Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
235148621
label
[12/17/1997 – 04/14/1998]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
235148621
contentType
document
title
[12/17/1997 – 04/14/1998]
citationUrl
collections
Presidential Electronic Mail from the Automated Records Management System (ARMS)
Automated Records Management System (ARMS) Email from the White House Office (WHO) Bucket
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
235148621
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
26444785-20190155F-004-002-2022
[fast track...]
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
e7f0cdb595b6a227
ocrText
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001. email
From Ana Duque to [email protected] Re: May be of interest
[personal]
04/14/1998
b(6)
[partial] (1 page)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management System [Email]
WHO ([fast track...])
OA/Box Number: 500000
FOLDER TITLE:
[12/17/1997 - 04/14/1998]
2019-0155-F
jn653
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRAJ
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRAJ
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY
[email protected]@INET@LNGTWY UNKNOWN
CREATION DATE/TIME:17-DEC-1997 12:01:53.00
SUBJECT:: Daily Digest 12/17: WTO: A 'MIRACLE YEAR?
TO: Kelley A. Lehman@eop (Kelley A. Lehman@eop [OMB])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Lori Anderson@eop (Lori Anderson@eop WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Pundits in Europe and Asia praised a number of the World Trade
Organization's (WTO) recent rulings and agreements, leading one Indian
observer to term this the WTO's "miracle year." Agreements on information
technology, telecommunications and the latest one on financial services
were seen by many as "feathers in the cap" of the world trade body and as
indicators of renewed world commitment to trade liberalization and freer
and fairer markets. There were some malcontents, however. A number of
commentators from the developing world expressed concern that many of the
WTO's agreements would first benefit only the richest nations--Europe and
America--and that poorer nations would continue to negotiate from a weaker
position, ultimately bearing the brunt of harsh economic reforms.
Following are major themes found in the commentary:
FINANCIAL SERVICES: Most editorial attention was devoted to the December
12 agreement reached in Geneva on financial services. A majority of
editorialists in Europe and Asia welcomed the "ground-breaking" pact--which
will open markets around the world to foreign suppliers of banking,
securities, insurance and financial data services. Analysts agreed with
the leading, business-oriented Toronto Globe and Mail's judgment that "the
more easily these [financial services] transactions are performed, the
easier it is for businesses to trade among each other and stimulate
economic growth and jobs.. This is a deal to be welcomed." Many
observers also pointed out that the agreement is "timely," coming during a
period when the global economy continues to be threatened by the ongoing
crisis afflicting many Asian economies. Indeed, some believed the
"calamity" in the Asian economies was the "mother of invention"--persuading
negotiators to come to an agreement on freeing up global financial services
that could possibly help the ailing Asian tigers. Voices of concern,
however, could be heard in some quarters of the developing world. Kuala
Lumpur's government-influenced Business Times, for instance, singling out
the U.S. for "still hankering after a greater role in the global trade and
business drama," went on to warn that nations like Malaysia must not be
"hasty" in opening their markets: "Liberalization of the financial
services sector should be conducted gradually in order to benefit every
WTO member. The world no longer needs a puppet master to order its every
move. The developing world is capable of directing its own growth. It
just needs a little guidance and the time and space to develop at its own
pace." In Moscow, one writer noted that these are fretful times for
Russia--a WTO aspirant--because liberalization agreements are being made
without its participation.
PROTECTIONISM STILL A CONCERN: While most commentators were reassured that
the recent actions at the WTO were confirmation that the world was
continuing its march toward trade liberalization, several writers still
expressed concern that protectionism currents have, "on the contrary, grown
stronger." Stockholm's conservative Svenska Dagbladet stressed that the
trend "can be noticed in the U.S., where President Clinton lost his 'fast
track authority' about a month ago... Also within the EU there is a
constant struggle between the supporters of free trade and the
protectionists Every tendency of protectionism therefore must be
clearly and forcefully rejected. And the WTO cannot, in spite of all its
success, do all the work by itself."
