they need to resolve, and I think anything else is just speculation. I'm looking way down the road. Q And what's the President's plans tomorrow and Thursday in terms of appearing in public and making statements? MR. LOCKHART: I expect you will see him tomorrow in some form. He'll have something to say as we start this process. We'll let you know the details once we finalize them. And then they'll go in to discussions. Both the three as a group of three, and the delegations, the President talking individually with the two parties, and then the two parties talking directly to each other. But how Thursday works out I think will depend a little bit on how Wednesday goes. We'll have some people in here in a few minutes here who know a good bit more than I do on this subject -- Joe, beyond these logistics that you've just outlined, what role does the President see himself taking? Is he going to be a mediator, a conciliator? MR. LOCKHART: I think the President and the United States government has played the role of helping the parties work through issues, and I think the President stands ready and willing to do whatever he believes to be constructive and appropriate. I don't know that we can completely predict how that will play out over the next days, weeks and months, but I think you should know from the past the President has been very deeply involved in this. He's talked to the leaders dozens of times and believes strongly that we are at an historic point where we have an opportunity for peace. Joe, what kind of expectations should we have for these two days of talks? How far does he think he can take this over two days? MR. LOCKHART: I think, realistically, what the two sides and the United States government can expect is they have a chance at the end of two days to discuss how they'll move forward. There is certainly no expectation that they can reach a broad, wide-ranging agreement on issues that are quite difficult and longstanding. But I think what they will hope to do over the next two days is work hard to find a process to allows them over a period of time to reach a peace agreement. Joe, what was the President's reaction to that trial in Memphis regarding the assassination of Dr. King? MR. LOCKHART: I have not had a chance to talk to him about that, so 1 don't know. And what was his reaction to Exon-Mobile's decision not to give benefits to unmarried couples? MR. LOCKHART: I didn't talk to him about that, either. Q Will you do some talking with the President? MR. LOCKHART: I talk to him about a lot of issues, not necessarily the ones that seem to dominate your mind. Q Merry Christmas, you all. MR. LOCKHART: Thank you. Q Happy New Year. MR. LOCKHART: Um-hmm. Q I always seem to end up following Lester. MR. LOCKHART: Yes. Q Back on the terrorism issue, is it correct that U.S. intelligence was not aware of this group's intentions until they were detained? And how did it get to that point without a red flag going up? MR. LOCKHART: Again, this is a longstanding practice to not discuss intelligence matters -- a, because it is not productive; and b, that discussing sources and methods can put lives at risk. And I'm just not going to engage in any of this discussion. Q What's the status of any recess appointments, especially Bill Lann Lee? Will those happen soon? MR. LOCKHART: Well, Congress is coming back soon, so -- I can't tell you. I'm certain that between now and when Congress returns, that there will be some recess appointments. But I can't tell you who or how many. Q Do you have a date for the State of the Union? MR. LOCKHART: Are we confirmed on the State of the Union? If you look at a congressional website you might find the 27th of January to be prominently displayed. But I really can't confirm that. Q Joe, you're saying Congress is coming back, therefore, the recess appointment will be short? They get to serve until the end of the term. MR. LOCKHART: No, no, no. You've got to do the appointments before they come back. But they're not coming back until the end of January, so you have plenty of time to do them. MR. LOCKHART: Right. Of course we do. Q Oh, okay. MR. LOCKHART: I meant in the broadest sense. Thinking about the millennium and 1,000 years, and -- (laughter) -- a month seems so short. Q Has Congress been sounded out on what you have in mind for the settlement for the Middle East? MR. LOCKHART: Well, I mean we, obviously -- Q And what it is going to cost the United States? MR. LOCKHART: Well, again, I haven't heard any real discussion about any additional aid that may be needed. We obviously provide a lot of aid to Israel. We provide economic aid to many of Israel's neighbors. And I expect that to continue. We will keep Congress informed -- as many in Congress have a keen interest in the Middle East peace process -- informed as we move along. And if there is need for additional aid, obviously OMB will be involved with the appropriate appropriators. Q Is the United States prepared to help Israel substantially to cover the costs of moving out of the Golan Heights, if indeed that should happen? MR. LOCKHART: That is a hypothetical question. We have always stood ready to help our friend Israel. We've always stood ready to help to provide aid in the cause of peace. As we move forward, those questions I'm certain will be discussed. Q Speaking of terrorism as we were earlier, is the United States confident as we go into these peace talks that Syria is no longer associated with terrorism in any shape, form or fashion, as has been alleged in the past by the United States? MR. LOCKHART: To understand the United States view on that, the State Department has a report that's issued every year, and our concerns are expressed there, and expressed openly. As far as these talks, we think it's an important point in time, and we encourage both sides to work constructively together to find a peace deal. Q Will the success of these talks lead to a decrease in terrorism? Q Syria's still on the list, right? They're still on the list? MR. LOCKHART: I phrased that carefully. Q Exactly. If these talks are successful, and I'm not talking about just these two days, but over the long run, does the United States think that could lead to a decrease in terrorism? MR. LOCKHART: I certainly think progress in the Middle East peace talks is a positive for not only the security of Israel, the security of the Middle East. Q How about the security of the United States? MR. LOCKHART: We'll see. Q Can I ask you a question about -- the Israeli news media is carrying price tags for this. The Israelis are looking for $8 billion to get their army bases off the Golan, another $10 billion to move just 18,000 settlers and buy their new homes along the beach. Are those figures what you're looking at? MR. LOCKHART: As well as I have been able to answer it, I've already answered, so I'd refer you to my transcript or the next briefers. Q Do you expect a handshake tomorrow between Prime Minister Barak and Foreign Minister Shara? Will you be working on this? MR. LOCKHART: No. I think we're working on some important issues of how to move forward in this process to find a way to a deal, rather than on any pictures or symbols. Q Could I ask you a philosophical question? MR. LOCKHART: Yes. Which I think I answered two, but -- (laughter) -- Q That's okay. I want it on the record. MR. LOCKHART: Okay. On the record, I answered -- Q Why should the United States taxpayer subsidize either Israel or Syria to do what is in their own best interest to do that has made peace, anyhow? MR. LOCKHART: I think, as a philosophical and hypothetical and whatever, the United States has always stood ready to help the peace process. We will remain ready to help in any way we can. Q Where is the money coming from, Joe? MR. LOCKHART: I don't know what money you're talking about, and I think this is a dry hook. Q -- all those billions. Where is it coming from? MR. LOCKHART: I answered these questions. So if anyone has other questions -- Q You did? Somehow I missed it. MR. LOCKHART: April? Q Joe, going back to the question about the President's flu, you said he rarely misses days. How many days has he missed because of sickness since the beginning of his presidency? MR. LOCKHART: I'll tell you, since I've been here, which is now going on four years, I think this is the first day I can remember. He missed some days because of his knee, which I guess you could define -- it depends how you define sickness -- but it's the first time I remember having to put off a series of events because he wasn't feeling well. Q Well, considering that there may be spending involved, what type of consultations will be ongoing this week with senior members of Congress as -- MR. LOCKHART: I think I've just answered that question. Q How did you answer that? Q How did you answer? MR. LOCKHART: Look at the transcript. Go back and look at the transcript. I answered all these questions before. Q You stand ready to do everything, but that's -- MR. LOCKHART: And I said we'd be consulting with members of Congress both on the peace process and on any funds that might be needed, and OMB would be doing that. Q Thank you. END 1:34 P.M. EST #145-12/14 RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (TRP NOTES MAIL) CREATOR: shelley simpson ( shelley simpson [ UNKNOWN 1) CREATION DATE/TIME:16-DEC-1999 14:53:38.00 SUBJECT: This is the packet that is to go out to potential letter-writers. It's Long!! TO: avelthaus ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: bwiteck ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Philip G Dufour ( CN=Philip G Dufour/O=OVP@OVP [ OVP ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: Elizabeth J. Potter ([email protected] [ who ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: fphoch ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN 1) READ:UNKNOWN TO: jclark1939 ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: lynnewiggens ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TO: ShaLiggett ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ] ) READ:UNKNOWN TO: winnie.stachelberg ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN CC: JTrammel ([email protected] [ UNKNOWN ]) READ:UNKNOWN TEXT: Gore 2000 Grassroots Organizing and Letter Writing: HOW YOU CAN HELP! The race for the Democratic Presidential nomination is accelerating. The only way to achieve victory in each caucus and primary state next year is for us to inspire others to vote, and to express the best reasons why to vote for Al Gore as our next President. For lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender voters, as well as our friends and families, this push is vital to win the nomination and the national election in November. One of the single most effective ways to motivate others is through personal letters to the editor in our gay community newspapers and other publications read by GLBT friends and family. All candidates have vocal supporters and allies who encourage others to follow their example. Vice President Al Gore has won legions of friends and supporters, and we need their help and their votes now more than ever. If you have written personal letters of support for candidates in the past, you understand the importance. If you have never done so, it's simple and vital. Follow these ten tips: 1. It's smart to double-check first whether your gay community newspaper publishes letters to the editor and if they have specific rules for submitting letters to the editor. Some may be strict on length or format. Follow the rules. 2. Personal and brief is always best in a letter. Editors are selective, and print space is always limited. Just explain why you personally support Al Gore, and try to do it in a couple of paragraphs. If you're comfortable and it's relevant, mention your family, your aspirations, and make the message local if possible. 3. Most editors prefer local writers, but may publish letters from others in the same state, and occasionally out-of-state. They understand their readers best, and their letters try to reflect their readers' interests and needs first. During campaign seasons, they try to reflect a wide range of political views about candidates. 4. You must be comfortable to sign your letter, and to include your home address, e-mail address (if available) and day time phone number (to confirm you are the author, however, publications will not print your address and phone number.) 5. If local guidelines permit, you may mail, fax or e-mail your letter to the editor; many publications allow alternatives. To be very safe - if you fax or e-mail, remember to send a hard copy of the letter through the U.S. postal service. 6. If you are a prominent member of the community, serving on a GLBT board or in a leadership capacity within a GLBT organization, you may wish to acknowledge your position - however, make it clear, that your connection with a group is for "identification purposes," and does not express the official views of the nonprofit group. We all have the right, even the obligation, to express individual opinions but be careful not to mislead readers. Therefore, it's best to write individual letters on personal or plain stationery, and not on organizational or company letterhead of any kind. 7. Remember, there is no guarantee any letter will be published. You may submit letters as frequently as you are able, but should modify each one in words and substance to improve chances of being published. It is usually best to submit different letters to different publications, rather than the identical letter to all - to increase the chance for success. 