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
470766521
label
Press Statements/Interviews the President - January 20, 1989-December 31, 1989
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
Source extras
naId
470766521
coverageEndDate
day
31
logicalDate
1989-12-31
month
12
year
1989
coverageStartDate
day
20
logicalDate
1989-01-20
month
1
year
1989
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
143fde082b8b3786
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s): FOIA Number: 2015-0017-S 2015-0017-S FOIA MARKER This is not a textual record. This is used as an administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential Library Staff. Record Group/Collection: George H.W. Bush Presidential Records Collection/Office of Origin: National Security Council Series: Latin American Affairs Directorate Files Subseries: Subject Files 1989 OA/ID Number: CF00193 Folder ID Number: CF00193-006 Folder Title: Press Statements/Interviews the President - January 20, 1989-December 31, 1989 Stack: Row: Section: Shelf: Position: V 8 6 1 4 Pres stituts THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release May 5, 1989 The President today met with Mrs. Violeta Chamorro, publisher of the Nicaraguan newspaper La Prensa. Mrs. Chamorro is in Washington at the invitation of the National Endowment for Democracy. Mrs. Chamorro and La Prensa have become symbols of freedom of expression and the struggle against tyranny and dictatorship throughout Latin America, beginning with the struggle against the Somoza government. During the meeting, the President expressed his deep regard for Mrs. Chamorro and of her unceasing efforts to carry on the tradition of her assassinated husband over the last ten years in the face of Sandinista harassment and intimidation. The President told Mrs. Chamorro that he shared her disappointment and concern that the new media law promulgated by the Sandinistas does not guarantee the free functioning of the media and unrestricted political expression. The new law gives the Ministry of Interior wide latitude for prosecuting and punishing the media for such ill-defined concepts as violating "national integrity" and for publishing "injurious, defamatory and false news." Rather than relaxing existing controls and increasing freedom of expression, the law is a more systematic compilation of existing restrictions and sanctions. The Sandinista media law, as well as the recently approved electoral law, do not comply with the letter or the spirit of the Esquipulas and El Salvador agreements signed by Central American leaders. The President and Mrs. Chamorro expressed their hope that international leaders would use their influence to persuade the Sandinistas to fulfill their commitment. # # # THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release 0 May 5, 1989 MESSAGE BY THE PRESIDENT Cinco de Mayo, 1989 It is with great pleasure that I join the people of Mexico and all those of Mexican heritage in the United States in celebrating Cinco de Mayo. The historic victory at the Battle of Puebla clearly showed the unbeatable determination of a people struggling for independence. Though badly outnumbered by the French, the Mexican people fought bravely for the freedom of their country. With the beacon of democracy giving them hope and inspiration, their cause could not be denied. Every American immediately identified with that cause and shares in the pride and happiness Mexicans feel on this day. Our country is proud of the long-standing friendship that has existed between the United States and Mexico and prouder still of the wonderful contributions Mexican Americans have made to our Nation. On this special day, I send congratulations and good wishes to the people of Mexico and to our citizens of Mexican descent. May we remember in gratitude and admiration the sacrifices your ancestors made for liberty, and may their brave legacy be a reminder to us all of the eternal vigilance that freedom demands. God bless you. /S/ George Bush # # # TOO/ZO Document No. 2702 File WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM Pres. statusts DATE: 04/17/89 ---- ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY: PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: SIGNING CEREMONY/BIPARTISAN ACCORD SUBJECT: (04/17 7:00 p.m. Draft 2) ACTION FYI ACTION FYI VICE PRESIDENT MCCLURE à SUNUNU d NEWMAN SCOWCROFT PORTER d DARMAN STUDDERT BATES UNTERMEYER BREEDEN ROGERS CARD WINSTON CICCONI PINKERTON DEMAREST FITZWATER GRAY HAGIN REMARKS: The attached has been forwarded to the President. RESPONSE: FYI: BS, RMG, GPH, MBD, RPO, PWR, DAP James W, Cicconi Assistant to the President and Deputy to the Chief of Staff Ext. 2702 THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON April 17, 1989 1033 APR 17 III S: 15 INFORMATION MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT FROM: CURT SMITH V THROUGH: CHRISS WINSTON can SUBJECT: SIGNING CEREMONY -- BIPARTISAN ACCORD ON CENTRAL AMERICA I. SUMMARY The attached remarks discuss the legislation, which you are to sign tomorrow in a Rose Garden ceremony, to implement the Bipartisan Accord on Central America. About 25 Members of Congress will be in the audience, along with 80-100 congressional staff, State Department officials, and members of the public with an interest in Central America. II. DISCUSSION The text focuses on our