This survey is based on 17 reports from 9 countries, December 8-17.
EDITOR: Diana McCaffrey
EUROPE
BRITAIN: "WTO Pact Will Open Financial Services Sector"
The independent Financial Times reported (12/15): "A ground-breaking
global pact reached at the weekend to open banking, insurance and
securities markets to foreign competition would expand opportunities for
companies in the multi-trillion dollar sector and help restore confidence
in Asia's crisis-ridden financial markets, U.S. officials said. Reluctant
East Asian nations, beset by financial turmoil at home, were brought into
the pact after they were persuaded that a deal would help in their
attempts to restore stability and investor confidence. The United States,
which walked away from a deal in 1995, had said it would need much better
offers from advanced emerging economies to join a pact this time."
"WTO's Film Ruling Angers Washington"
The independent Financial Times said (12/8): "The rejection by a World
Trade Organization disputes panel of a U.S. complaint that Japan has
rigged its photo-film market against imports has set off tremors which go
far beyond the commercial impact on Kodak and Fuji, the two companies
directly involved in the case Both Republicans and Democrats in
Congress have rushed to call for the United States to revert to tough
actions to pressure Japan into opening its market. In Japan, the WTO
decision has disheartened reformers. They fear it will be taken as an
exoneration of the country's burdensome regulatory practices, dashing
hopes of accelerating faltering efforts to restructure the economy and
stimulate demand."
"WTO Rules, OK?"
The independent Financial Times editorialized (12/8): "The dismissal by a
WTO disputes panel of U.S. and EU complaints that Japan has discriminated
against photo film imports is a forthright affirmation of judicial
independence. The panel's judgment was clearly unswayed by fear of
displeasing the WTO's two most powerful members. Such impartiality is
commendable. But it also puts the institution's authority squarely to the
test. Politically, the ruling could hardly have come at a worse time. The
outrage it has provoked in the United States can only make harder President
Bill Clinton's task of obtaining fast-track trade negotiating authority
from Congress. The decision also risks eroding further U.S. support for
multilateralism and encouraging demands for a reversion to strong-arm
trade tactics towards Japan, based on threats to penalize its exports."
RUSSIA: "Agreement May Hurt Russia"
Commenting on the financial services agreement talks in Geneva, Aleksei
Portansky said in Finansoviye Izvestia supplement to reformist Izvestia
(12/11): "Solving differences and signing a document in good time will
undoubtedly have considerable influence on the development of financial
markets in the world. Apart from the fact that developed and some
developing countries have been moving toward liberalizing the financial
services market, a recent crisis in Asia has confirmed a need for an
international agreement in this field Signing an agreement in Geneva
will create problems for Russia and other countries that are in the process
of joining the WTO, since, being no party to the talks, they will have to
accept the levels of liberalization established in Geneva."
CANADA: "WTO Agreement On Financial Services: A Deal To Be Welcomed"
The leading Globe and Mail (12/16) stated: "Necessity may be the mother of
invention, but it seems that calamity was the mother of last-minute
persuasion in the World Trade Organization's agreement on freeing up
global financial services Now, some holdouts have come on board,
offering to open up by March 1999, their still formidable markets to
outside competitors and, for some countries, outside investors.
"The emerging markets of Asia appear to recognize the deal will help
them There are other gains from the talks. World financial services
perform $2 trillion in foreign-exchange transactions per day. The more
easily these transactions are performed, the easier it is for businesses
to trade among each other and stimulate economic growth and jobs. For
many reasons, this is a deal to be welcomed."