8. Attached you will find the names, addresses and contact information for selected gay publications where you live - and perhaps there are more. You do not need to be limited to only gay owned and operated publications, but feel free to submit similar letters to the leading daily newspapers in your community. It stands to reason that many if not most gays and lesbians read mainstream publications where they work and live. 9. We also are including key messages, talking points and background about Vice President Gore. These are informational, of course, and intended to help you review and to personally communicate his leadership, policies and valuable contributions to the LGBT community. Your own words matter first and most, so keep in mind these are intended to motivate you and make the task easier putting pen to paper. 10. When should you write? Right now. From January through March 2000, the voters in key primary states will make up their minds and decide who will be the best individual to serve as our next President. Your help and your personal opinion matters at home where it influences the decisions made by many others. Important Note about the Internet: Don't ever forget the Internet and the power of e-mail advocacy. If you have access to on-line list serves and websites that invite comments and letters, be sure to take advantage of those opportunities. The gay and lesbian on-line community is vast, highly motivated and very well informed. Make use of these popular news and information channels, when appropriate, as permitted and where they are most visible, to express your support for Vice President Gore. Paid for by Gore 2000, Inc., Nashville, TN 37203. Contributions to Gore 2000, Inc. are not tax deductible for Federal income tax purposes. GLBT Publications (by state) This media list is not intended to be comprehensive, but it will include the major GLBT publications in these target states. The contact information is believed current as of January 1, 2000. lowa Accessline 317 Hartman Avenue Waterloo, lowa 50701-2332 319-232-6805 [email protected] Iowa's Pride University of lowa SAC/lowa Memorial Union Iowa City, Iowa 52242-1317 319-335-3251 319-335-3407 fax www.uiowa.edu/~iapride [email protected] OutWord G/L Resource Center 414 E. 5th Street P.O. Box 7008 Des Moines, Iowa 50309-7008 515-281-0634 www.serve.com/glrc [email protected] Icon 632 S. Dubuque P.O. Box 3002 lowa City, Iowa 52244 319-351-1531 319-351-0255 fax New Hampshire (See Massachusetts) Massachusetts Bay Windows 631 Tremont Boston, Massachusetts 02118 617-266-6670 617-266-5973 www.baywindows.com [email protected] Gay Community News 29 Stanhope Street Boston, Massachusetts 02555 617-262-6969 www.bsef.org Harvard Gay and Lesbian Review P.O. Box 180300 Boston, Massachusetts 02118 617-421-0082 www.hgle.org/hglr/review.htm [email protected] One in Ten The Boston Phoenix 126 Brookline Avenue Boston, Massachusetts 02215 617-859-3237 617-859-8201 fax www.bostonphoenix.com [email protected] In Newsweekly 544 Tremont Street Boston, Massachusetts 02116 617-426-8246 617-426-8264 www.innewesweekly.com [email protected] Provincetown Advocate P.O. Box 93 Provincetown, Massachusetts 02657-0093 508-487-1170 www.capcodeaccess.com/advocate California Orange County Blade P.O. Box 1538 Laguna Beach, CA 92652 949-494-4894 949-494-6945 fax www.metrog.com [email protected] Edge Magazine 6434 Santa Monica Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90038 323-962-6994 323-962-2917 fax [email protected] The Advocate 6922 Hollywood Boulevard Suite 1000 Los Angeles, CA 90028 323-871-1225 [email protected] www.advocate.com Mom Guess What! 1725 L Street Sacramento, CA 95814 916-441-6397 916-441-6422 fax www.mgwnews.com [email protected] OutWord News Magazine 709 28th Street Sacramento, CA 95816 916-329-9280 916-498-8445 fax www.outword.com [email protected] Gay & Lesbian Times 3911 Normal Street San Diego, CA 92103 619-299-6397 619-299-3430 fax www.gaylesbiantimes.com [email protected] Update P.O. Box 33148 San Diego, CA 92103-3148 619-299-0500 619-299-6907 fax www.gaywired.com/update [email protected] Bay Area Reporter 395 9th Street San Francisco, CA 94103-3831 415-861-5019 415-861-5019 fax www.ebar.com [email protected] Frontiers (San Francisco) 2370 Market Street 2nd Floor San Francisco, CA 94114 415-487-6000 415-487-6060 fax www.frontiersweb.com [email protected] Frontiers (Los Angeles) P.O. Box 46367 West Hollywood, CA 90046 323-848-2222 323-656-8784 fax www.frontiersweb.com [email protected] Magnus News Magazine 2215-R Market Street #495 San Francisco, CA 94114 www.magnusnews.com [email protected] Q San Francisco 584 Castro Street Suite 521 San Francisco, CA 94105 415-764-0324 415-626-5744 fax www.qsanfrancisco.com [email protected] San Francisco Bay Guardian 520 Hampshire Street San Francisco, CA 94110 415-255-3100 415-255-8955 fax Lesbian News P.O. Box 55 Torrance, CA 90507 310-787-8658 213-656-9056 fax www.lesbiannews.com [email protected] San Francisco Bay Times 3410 19th Street San Francisco, CA 94110 415-626-0260 415-626-0987 fax [email protected] San Francisco Spectrum P.O. Box 31331 San Francisco, CA 94103-103 415-431-1981 415-252-0724 fax [email protected] New York LGNY 150 Fifth Avenue Suite 600 New York, NY 10011 212-691-1100 212-343-9327 fax www.lgny.com [email protected] New York Blade News 242 West 30th Street 4th Floor New York, NY 10001 212-268-2711 212-268-2069 www.nyblade.com [email protected] CommUnity P.O. Box 131 Albany, New York 12201-0131 518-462-6138 x37 518-462-2101 fax www.cdglcc.org [email protected] Gayzette P.O. Box 122 Utica, New York 13503-0122 315-894-3565 http://members.aol.com/timditty/gulf.html [email protected] Greenwich Village Gazette P.O. Box 1023 Island Heights, New Jersey 08732 1-800-670-3898 www.gvny.com [email protected] or [email protected] Outcome 23 Lafayette Square #226 Buffalo, New York 14203 716-441-7485 [email protected] or [email protected] Texas Dallas Voice 3000 Carlisle Suite 200 Dallas, Texas 75204 214-754-8710 214-969-7271 fax www.dallasvoice.com [email protected] Houston Voice 500 Lovetta Boulevard Suite 200 Houston, Texas 77006 713-529-8490 