objective in that region -- "a democratic Nicaragua which does not subvert or threaten its neighbors" -- and references it to the Esquipulas Accord. The remarks, in particular, discuss America's continuing aid to the Nicaraguan Resistance, and challenge the Sandinista government to uphold its pledges of democracy and freedom. They also call upon the Soviet Union to help in the peace process. (Smith/Simon) 4/17/89; 7 pm Draft 2 CENT PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: BIPARTISAN ACCORD ROSE GARDEN TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 1989 2:15 p.m. Four weeks ago, for the first time in many years, the President and Congress, the Democratic and Republican leadership in the House and Senate, spoke with one voice about Central America. By signing a Bipartisan Accord on Central America, we joined hands for the good of that troubled region. And by placing principle above party, we reaffirmed the cornerstone of America's foreign policy. Last week, the Congress passed legislation to implement this Bipartisan Accord. And, today, I am proud to sign this legislation. My friends, you have shown that bipartisanship works. And I want to thank you for acting quickly, honorably, and in the national interest. Our objective in Central America is a democratic Nicaragua which does not subvert or threaten its neighbors and whose people enjoy the social and economic fruits of a free society. Our continued assistance to the Nicaraguan Resistance represents the commitment of the United States both to support the Esquipulas ((Eh-ski-POO-las)) peace process and to sustain those who struggle for freedom and democracy. 2 Under the Esquipulas Accord, insurgent forces have the right to reintegrate into their homeland under safe, democratic conditions with full civil and political rights. That is the desire of the Nicaraguan resistance. And we will support it through concerted diplomatic efforts to reinforce this regional agreement. Here, in particular, let me thank the Congress. For by supporting my request for continued assistance at current levels through the elections in Nicaragua, scheduled for February 28, 1990, you have reaffirmed the will of this government to ensure peace and freedom in Central America. The success of the Central American peace process and the prospects of national reconciliation in Nicaragua depend on full and honest Sandinista compliance with their repeated pledges of democracy and freedom. We have yet to see genuine Sandinista compliance; thus far, they have refused to negotiate with the opposition regarding the necessary conditions for fair elections. It is clear that close international scrutiny and sustained pressure will be critical to induce Sandinista compliance. It is also clear that the Soviet Union must match its rhetorical support for the peace process with concrete action to halt military aid, to end subversion in the region, and to promote genuine democracy in Nicaragua. 3 It is fitting to recall what Franklin Roosevelt said when he addressed the nation in 1940: "Today we seek a moral basis for peace It cannot be a lasting peace if the fruit of it is oppression, or starvation, or cruelty, or human life dominated by armed camps." Our accord envisions a democratic Central America, and a more just and tranquil hemisphere. Above all, it points us toward the future -- for America, and for the people of Central America. So, let us seize the moment. Thank you, and God bless you. And now, it is my pleasure to sign legislation implementing the Bipartisan Accord on Central America. # # # THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release February 16, 1989 INTERVIEW OF THE PRESIDENT BY THE OVAL OFFICE POOL The Oval Office 2:24 P.M. EST THE PRESIDENT: Let me just say, I am going to hand you all -- or Marlin will provide it later on -- a statement on Afghanistan. And we support -- I'll just give you a little summary of it at the outset here -- we support the Afghan efforts to fashion a stable, broadly-based government, responsive to the needs of the Afghan people. Throughout the long, dark years of Afghanistan's occupation, the international community has been steadfast in its support of the Afghan cause, and this certainly has been true for the United States. Our commitment, the commitment of the United States to the people there will remain, and it will remain firm -- both through our bilateral humanitarian aid program and through the United Nations efforts to remove the mines and resettle the refugees and reconstruct the -- help reconstruct the war-torn economy. So we would call upon the Soviet Union to refrain from other forms of interference in Afghan affairs. The Soviet Union has nothing to fear from the establishment of an independent, nonaligned Afghanistan. And they do bear a certain special responsibility for healing the wounds of this war. And I would hope that the Soviet Union would generously support international efforts to rebuild Afghanistan. And there will be a fuller statement on this later on. Q Were you hoping also that the rebels would not conduct a bloodbath once they get in the ascendant and really take power? THE PRESIDENT: Yes. 2 I mean, it's a two-way street, isn't it? In this magnanimity is there any sense that you would like to convey that to the rebels, or do you think it's just a one-way street for the Soviets? THE