"Anti-Dumping Suits Becoming Weapon Of Choice In Trade Fights"
International trade counsel and columnist Lawrence Herman observed in the
business-oriented Financial Post (12/16): "Problems are bubbling to the
surface of the international trading system that require immediate
attention. What's emerging is a kind of 'neo-protectionism' consisting of
the aggressive pursuit of anti-dumping remedies by more and more countries
around the world. The irony is this new protectionism derives legitimacy
under the rules of the World Trade Organization itself. The real
problem is the excessive detail and complexity of those investigation and
the incessant demand by governmental agencies for endless amounts of data
from the exporters. By virtue of the WTO trade rules dumping
investigations are far more onerous than the most scrupulous corporate
audit So the process forces exporters to spend vast amounts of time
and money in providing reams of material to investigating agencies, often
losing focus and market edge in the process This means that, win or
lose, the complaining industry can often come out ahead in terms of market
share recovery. It also can mean less competitive local industries can
gain at the expense of more efficient foreign ones New protectionism
cannot go ignored, given the proliferation of continually more stringent
anti-dumping laws. The issue should be put on the WTO's priority agenda."
SPAIN: "Favorable Pact"
Liberal El Pais proclaimed (12/15): "The agreement reached by the World
Trade Organization to expand opportunities for foreigners in the financial
services sector is favorable on a global scale. Its entry into force in
March 1999 could prove to be an historic moment, as indicated by both
WTO's Director General and the U.S. president. But above all it could be
a stabilizing signal that could have a not insignificant calming effect on
the extraordinary circumstances currently being experienced in that
sector The pact will facilitate, among other things, the resolution
of the problems now confronting Asian countries by providing greater
transparency and opportunities for participation by foreign financial
services firms. That is, financial globalization will be furthered, but in
a more competitive, transparent and secure environment Nothing less is
needed if the severe Asian economic and financial crisis is to have
anything like a positive outcome."
SWEDEN: "Protectionist Currents Still Growing Stronger"
Conservative Svenska Dagbladet opined (12/16): "By the creation of WTO,
organized protectionism around the world got a worthy opponent
However, its accomplishments, including the successful conclusion of the
WTO financial services negotiations in Geneva, must not be regarded as
proof that free trade no longer is in jeopardy. Protectionist currents
have, on the contrary, grown stronger lately and most clearly this can be
noticed in the United States, where President Clinton lost his 'fast track
authority' about a month ago. The development in the United States is not
unique. Also within the EU there is a constant struggle between the
supporters of free trade and the protectionists Every tendency of
protectionism therefore must be clearly and forcefully rejected. And the
WTO cannot, in spite of all (its success), do all the work by itself."
EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC
AUSTRALIA: "WTO Pact A Timely Trade Commitment"
In the view of the national, conservative Australian (12/16): "As Asian
currencies have fallen to new lows in recent days, the World Trade
Organization pact signals a welcome renewal of the region's commitment to
freer and fairer markets. The pact, involving about 70 countries which
account for more than 95 percent of the world's financial markets, does not
take effect until 1999 but its greatest impact and merit has materialized
almost instantaneously. It reassures investors in Asia that the region's
governments are serious about more transparency and certainty for overseas
investors, while recognizing that policies which protect domestic industry
at the expense of competition are likely to exacerbate their national
economic problems."
HONG KONG: "Double Dealing"
The independent, English-language South China Morning Post editorialized
(12/17): "It is striking how the delight over last weekend's 102-nation
pact to liberalize financial services has come from Americans and
Europeans. It is they who stand to benefit most from the World Trade
Organization accord to open up markets all over the world for powerful
multinationals to dominate U.S. Trade Representative Charlene
Barshefsky could scarcely contain her jubilation, talking of it in terms of
a trade deal rather than a genuine attempt at liberalization, and frankly
admitting that it would provide tremendous opportunities for American
firms
"It is not necessarily in Asia's interests to allow such unparalleled
access at a time when its ability to compete on equal terms has been
hampered by the recent crises. But a failure to reach agreement would have
resulted in a negative response from international investors and
accelerated capital outflow from the region. So Asia has little choice but
to reluctantly accept this one-sided accord and hope that the benefits it
brings the United States and Europe are reciprocated."