www.houstonvoice.com [email protected] The Coastal Bend Community Press 1315 Craig Street Corpus Christi, Texas 78404 361-776-4989 630-578-0995 fax www.cbgpa.com [email protected] The Texas Triangle 4001-C Cedar Springs Dallas, Texas 75219 214-599-0155 214-599-0156 fax [email protected] Florida The Weekly News (TWN) 901 N.E. 79th Street Miami, Florida 33138 305-757-6333 305-756-6488 fax www.theweeklynews.org [email protected] Watermark 414 N. Ferncreek Avenue Orlando, Florida 32803 407-481-2243 407-481-2246 fax www.watermarkonline.com [email protected] The Gazette P.O. Box 2650 Brandon, Florida 33509-2650 813-689-7566 813-654-6995 fax http://members.aol.com/GazetteOL [email protected] Community News P.O. Box 3725 Tallahassee, Florida 32315-3725 850-425-6397 850-222-3783 fax www.queerpress.com [email protected] Ohio Gay People's Chronicle P.O. Box 5426 Cleveland, Ohio 44104 216-631-8646 800-426-5947 toll-free 216-6731-1052 fax www.cleveland.com/community/gay [email protected] Outlook 700 Ackerman Road Suite 600 Columbus, Ohio 43224 614-268-8525 614-261-8200 fax www.outlooknews.com [email protected] The Spectrum 5765 Philadelphia Drive Dayton, Ohio 45415 937-278-5482 937-278-5877 fax www.spectrumnews.com [email protected] Stonewall Journal P.O. Box 10814 Columbus, Ohio 43201 614-299-7764 614-299-4408 fax www.stonewall-columbus.org [email protected] Georgia Southern Voice 1095 Zonolite Road Suite 100 Atlanta, Georgia 30306 404-876-1819 404-876-2709 www.southernvoice.com [email protected] Etcetera Magazine 151 Renaissance Parkway Atlanta, Georgia 30308 404-888-0063 404-888-0910 fax www.etcmag.com [email protected] Maryland Baltimore Alternative P.O. Box 2351 Baltimore, Maryland 21203 410-235-3401 410-889-5665 fax www.balalt.com [email protected] Baltimore Gay Paper P.O. Box 2351 Baltimore, Maryland 21203-4575 410-837-7748 410-837-8512 www.bgp.org [email protected] Minnesota Lavender Magazine 2344 Nicollet Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55404 612-871-2237 612-871-2650 fax www.lavendermagazine.com [email protected] Siren 14th Avenue South #3 Minneapolis, MN 55407 612-676-2178 Upmagazine 1043 Grand Avenue #322 St. Paul, MN 55105 612-822-8335 651-293-0313 fax www.upmagazine.com [email protected] Washington Seattle Gay News P.O. Box 22007 Seattle, Washington 98122-0007 206-324-4297 206-322-7188 fax www.sgn.org/sgn [email protected] Stonewall News Northwest (SNN) P.O. Box 3994 Spokane, Washington 99220-3994 509-456-8011 509-455-7013 fax [email protected] Paid for by Gore 2000, Inc., Nashville, TN 37203. Contributions to Gore 2000, Inc. are not tax deductible for Federal income tax purposes. ,Talking Points VICE PRESIDENT AL GORE SUPPORTING EQUAL RIGHTS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR GAY AND LESBIAN AMERICANS "It is time for all Americans to recognize that the issues that face gays and lesbians in this country are not narrow, special interests, they are matters of basic human and civil rights." - Vice President Al Gore, the first vice president to speak at a gay rights event [AP, 9/15/97] More than any presidential candidate in our nation's history, Vice President Gore has described a vision for America that includes equal rights and opportunities for gay men and lesbians. Al Gore believes that "the story of America is the story of an ever-widening circle of human dignity and expanding opportunity." He believes that the challenge of our time is to expand this circle of human and civil rights to fully include gay men and lesbians in American life. Al Gore sees intolerance and discrimination as obstacles to America's progress and supports the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, the Hate Crimes Prevention Act, eliminating the "don't ask, don't tell" policy in the military, and legal protection for domestic partnerships. He is committed to a national and international campaign against AIDS that he calls a "moral duty." Al Gore's commitment is one of action, not just words. It is longstanding and heartfelt and not motivated by the political moment. As a Congressman, Senator, and Vice President, Al Gore has voted and worked with the gay and lesbian community, always offering -- in his words "an open door, an open mind, and an open heart." He and Tipper Gore have welcomed gay men and lesbians into their home. They have dozens of openly gay and lesbian staff and count gay and lesbian people among their closest friends and advisors. Their actions speak volumes -- attending and addressing the 1998 Human Rights Campaign National Dinner, a historic first; visiting and reading names at the AIDS Quilt; volunteering to prepare meals for people with AIDS. Al Gore underscored his commitment to gay and lesbian rights by visiting the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center as one of his first stops after announcing his candidacy for President. During an earlier visit to a Los Angeles high school, Gore embraced 18-year-old lesbian Jessie Funes who began to cry asshe told him about her experience as a lesbian youth. Al Gore has reached out to the gay and lesbian community like no other presidential candidate in American history. He can be counted on to advance the cause of gay and lesbian equality more than any President in American history, and he deserves the strongest support. FIGHTING DISCRIMINATION IN THE WORKPLACE ? ? Fighting to Pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. Al Gore is fighting to pass ENDA, which will extend employment protection to gays and lesbians in the workforce. As Vice President, he is prepared to cast the deciding vote to pass ENDA in the Senate, and as President, he will be the bill's leading advocate. ? ? Ensuring Diversity and Fairness in the Federal Government. Al Gore has been a leader in the Administration's effort to ensure an inclusive and diverse federal workplace, including the appointment of more than 150 gay men and lesbians to the Judicial and Executive branches. He strongly supported the appointment of James Hormel as the first openly gay U.S. Ambassador. He also supported the Administration's 1998 Executive Order prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation in the Federal Government. FIGHTING HATE CRIMES ? ? Fighting to Pass the Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Al Gore has been a leading advcoate for this legislation, calling on Congress "to stand together against intolerance, against prejudice, and against violent and senseless bigotry." The HCPA would expand the definition of hate crimes to include those based on sexual orientation, gender, or