PRESIDENT: Well, I don't think a bloodbath is in anyone's interest. And I think if we had a catalytic role, I would hope it would be, along with others, working towards reconciliation and towards a peaceful resolution now to all the problems. There's been enough of a bloodbath there. And so I think you raise a good point, Helen, and, yes, I feel strongly that the time for recrimination is over, the time for bloodbaths is over. And I would like to see the various factions get together and come up with recommendations that would lead to a peaceful Afghanistan with no more bloodbaths. Q Mr. President, the Soviet Union is calling for an immediate cease-fire in Afghanistan and an embargo on arms shipments. Would you go along with that idea? THE PRESIDENT: Here's one of the complicating factors on that call. There is some concern about what we call stockpiling, and it would not be fair to have tremendous amount of lethal supplies MORE - 2 - left behind and then cut off support for resistance and, thus, leaving an unacceptable imbalance. And so before one could do anything other than appeal for peaceful resolution, which I have done, one needs to know the real facts on this question, this troublesome question of stockpiling. Q So does that mean that you will continue to aid the rebels? THE PRESIDENT: That means we will do what we need to do to see that there is a peaceful resolution to this question, that one reconciliation. side does not dominate militarily, and we will be encouraging Q Mr. President, what is your reaction, sir, to the action by the Central American countries yesterday that appears to undermine the standing of the Contras, to say the least, and leave them in a very vulnerable position? And was your administration, as has been reported, caught off-guard on that? THE PRESIDENT: Let me say, Brit, on that one that there's some positive elements of what's taking place there. There are also some troublesome elements. Positive because the Nicaraguans appear to be taking steps in accord with the Esquipulas agreement; they're talking about national reconciliation and full freedoms, including complete freedom of the press and free and fair elections and an end to subversion. To the degree that rhetoric goes forward and is enacted, that's good. But there's 90 days now in which to finalize arrangements. And what's troubling to me is that agreements have been -- claims like this have been made in the at one time, only to see those claims repudiated; promises made, promises broken. And so I think we have to be wary of supporting any positive elements like commitments to democracy and yet say, wait a minute, let's be sure that we not leave the resistance standing alone, leave them twisting out there without fulfillment of the commitment to democracy on the part of the Sandinistas. So in terms of being caught off-guard, we are in the midst of a review of our whole policy there. If you ask me would I have predicted that the five presidents would have worked out agreement in this detail at this time, I'd have to tell you that, having talked to President Azcona, having our Secretary of State deal with two foreign ministers just recently, I think within the last 10 days, that I wouldn't have said that they'd do exactly what they did do. But, as I say, there's some positive elements to it and there's some troublesome elements. Q How does that note of caution, sir, translate into policy and action on your part? THE PRESIDENT: You mean from the future? Work here in the next 90 days with the leaders to see that there's not just some fluffy promises out there, but that there's some teeth in the promise of democratization. And that is what has to be done. And so we are going to keep our resolve to have the people of Nicaragua have what these other countries have there - democracy. And we're talking about freedom of the press, freedom of elections, freedom of worship. And it's fine to spell these things out in generalities, but now let's get down to how we proceed. What does a free and fair election mean? I want to see some certification of the election process. But we've got time now, little bit of time now in which to make very clear that our resolve, our commitment to democracy is still there. Q Mr. President, how do you intend to stand by your commitment to the resistance? And might that mean a request for MORE - 3 - additional nonlethal aid, at the end of which -- THE PRESIDENT: It could mean that. It could mean that. But again, I think we've got to work with this process now the best we can. But I don't think anybody would want to suggest that we would leave people with no humanitarian aid. I can't imagine anyone taking that view. Q Will you intend to ask Congress to approve of that aid? THE PRESIDENT: Well, we have some time on that, too. But I obviously want to know what the status quo is at the time. But I have every intention of seeing that these people receive humanitarian support, but how that comes about, we'll just have to wait and see. Q Mr. President, have you been dismayed at all at the slow pace of filling jobs in the State Department and, of course, in the Defense Department, elsewhere in your government? Has it slowed you down at all? THE PRESIDENT: I worry a little about it, but not dismayed. The ground rules have changed. I was talking yesterday to one of our appointees who I will leave