MALAYSIA: "Gaining From The Crisis"
The government-influenced English-language New Straits Times declared
(12/15): "Few in the international community have bothered to notice how
badly Asia's troubled economies are being served by the belated scramble to
counter the region's financial problems. The just-announced WTO agreement
on financial services--after six years of negotiations and strident
developing country objections--offers the biggest hint so far of the Asian
countries' sharply reduced bargaining position. True, the deal would, as
its proponents say, increase capital flows, improve quality competition,
financial stability and economic efficiency. But that is only one side of
the story. The last round of WTO talks in 1995, had come up empty after
Asia's emerging economies balked from opening their markets up to
better-equipped foreign competitors. This time, equal market access was
hard-sold as a confidence-restoring measure for the badly hit Asians.
Several developing countries barely concealed their dismay at having to buy
that line in spite of their justifiable fears. International perceptions
about Asia have changed, and its once high-flying economies are being made
to pay needlessly, without a voice of their own."
"Insurance War Looms At WTO"
The government-influenced Business Times ran the following editorial
(12/12): "It is clear that another 'shadow play' or 'wayang kulit' is about
to be staged by the WTO as the United States is expected to make life
difficult for other members with regards to the liberalization of
financial services And true to form, the United States is still
hankering after a greater role in the global trade and business drama
"Malaysia has nothing against liberalization per se, but we wish to be
comfortable with the pace at which the markets are opened. Liberalization
has had a drastic impact upon the currency and the stock market and it
simply cannot happen overnight. Haste will only cause the underdeveloped
markets in developing countries to suffer. The currency and stock market
turmoil in south-East Asia is proof of this Malaysia needs to be
comfortable with the march too, just as the United States took more than
50 years to grow into a global economic titan, Malaysia and other
developing nations also need to be stable and strong enough to face the
challenges of liberalization. Involving the people without solid
preparation would be tantamount to economic suicide. Malaysia is just
beginning to develop its insurance industry. Since insurance premiums
have been eating into our finances, the government has revived the
Malaysian International Re (Labuan) Ltd in an effort to halt the huge
outflow of capital to foreign insurance companies. With US$200 million in
paid-up capital, the company will result in savings of billions of ringgit
a year in terms of shipping and property insurance premiums.
"Malaysia has never closed its doors to foreign insurance companies. It
would be incorrect to assume that we wish to promote locals at the expense
of foreign investors. Foreigners are welcomed as they bring knowledge as
well as capital with them. The United States took many years to establish
its insurance sector and they really ought to let us get ours on its feet.
Liberalization of the financial services sector should be conducted
gradually in order to benefit every WTO member. The world no longer needs
a puppet master to order its every move. The developing world is capable
is directing its own growth. It just needs a little guidance and the time
and space to develop at its own pace."
SOUTH ASIA
INDIA: "At Whose Service?"
The centrist Statesman commented (12/17): "Fifteen years of tortuous
negotiations have produced an agreement, of sorts, on global financial
services The member that matters most, the United States, has its
Congress to appease, especially over what American legislators from New
York to Nebraska view as 'inadequate' market access offers by individual
countries. Still, the world has changed from the feverish early '80s when
mere mention of financial services would make developing countries, as well
as some Europeans, reach for the gavel. India has changed very little.
And why does that surprise us. At the final stages of the global
telecommunications treaty, signed in February this year, India barely took
its head out of the sand: the monopolies of DoT and VSNL, which exist to
mulct Indians, not foreigners, were defended in the name of national
interest. The financial services treaty is no less pro-Indian government
officials and anti-Indian citizens.
"Take banking, virtually the only financial services where the Indian team
offered 'greater' liberalization. The most favored nation principle will
cover foreign banks in India now The Indian consumer would have
benefited from more foreign banks, from more foreign investment in
financial services, from more choice and better products. Some Indian
producers of financial services would have undoubtedly suffered. But
should the course of progress be charted according to how many shoals some
inefficient producers may hit? Till such time as the answer remains yes,
expect no real improvement even after Indian officials come back waving
treaties."
"WTO's Miracle Year"
The right-of-center Indian Express concluded (12/16): "The financial
services agreement is the third feather in the World Trade Organization's
cap this year, after the information technology and telecoms agreements.