disability, and allow for the prosecution of those crimes under federal law. FIGHTING AIDS AND CARING FOR THOSE AFFECTED ? ? Aggressively Fighting HIV/AIDS. Vice President Gore has helped lead the Administration's aggressive efforts to fight HIV and AIDS, including the establishment of an Office of National AIDS Policy. During this Administration, overall funding for AIDS-related programs has increased by more than 122 percent, including increases of 854 percent for assistance in the purchase of AIDS drugs and 292 percent for the Ryan White CARE Act. This Administration has committed to developing an AIDS vaccine within 10 years and established a center funded by public and private sources to achieve this goal. ? ? Personally Leading the Fight Against AIDS. As a Senator, Al Gore was an original cosponsor of the Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency Act of 1990. Al and Tipper Gore have visited and read names at the AIDS Memorial Quilt, volunteered at Food and Friends to provide meals to people with AIDS, and been honored by the AIDS Action for their personal dedication and support on HIV/AIDS issues. ? ? Fighting AIDS in Developing Nations. Al Gore recently announced a new initiative to provide $100 million more in U.S. assistance to help African nations cope with the AIDS epidemic. This represents the largest increase in government spending for AIDS-related assistance to developing nations and would double the current U.S. budget for these efforts. "We have the knowledge, the care, the compassion, and the moral duty to make a difference," Gore said. (Associated Press, 7/19/99). FIGHTING FOR THE RIGHTS OF GAY FAMILIES ?? Providing Legal Protection for Domestic Partnerships. Al Gore has stated: "I'm in favor of legal protections for domestic partnerships." When speaking of families, Gore includes "all kinds of families" and unequivocally rejects the notion that the lives of gay and lesbian people run contrary to family values: "I disagree with it. I believe that God made us in different ways. I don't believe that having made us, God intends us to suffer discrimination and prejudice in all our days on this earth." (The Advocate, 9/14/99) ? ? Leaving Adoption Decisions to the Experts. Al Gore opposes legislation to prohibit gay men and lesbians from adopting or serving as foster parents. Gore stated, "Those decisions should be made by adoption agencies or the people who are closest to the circumstances of the children who desperately want and need loving and caring parents. I don't think national or state governments should come in and "bigfoot" the compassionate and careful decisions of people on the local level." (The Advocate, 9/14/99) STATEMENT BY AL GORE ON DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL "In light of the Winchell case and other evidence, I believe the"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy should be eliminated. Gays and lesbians should be allowed to serve their country without discrimination. If I am entrusted with the Presidency, I will make those changes and propose legislation in Congress to eliminate this unacceptable form of discrimination." AL GORE VS BILL BRADLEY Who honestly has earned the support of the GLBT Community? For the first time in a presidential election, there is real competition for GLBT votes. Vice President Gore and former Senator Bradley are competing for the Democratic nomination; both recognize that our votes are critical in earning the presidential nomination. This begs a key question for gay voters across the country, who ask which candidate should we support? The answer is clear. VICE PRESIDENT AL GORE HAS EARNED THE SUPPORT OF GLBT VOTERS IN2000. HERE ARE THE FOUR BEST REASONS WHY: 1. For the past seven years as our vice president, Gore has been a proven friend of the community. From personally lobbying for passage of ENDA to fighting for Hate Crimes legislation, his leadership, respect and support for our community has been there year after year. Bill Bradley seems to have discovered the GLBT community in 1999; once he decided to run for President.2. Al and Tipper Gore visited the AIDS quilt on the Mall and twice read names as part of the Remembrance. Afterwards, Tipper Gore personally displayed AIDS quilt panels on the fence surrounding the Vice President's Residence to draw needed public attention to the epidemic. While she served as the chair of AIDS Walk in Washington, D.C. for seven years, the Vice President fought within the Clinton administration to expand funding for AIDS research and improved Medicaid coverage for AIDS patients. Bill Bradley has had few words to say about AIDS until 1999, when he decided to run for President. No candidate for president of the United States can match Al Gore's record of fighting bigotry against lesbians and gay men. Leaders of the lesbian and gay community across the nation, including most of the openly gay elected officials and Democratic Party leaders strongly support the Vice President. They believe that voters should place their trust in a proven friend like Al Gore - an individual who has earned our trust and been loyal to the community for many years. The men and women who lobbied both Gore and Bradley on GLBT and AIDS issues during their years in public service know first-hand each of the candidates' grasp, commitment, and leadership on our issues. They are near unanimous in their support for Al Gore.4. This year Sen. Bradley says the right things. This is a marked contrast with his statement in his first Senate campaign that "I do not support gay rights. (Trenton Times, August 27, 1978) or nearly twenty years later, in 1996 when he was interviewed by the Detroit News(September 20, 1996) acknowledging, "there is a limit to how far(Bradley) can go in supporting gay rights. And he has reached it. "We applaud Bill Bradley's education, but why did he have to become a presidential candidate who needed votes before he truly cared about gay rights? Did he ever read names at the AIDS quilt? Has he ever picked up the phone and called friends in Congress to lobby them on behalf of equal rights? Has he demonstrated a year-in-year-out commitment to our community, before running for president? No, but Al Gore has been therefor us and worked on our behalf over and over again. That is the best reason Al Gore strongly deserves our support in the up coming primaries. For Al and Tipper Gore supporting equal rights and full respect for GLBT Americans has been a way of life, not an election year phenomenon. Sample letters It always intrigues me to find out why people support