the way you like to put it -- who asked to be remain anonymous. And he told me that to fill out the forms required 36 hours and the forms are different in different departments. And part of -- I hope that this new Ethics Committee that we've got will take a look at this and try to see if we can't do better. The ground rules have changed from eight years ago. And there's one other substantive point here. I don't worry about it as much as I would have if I were President eight years ago when we came in on the in the wake of an administration that I was opposed to and everything. I've come in as President to build on the record of an administration of which not only I was a part of, but whose objectives I strongly support. And so the people that are running that are in these departments now are people who generally are good people and share my objectives for this country. So it's not like you're having to worry that your departments are going to be coming out with a lot of last-minute rules and regulations that will be an anathema to everything you believe in. So that's a substantive point. The nature of the clearance process is a substantive point. But back to your question, I do worry about it; I am concerned about it, and I'd like to see if we can't speed the system up in some way. We're getting good people, we're getting good people to nominate. There used to be a real quick turnaround on what they call a name check, but now, under the new procedures, that takes a lot longer. So there's some frustrations. I don't want to mislead you. But for the reasons that I gave you, I don't think it's hurting the government. I think our Cabinet appointments I want to get them done as soon as possible, all of them. Q Sir, could we take up a question you said a couple days ago, why is it that the ethics questions get so complex in practice and yet were so simple in your campaign language? Why is it that straightforward questions of accepting outside income now require a legal opinion? THE PRESIDENT: Well give me an example of what you mean straight for about ethics outside income. Maybe I can answer it by rhetorical question. Take the case of Lou Sullivan, who had earned a pension from a medical school working not for exorbitant sums, as the president of a black medical college. And it is now suggested that if he accepts money from a pension that he earned, that he is doing something illegal. We have other questions of that nature. Some people who are interested in being in the government MORE PACELLI File THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release March 31, 1989 REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT IN LUNCHEON WITH REPORTERS The East Room 12:45 P.M. EST THE PRESIDENT: Well, first, let me just say, welcome to Washington. And I've been traveling some, but I like this much better you all coming here. And we're delighted that you are here. We've got a broad cross section of both print and broadcast journalists here, and what I really want to do is to take your questions. I'm delighted that you heard from our drug czar, Bill Bennett, this morning, and Roger Porter, as well. And I'll be glad to follow on to any subjects that you have taken up with them. Our Chief of Staff John Sununu came over here with me -- hey, you don't get off that easy, Joe. You haven't heard my speech. (Laughter.) No, I'm not going to spend a lot of time, but I do want to indicate that certain important things have taken place at the outset. We went up with a good budget agreement -- we hope we'll get an agreement -- a good budget proposal. We've thrown an idea, a plan out there for the savings and loans, and I think that is an important thing to have happen. We've introduced a child care initiative in keeping with the philosophical approach that I talked about in the campaign parental choice. We've done that one. We've made a vigorous start in the narcotics area, and I want to congratulate Bill Bennett, who really -- antinarcotics area -- hit the ground running. And he has to formulate under the law a specific plan. But we're not going to wait for that to move forward in various ways. Next week, we'll be sending up new legislation on ethics and education. The ethics guidelines will enable us to sustain an honesty and integrity in public service. I've been talking some about my belief in public service -- those not that are in and out on the political basis, but those who serve in a career basis. And I -- though we have no legislation on that, I want to keep saying how important I think that is. We've made -- we recognize that the major problem facing us is the budget deficit. And Dick Darman is doing a very good job -- nobody declared our budget dead on arrival, which pleased me very, very much. Nobody has annointed it, either, in every possible way. (Laughter.) But nevertheless, we are making progress. We're -- on the national security-foreign affairs side, we're going to have a vigorous week next week with President Mubarak here, Prime Minister Shamir here. And then we're going to have several of the Central Americans up here very soon. You've seen our new approach, you might say, on Nicaragua, where we are working with the Congress, we're together with Congress. One of my regrets is that we were sending two signals. We'd have one signal out of the Executive Branch and then another signal