Given the Asian crisis, any financial services pact is an achievement
Anti-free-trade voices have been particularly sharp in America of late. In
the end, what was won was a true compromise. Perhaps this is just as well.
America is already a very open economy, but countries whose starting point
is a far more closed economy are bound to be nervous of opening up in one
go."
ATTACHMENT 1
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE: 0 00:00:00.00
TEXT:
WPC
2BPV`Courier 10cpi|x?xxx,kx6X@8;X@ 3'
3'
3'
3'
X'
hp X x
XX
3'
3'
3'
3'
XX X' hp X (##Xx\ P6QyXP#
X' hp X (#%O
ddx
XxX<O
#:x2PkCXP#
FOREIGN MEDIA REACTION
#:,2PkCP#DAILY DIGEST #XX\ P6QyP#USIA #:Z2PkCP#U.S. INFORMATION AGENCY, WASHIN
GTON DC 20547 OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND MEDIA REACTIONOO
#XP\ P6QyP#Bill Richey, Branch Chief Media Reaction (R/MR), #:x2PkCXP# #XP\
P6QyP#[email protected], (202) 6196511
Ann Pincus,
Director, (2
02) 6196511
X' hp X (##Xn\ P6Qy&P#Wednesday, December 17, 1997
X' hp X (#%
WTO: A 'MIRACLE YEAR'?
Pundits in Europe and Asia praised a number of the World Trade Organization's
(WTO) recent rulings and agreements, leading one Indian observer to term this
t
he WTO's "miracle year." Agreements on information technology,
telecommunicati
ons and the latest one on financial services were seen by many
as "feathers in
the cap" of the world trade body and as indicators of renewed
world commitment
to trade liberalization and freer and fairer markets.
There were some malcont
ents, however. A number of commentators from the
developing world expressed CO
ncern that many of the WTO's agreements would
first benefit only the richest na
tionsEurope and Americaand that poorer
nations would continue to negotiate from
a weaker position, ultimately
bearing the brunt of harsh economic reforms. Fo
llowing are major themes
found in the commentary:
FINANCIAL SERVICES: Most editorial attention was devoted to the December 12
ag
reement reached in Geneva on financial services. A majority of
editorialists i
n Europe and Asia welcomed the "groundbreaking" pactwhich
will open markets aro
und the world to foreign suppliers of banking,
securities, insurance and financ
ial data services. Analysts agreed with the
leading, businessoriented Toronto
Globe and Mail's judgment that "the more
easily these [financial services] tran
sactions are performed, the easier it
is for businesses to trade among each oth
er and stimulate economic growth and
jobs... This is a deal to be welcomed."
Many observers also pointed out
that the agreement is "timely," coming during
a period when the global
economy continues to be threatened by the ongoing cris
is afflicting many
Asian economies. Indeed, some believed the "calamity" in th
e Asian economies
was the "mother of invention 'persuading negotiators to come t
o an agreement
on freeing up global financial services that could possibly help
the ailing
Asian tigers. Voices of concern, however, could be heard in some q
uarters of
the developing world.
Kuala Lumpur's governmentinfluenced Busin
ess Times,
for instance, singling out the U.S. for "still hankering after a gre
ater role
in the global trade and business drama," went on to warn that nation
S like
Malaysia must not be "hasty" in opening their markets: "Liberalization
of
the financial services sector should be conducted gradually in order to
be
nefit every WTO member. The world no longer needs a puppet master to
order it
S every move. The developing world is capable of directing its own
growth. I
t just needs a little guidance and the time and space to develop
at its own pa
ce." In Moscow, one writer noted that these are fretful times
for Russiaa WTO
aspirantbecause liberalization agreements are being made
without its participa
tion.
X' hp X (#
X' hp X (#PROTECTIONISM STILL A CONCERN: While most commentators were reassure
d that
the recent actions at the WTO were confirmation that the world was conti
nuing
its march toward trade liberalization, several writers still expressed
co
ncern that protectionism currents have, "on the contrary, grown stronger."