a political candidate, or do not. For some, it's about personality, and for others it can be a position on one particular issue. Clearly, there is no magic formula --- no"best"way. There are people who make up their minds based on endorsements by newspaper editorial boards or organizations. Others perhaps, like me, spend a great deal of time and effort studying the issues, listening to the candidates and not the spin- trying to recognize the person behind the candidate because they are not always the same. Supporting Al Gore was an easy choice for me. Al Gore makes it clear through his official positions and his personal life that gay and lesbian people are not only part of his vision. We also are part of his life. Al Gore strongly supports ENDA and what's more, gay and lesbian people serve at the highest levels in both his official and campaign offices. When the Senate came stunningly close to a tie vote on ENDA two years ago, he was prepared to cast the tie breaker for our equal rights. I have no doubt that President Al Gore would confidently appoint a qualified and openly gay or lesbian member of his Cabinet, or to any high government office. He never wavered in his full support for Ambassador James Hormel -- making history just by doing the right thing. Al Gore believes our lives reflect real family values. He is steadfast in his support for Domestic Partnership benefits because he sincerely believes our families deserve the same benefits and protections available to others. On adoption, he understands that all children need and want loving parents, and just as important, gay and lesbian people help fulfill that need. He knows our issues, understands them, and is committed to being part of the solution. Whether the concern involves our families, our health care, our jobs, or military service, Al Gore has a clear vision not only where he will lead, but also where the pitfalls lie. He knows that positive change is not built on big promises and grand expectations. Progress, to Al Gore, means expanding the circle of human dignity in this country every day by extending equal rights to gay and lesbian people. He truly sees our struggle as part of the continuum for civil rights in this country. He believes - as we do - that it is wrong merely to say the right words without action to back them up. As a Congressman, a Senator, and as Vice-President he has never simply sought our support. He has voted with us, walked, marched and run with us. He and Tipper have been guests in our homes and invited us to theirs. I support Al Gore because he has been with us throughout our struggle. He has never turned away. He has always been open and honest with our community and has never taken us for granted. Al Gore has the willingness and the ability to lead this country toward a future in which as he has said, "there is a growing understanding of who we are as human beings and toward an appreciation of the diversity of the human family." **** It seems almost ludicrous to me that anyone could doubt that Al Gore is the best choice for the gay and lesbian community. After all, what other candidate has a record as positive and as long term as the Vice President Gore? When he was in the Senate, he cosponsored every AIDS funding bill without hesitation, just as he cosponsored the Hate Crimes Reporting Act in 1988 ?the same day it was introduced. As Vice President he eagerly awaited the opportunity to cast the tie breaking vote on ENDA after lobbying his friends and former colleagues for their support. How can anyone doubt the sincerity of Al Gore after walking with him and Tipper at AIDS Walk and after learning about how they have sat at the bedside of people dying of AIDS and after hearing them read names at the Quilt? Sure, it is better when politicians finally ?get it. ? We welcome support whenever it comes, and it is never too late to get on board. We must remember, however, to give our support to people who have been with us over the long haul and who truly understand our issues. The leaders we elect must not only give voice to big ideas and noble goals, they have to be people we know will put those actions into words because they have done so in the past. Al Gore has been willing to put himself on the line for us before and has earned our votes. For him gay and lesbian people are not just a constituency to be courted ?we are his friends, and fighting for gay equality is not just a campaign issue ?it ?s a way of life. **** As the new millennium begins to unfold and the century ?s first presidential election approaches fast, I am struck by how far our community has come, not only in the last century but in the past decade alone. For the first time in history, we have two presidential candidates who believe that gays and lesbians deserve to live in a country where basic human and civil rights are guaranteed. And, although we have come very far, we all know we still have far to go. That is why I am casting my vote for Al Gore in the Democratic Primary on Super Tuesday. Al Gore has been a constant friend to the gay and lesbian community for the past decade. He has been a leader in fighting AIDS, winning the AIDS Action ?s National Leadership Award and actively supporting the current administration expansion of AIDS research funding and improved Medicaid coverage for AIDS patients (all of which have increased by more than 122 percent under the Clinton Administration). As a senator, he was an original co-sponsor of the Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency Act of 1990. Both he and Tipper have visited and read names at the AIDS Memorial Quilt and volunteered at Food and Friends to provide meals to people with AIDS. Tipper also has served as the chair of AIDS Walk in Washington D.C. for seven years. In addition, Al Gore is steadfast in his support for gay and lesbian anti-discrimination laws in the workplace. He understands and believes that we deserve the same protections available to others and continues to fight for the passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). In fact, two years ago when ENDA came very close to a congressional tie vote, Gore was prepared to case the tie-breaking vote in favor of our equal rights. Al Gore ?s leadership, respect and support for our community has been there year after year, issue after issue. As gays and lesbians, we have worked hard in the face of much adversity to achieve significant progress in the last century. Let ?s be sure and elect the best person to lead us into the next -- someone who understands our needs and shares our vision for