coming out of Capitol Hill. And I think that now we've laid that to rest and we're going to do what we can to move forward -- help move forward the democracy that I believe the people of MORE - 2 - Nicaragua want and the democracy that they've been denied. So we've got a big agenda there with forthcoming meetings on Europe, on the NATO summit coming up at the end of May, and then, of course, we'll have a big meeting in Paris in July. So we're going to -- the agenda is full. We're moving forward on our national security reviews. I remain optimistic about working with the Soviets, but I've said and I'll repeat to you all, I'm not going to precipitously move just to be -- just to have some meeting going on out there. There's a lot happening and when I come forward with a proposal, I want it to be sound; I want it to have the full support of the NATO Alliance; and I want it to have a credibility, and instant credibility that shows our commitment, not only to enhancing the peace, but to preserving the Alliance and keeping it strong. So there's a lot happening out there. I'm just delighted all of you are here. And now, let's just go to the questions. Q Mr. President, I was wondering whether you, in the light of the Alaska oil spill, whether you think the federal government should take measures in perhaps two areas -- one, to tighten up the requirements -- the restrictions on alcohol and drug abuse by the people who are in charge of these ships; and perhaps more importantly, to ensure that there is a quicker response on the cleanup efforts? THE PRESIDENT: I would certainly support constitutional steps in the former area. I feel that substance abuse is wrong. I want to see a drug-free workplace, and I would certainly think we could expand that to reasonable requirements in terms of people who are fulfilling important functions like taking crude oil through straits. I will say it's awful hard to guard against abuse of this nature when you're making laws. And I think one of the things I learned from our meeting with our EPA Administrator, and the head of the Coast Guard, and our able Secretary of Transportation, was that this strait was pretty wide and that it -- I don't think there is any way you could plan, as you're making the pipeline, against this kind of abuse. But in terms of testing, I do favor that. You noticed I used the word "constitutional." What was the second part, Joe? Q Regarding the cleanup, sir. There's been criticism in Alaska that, for a number of reasons, that the cleanup didn't begin THE PRESIDENT: I think there were some reasons that it didn't go fast enough, and yes, I think we will have to do everything we can to see that the federal government, working with the states and private industry, has as rapid response time as possible. And I will say I feel very concerned about the environmental damage up there. When you look at those pristine shores and then see the threat to the fisheries and certainly the loss of life that's taken place so far birds and animals -- you have to be concerned about the environmental damage. And we have a very able Administrator of EPA, a man with unquestioned credentials in environment. And I expect that he and his people will learn from this, and then maybe we can maybe there are things we can do to guarantee quicker cleanup. Q Mr. President, Iraq is reported as seriously engaged in a program to build nuclear warheads and missiles. Does the prospect of this tiny, sometimes warlike, nation being able to wage nuclear war does it give you great concern for the future? THE PRESIDENT: Well, one, I don't want to give credibility to the reports. Two, I strongly stand against the MORE - 6 - THE PRESIDENT: Yes. & Are you saying then, that at some time private enterprise will take over NASA's role of the R&D? THE PRESIDENT: No. Q Do you see that coming? THE PRESIDENT: No, no I don't. But I see NASA making room for a significant private role in terms of putting things into space. And I don't sense, at the highest levels of NASA, a total resistance to this, But I've had a feeling that some involved in the process, not just in NASA, but along the way, have not been pushing the concept of privatization -- not being as cooperative as we might. So I see NASA's role continuing in R&D. And I see it continuing in its shuttle business, space station business -- that I hope to see come to fruition. But I just think that we need to support and applaud those who, in the private sector, have big dreams like David Hanna has had. Q Mr. President, you have come under criticism in some conservative circles due to your policy toward the Nicaraguan Contras. The fact that apparently you have no plans to request military aid for the Contras, is that a tacit admission on your part that the Reagan administration policy which you had a part in for eight years -- of asking for military aid for the Contras was a failure in forcing our the Sandinista government or making it make reforms in Nicaragua? THE PRESIDENT: No, I think the Reagan policy brought the Sandinistas to the table. And I think, had there been no pressure, the Sandinistas would have gone about their merry revolutionary ways, without keeping their commitment to the Organization of American States -- a commitment for free press, for freedom of worship -- democratization, if you will. So, I think now we are --- the problem