Sto
ckholm's conservative Svenska Dagbladet stressed that the trend "can be
noticed
in the U.S., where President Clinton lost his 'fast track authority'
about a m
onth ago.... Also within the EU there is a constant struggle
between the suppo
rters of free trade and the protectionists Every
tendency of protectionism
therefore must be clearly and forcefully rejected.
And the WTO cannot, in spi
te of all its success, do all the work by itself."
This survey is based on 17 reports from 9 countries, December 817.
EDITOR: Diana McCaffrey
EUROPE
X' hp X (#
BRITAIN: "WTO Pact Will Open Financial Services Sector"
The independent Financial Times reported (12/15): "A groundbreaking global
pa
ct reached at the weekend to open banking, insurance and securities markets
to
foreign competition would expand opportunities for companies in the
multitrill
ion dollar sector and help restore confidence in Asia's
crisisridden financial
markets, U.S. officials said. Reluctant East Asian
nations, beset by financial
turmoil at home, were brought into the pact
after they were persuaded that a
deal would help in their attempts to
restore stability and investor confidence
. The United States, which walked
away from a deal in 1995, had said it would
need much better offers from
advanced emerging economies to join a pact this
time."
"WTO's Film Ruling Angers Washington"
The independent Financial Times said (12/8): "The rejection by a World Trade
Organization disputes panel of a U.S. complaint that Japan has rigged its
phot
ofilm market against imports has set off tremors which go far beyond
the comme
rcial impact on Kodak and Fuji, the two companies directly involved
in the cas
e Both Republicans and Democrats in Congress have rushed to
call for the
United States to revert to tough actions to pressure Japan into
opening its ma
rket. In Japan, the WTO decision has disheartened reformers.
They fear it wil
1 be taken as an exoneration of the country's burdensome
regulatory practices,
dashing hopes of accelerating faltering efforts to
restructure the economy an
d stimulate demand."
"WTO Rules, OK?"
The independent Financial Times editorialized (12/8): "The dismissal by a
WTO
disputes panel of U.S. and EU complaints that Japan has discriminated
against
photo film imports is a forthright affirmation of judicial
independence. The
panel's judgment was clearly unswayed by fear of
displeasing the WTO's two mos
t powerful members. Such impartiality is
commendable. But it also puts the ins
titution's authority squarely to the
test. Politically, the ruling could hardl
y have come at a worse time. The
outrage it has provoked in the United States
can only make harder President
Bill Clinton's task of obtaining fasttrack trad
e negotiating authority from
Congress. The decision also risks eroding further
U.S. support for
multilateralism and encouraging demands for a reversion to S
trongarm trade
tactics towards Japan, based on threats to penalize its exports
"
X' hp X (# RUSSIA: "Agreement May Hurt Russia"
X' hp X (#
Commenting on the financial services agreement talks in Geneva, Aleksei
Portan
sky said in Finansoviye Izvestia supplement to reformist Izvestia
(12/11): "Sol
ving differences and signing a document in good time will
undoubtedly have cons
iderable influence on the development of financial
markets in the world. Apart
from the fact that developed and some developing
countries have been moving to
ward liberalizing the financial services market,
a recent crisis in Asia has co
nfirmed a need for an international agreement
in this field Signing an agr
eement in Geneva will create problems for
Russia and other countries that are i
n the process of joining the WTO, since,
being no party to the talks, they will
have to accept the levels of
liberalization established in Geneva."
CANADA: "WTO Agreement On Financial Services: A Deal To Be Welcomed"
The leading Globe and Mail (12/16) stated: "Necessity may be the mother of
i
nvention, but it seems that calamity was the mother of lastminute
persuasion i
n the World Trade Organization's agreement on freeing up global
financial serv
ices Now, some holdouts have come on board, offering to
open up by March 1
999, their still formidable markets to outside competitors
and, for some count
ries, outside investors.