an America that includes equal rights and opportunities for gays and lesbians. Al Gore is that person. For these reasons, he deserves our strongest support. ****As the Georgia Democratic Primary draws closer, I am forced to choose between two strong contenders for the democratic presidential nomination: Al Gore and Bill Bradley. Both men have been outspoken and supportive of issues near and dear to my heart. However, after much contemplation and reflection on these two men and their ideologies, the choice is very simple. For the past seven years now, Al Gore has consistently supported our community, time and time again, year after year. In my book, this counts for a lot, and at a minimum, my vote on Super Tuesday. Al Gore personally lobbied (and continues to do so) for the passage of ENDA, which will extend employment protection to gays and lesbians in the workforce, a law our community desperately needs and especially here in the State of Georgia. With the sad and unfortunate deaths this past year of people such as Matthew Shepard and Billy Jack Gaither, we must all begin to fight this very real and serious crime of ?hate. ? Al Gore has been such a person -- consistently fighting for the passage of Hate Crimes legislation, calling on everyone -- especially Congress -- to stand together against intolerance, prejudice, and violent and senseless bigotry. As we enter a new millennium, I am very thankful we have two presidential candidates who are willing to stand up and fight for basic human and civil rights for all Americans. When the time comes to cast my vote in March, however, I must go with the person who has been a proven friend to our community the longest - Al Gore. I urge you to make the same choice. **** For campaign 2000 and particularly for the presidential primaries, candidates are seeking the support of the lesbian and gay community. They seek our money and our votes. We can ?t afford to squander either. Clearly, our lobbying efforts have worked. Bill Bradley has come along way ? both his legislative record and his public comments reveal that. But he ? S on board and we should applaud his ability to admit that he was wrong. Even John McCain, a politician with a solid anti-gay record, is showing signs of enlightenment, but clearly needs a lot of work. How do we decide which candidate is the one who has earned our support? No candidate for president can match Al Gore ?s record of fighting bigotry against lesbians and gay men. None has demonstrated specific commitment and leadership on our issues. Al Gore has been a leader when it comes to fighting AIDS fighting for increased funding for research and improved medicaid coverage for AIDS patients. Al and Tipper Gore have been there to read names at the Quilt and who have walked AIDS Walk. Al Gore has long supported our right to be free from job discrimination by lobbying vigorously for passage of ENDA and has urged congress to pass The Hate Crimes Prevention Act by personally getting on the phone and making the calls. No other candidate can claim such a record-on gay and lesbian rights. I applaud the newly educated candidates and hope that their support will stand the test of time, Perhaps, once they prove that their support is more than an election year phenomenon they will have earned the support that Al Gore deserves based on his record of service to our community. **** Although it is important that we in the LGBT community acknowledge the new found support from Bill Bradley, and that we appreciate his well meaning albeit unsophisticated approach to resolving many of our issues. It is more important that we recognize that we can ?t afford to be tempted by big talking and vague promises. It is one thing when a candidate expresses support on AIDS issues, but it is quite another when someone has a track record of support for funding as well as a history of public acts on our behalf. It is one thing when a politician decries discrimination, it is something much more when someone takes steps to end it. While Bill Bradley has earned our appreciation for his new found respect for our community, he certainly has not earned our vote. Al Gore has always cosponsored Ryan White re-authorization. Vice President Gore has read names at the AIDS quilt. He is the one who has not only decried anti-gay discrimination in housing and employment but has lobbied his friends and colleagues to work for our equal protection. Al Gore has always been there for us long before this race for the presidency. Clearly, the candidates realize that our votes are critical. Our community must make its voice heard, and what we must be heard to say is that we will continue to work to change the hearts and minds of those who reject our demand for equal rights, we will work with those who do open their hearts and change their minds, but we will vote for those who have long stood by our side in our struggle because they, like Al Gore, have earned our support. **** While accepting the premise that Bill Bradley is a good and fairminded person and that his commitment today to the gay community is real, I believe that his timing, his record and his judgment are suspect. In 1991, Bill Bradley had the chance to co-sponsor legislation to do exactly what he now advocates, but he did not. Most voters probably don ?t realize that during his 18 year career in the U.S. Senate, Bill Bradley authored 573 bills. Not one of them would have guaranteed, expanded or even addressed the rights of the LGBT community. Throughout his record, he failed to cosponsor, conveniently missed or voted against bills of importance to us. We welcome Bill Bradley ?s newfound passion. Just imagine his legislative clout and his voice in the Senate on behalf of gay concerns these past three years, had he instead decided to stay and fight in the Senate with other Democratic leaders and to confront the radical, right-wing control of Senator Trent Lott and his Republican majority. We deserve a president who not only talks with us but also one who walks with us. Vice President Al Gore is unquestionably the only candidate seeking the presidency in 2000 who embodies a consistent and outstanding leadership record, combined with a lifetime of fairness, sensitivity and trust. **** I don ?t know why some people in our community just don ?t get it. We still have the tendency to seek any port in the storm. Gore V Bradley? Let ?s take a look: In 1984, Bradley was interviewed by the New York Times and made his position clear, ?