we had is you go to recommend aid and you have a different foreign policy set on Capitol Hill. Now we're saying and my own view is, there was no way, not a snowball's chance in hell of getting a dime for lethal aid military aid, from Congress. And I think anybody that's familiar with Congress would acknowledge that. So what we've done is get together with the Congress -- with strong conservative support, I might say. I'm not suggesting your question is wrong, because I hear some voices out there hitting us. But it's not bad. The policy has been well-received. And we're speaking with one voice and we are going to push for democratization. And by getting humanitarian aid that goes through this election, I am hopeful that the Nicaraguans will go forward and do that which they give rhetorical support for, but that which they've failed to implement and that means democracy -- free certifiable elections. And you hear some criticism of Salvador and what's taken place down there recently. You don't hear it from me because I want to give Christiani a chance. Those elections were certifiably free. Democrats and Republicans on our commission going down there and saying that. So we will treat the Salvadoran winner on his word -- that he wants to continue the democracy that we salute Duarte for moving forward; that he stands against the extremes. And I think he's got some big problems with these Marxist-backed guerrillas coming at him. But we're going to support that, just as we're going to support the Central American presidents as they now, hopefully, push Ortega to do that what Ortega should have done long before now. Q Secretary Yeutter and Ambassador Hills, Mr. President, go to Geneva next week for very important trade negotiations that I've been told will determine the shape of the U.S. foreign policy in the next decade and how the world reads it. What are your expectations from that meeting? Are you optimistic? THE PRESIDENT: Well, it's hard to say. So far, I've MORE - 5 - THE PRESIDENT: Let me go back. Existing laws, to my knowledge, are being enforced. I can't think of any new existing law that's in force that wasn't before. Q Okay. On the question of U.S. dependency on foreign oil, can we reach a point where your administration would take steps such as an oil import fee or other stances that would help the domestic oil industry? THE PRESIDENT: Well, the domestic oil industry is doing a little better now, the price of crude oil having risen to some $20 or $18 -- I don't know what West Texas crude is today $18.50, something of that nature. The industry is doing a little better. The rig count is still very low. I repeat; there is no security for the United States in further dependency on foreign oil. I have made proposals that would stimulate domestic production and I'd like to see the Congress move on those proposals. And so I but I am not have not changed my view on the oil import tax. Q Mr. President, what do you envision for the role of education, especially in the fight against drug abuse? Do you see a blending together of the two? THE PRESIDENT: I think it is absolutely essential. We are not going to win the fight against narcotics on the interdiction front alone. And I think Bill Bennett agrees with me that the demand side is the place where we've got to do better, and that means education. Q Mr. President, we've been hearing about the new Whip in the House and all we hear is, he's a pretty tough guy. Are you going to meet the Congressman and are you going to talk to him? I mean, talk to him about the style that he's known for with respect to what you have at stake in legislation over there? THE PRESIDENT: I am absolutely convinced, having known Newt Gingrich, that we are going to work together very, very well. I don't think he needs any lectures from me. But he's -- I think that every congressman that I've talked to since then feels that he'll be what he said he'd be -- a team player. He's not going to suddenly become a shrinking violet, but we don't want that. He's going to be a good leader. And I'm going to work with him and I'm going to work with him productively. He's got his style and I got mine. 2 Mr. President, a few days ago, a small company out of Houston called Space Services launched a private rocket. What are your plans to incorporate private enterprise in space? How is that going to work with NASA? THE PRESIDENT: It's going to work that we're going to encourage it. I've had a feeling and I can't document this -- that there has been some reluctance in some quarters of the government against privatization, against the commercial aspects of this. David Hanna, who was the founder, certainly one of the key honchos in that company, has risked a lot of capital. He's gone out and done what he believed in. He had one dramatic failure -- and a lot of people were giving him grief over that -- and he stayed with it. And he's had a successful launch -- he and Deke Slayton and others -- and I applaud them. My role will be to tell the bureaucracy NASA, that we want to encourage the privatization. NASA has a role that's a government role and it'll continue to be a government role. But when you have enterprise like this, I think it is nothing but good for the United States. And we need alternate ways to put things into space, and this is good. Q Can I just follow that up, Mr. President? MORE