[I] ?ve got to be convinced that ?s the way we should go. I ?m willing to sit down and talk with anyone, but no one has come to me and convinced me yet. ? In 1988, Bradley was not eager to cosponsor the Hate Crimes Statistics legislation. Gore signed on the day it is introduced. 1996 Bradley didn ?t cosponsor the Ryan White Reauthorization bill. In 1996, Bradley tells The Detroit News that ?there ?s a limit to how far he can go in supporting gay rights and he ?s reached it. ? In 1978 when Bill Bradley was asked whether his lack of support for gay and lesbian people was in conflict with his liberal orientation he told the reporter that ?maybe I just need a little more education. ? Well it ?s 1999 and someone has convinced Bradley that we are the way to go. Do we reject his new found support? Of course not! But, while we want to hear lofty goals and big ideas, we have to be careful not to fall for good politics and wind up with bad policy. We better take a long look before casting that vote to make sure that it has been earned. Bradley is the perfect example of why we must continue our lobbying efforts. He is a prime example of why gay and lesbian people must be engaged in the process. It works! But Bradley is not the best person to lead our cause. We need someone who knows us, understands our issues and can put words into action. We need someone who ?s record is clear and whose support has been unequivocal. Al Gore has been there. He and Tipper have been on the front lines fighting with us every step of the way, walking in AIDS Walk, reading names at the Quilt, inviting us into their home, lobbying votes for ENDA and The Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Supporting Al Gore is one more way of making it clear that we are indeed a powerful constituency who knows how to use our power wisely. **** It always intrigues me to find out why people support a political candidate, or do not. For some, it's about personality, and for others it can be a position on one particular issue. Clearly, there is no magic formula --- no"best"way. There are people who make up their minds based on endorsements by newspaper editorial boards or organizations. Others perhaps, like me, spend a great deal of time and effort studying the issues, listening to the candidates and not the spin--- trying to recognize the person behind the candidate because they are not always the same. Supporting Al Gore was an easy choice for me. Al Gore makes it clear through his official positions and his personal life that gay and lesbian people are not only part of his vision. We also are part of his life. Al Gore strongly supports ENDA and what's more, gay and lesbian people serve at the highest levels in both his official and campaign offices. When the Senate came stunningly close to a tie vote on ENDA two years ago, he was prepared to cast the tie breaker for our equal rights. I have no doubt that President Al Gore would confidently appoint a qualified and openly gay or lesbian member of his Cabinet, or to any high government office. He never wavered in his full support for Ambassador James Hormel -- making history just by doing the right thing. Al Gore believes our lives reflect real family values. He is steadfast in his support for Domestic Partnership benefits because he sincerely believes our families deserve the same benefits and protections available to others. On adoption, he understands that all children need and want loving parents, and just as important, gay and lesbian people help fulfill that need. He knows our issues, understands them, and is committed to being part of the solution. Whether the concern involves our families, our health care, our jobs, or military service, Al Gore has a clear vision not only where he will lead, but also where the pitfalls lie. He knows that positive change is not built on big promises and grand expectations. Progress, to Al Gore, means expanding the circle of human dignity in this country every day by extending equal rights to gay and lesbian people. He truly sees our struggle as part of the continuum for civil rights in this country. He believes - as we do - that it is wrong merely to say the right words without action to back them up. As a Congressman, a Senator, and as Vice-President he has never simply sought our support. He has voted with us, walked, marched and run with us. He and Tipper have been guests in our homes and invited us to theirs. I support Al Gore because he has been with us throughout our struggle. He has never turned away. He has always been open and honest with our community and has never taken us for granted. Al Gore has the willingness and the ability to lead this country toward a future in which as he has said, "there is a growing understanding of who we are as human beings and toward an appreciation of the diversity of the human family." **** As a community used to being left to choose between the better of two evils, times sure have changed. In the race for the presidency, the two democratic contenders are vying for our support and all of the major candidates are willing to accept our money. So, how do we choose? Look at the records. Bill Bradley has finally been educated and has made the long journey from little or no support ?remember his 1978 statement that he does not support gay rights and his 1996 assertion that he could only go so far on gay rights and that he had gone as far as he could go. Both statements were made in the context of his senatorial races and both sentiments were reflected in his voting record. He was slow to support hate crimes statistic reporting legislation and in 1996 he failed to vote for re-authorization of Ryan White funding. Al Gore in contrast has been a loyal supporter on gay issues throughout his career and he has demonstrated that support with his votes as well as with his actions. Al Gore has always fought hard on AIDS issues whether by pushing for increased funding for research and medicare coverage or by participating in AIDS Walk or by reading names at the Quilt. It was Tipper and Al Gore who displayed the Quilt at their home so as to draw attention to the issue. Al Gore is the one who took it upon himself to personally lobby for passage of ENDA and who anxiously awaited an opportunity to cast the tie breaking vote in the senate. The answer is clear to me. We choose to cast our votes for the candidate who has demonstrated by his words and his actions that he is concerned about our issues and that he is committed to the fight for our equality. Paid for by Gore 2000, Inc. Contributions to Gore 2000 are not tax deductible for Federal Income Tax Purposes. Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com