"The emerging markets of Asia appear to recognize the deal will help
them
There are other gains from the talks. World financial services
perform $2 tri
llion in foreignexchange transactions per day. The more
easily these transact
ions are performed, the easier it is for businesses to
trade among each other
and stimulate economic growth and jobs. For many
reasons, this is a deal to b
e welcomed."
"AntiDumping Suits Becoming Weapon Of Choice In Trade Fights"
International trade counsel and columnist Lawrence Herman observed in the
bus
inessoriented Financial Post (12/16): "Problems are bubbling to the
surface
of the international trading system that require immediate
attention. What's
emerging is a kind of 'neoprotectionism' consisting of
the aggressive pursuit
of antidumping remedies by more and more countries
around the world. The iron
y is this new protectionism derives legitimacy
under the rules of the World Tr
ade Organization itself. The real problem
is the excessive detail and compl
exity of those investigation and the
incessant demand by governmental agencies
for endless amounts of data from
the exporters. By virtue of the WTO trade
rules dumping investigations
are far more onerous than the most scrupulous c
orporate audit So the
process forces exporters to spend vast amounts of ti
me and money in
providing reams of material to investigating agencies, often 1
osing focus
and market edge in the process This means that, win or lose, t
he
complaining industry can often come out ahead in terms of market share
reco
very. It also can mean less competitive local industries can gain at
the expe
nse of more efficient foreign ones New protectionism cannot go
ignored, gi
ven the proliferation of continually more stringent antidumping
laws. The is
sue should be put on the WTO's priority agenda."
SPAIN: "Favorable Pact"
X' hp X (#
X' hp x (#Liberal El Pais proclaimed (12/15): "The agreement reached by the W
orld
Trade Organization to expand opportunities for foreigners in the financia
I
services sector is favorable on a global scale. Its entry into force in
Mar
ch 1999 could prove to be an historic moment, as indicated by both WTO's
Direc
tor General and the U.S. president. But above all it could be a
stabilizing
signal that could have a not insignificant calming effect on the
extraordinary
circumstances currently being experienced in that sector
The pact will fac
ilitate, among other things, the resolution of the problems
now confronting As
ian countries by providing greater transparency and
opportunities for particip
ation by foreign financial services firms. That
is, financial globalization W
ill be furthered, but in a more competitive,
transparent and secure environment
****
Nothing less is needed if the severe
Asian economic and financial crisis
is to have anything like a positive
outcome."
SWEDEN: "Protectionist Currents Still Growing Stronger"
X' hp X (#
Conservative Svenska Dagbladet opined (12/16): "By the creation of WTO,
organ
ized protectionism around the world got a worthy opponent... However,
its acc
omplishments, including the successful conclusion of the WTO financial
services
negotiations in Geneva, must not be regarded as proof that free
trade no longe
r is in jeopardy. Protectionist currents have, on the contrary,
grown stronger
lately and most clearly this can be noticed in the United
States, where Preside
nt Clinton lost his 'fast track authority' about a month
ago. The development
in the United States is not unique. Also within the EU
there is a constant str
uggle between the supporters of free trade and the
protectionists Every te
ndency of protectionism therefore must be clearly
and forcefully rejected. And
the WTO cannot, in spite of all (its success),
do all the work by itself."
EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC
X' hp X (#
AUSTRALIA: "WTO Pact A Timely Trade Commitment"
In the view of the national, conservative Australian (12/16): "As Asian
curr
encies have fallen to new lows in recent days, the World Trade
Organization pac
t signals a welcome renewal of the region's commitment to
freer and fairer mark
ets. The pact, involving about 70 countries which
account for more than 95 pe
rcent of the world's financial markets, does not
take effect until 1999 but i
ts greatest impact and merit has materialized
almost instantaneously. It reass
ures investors in Asia that the region's
governments are serious about more tra
nsparency and certainty for overseas
investors, while recognizing that policies
which protect domestic industry at
the expense of competition are likely to ex
acerbate their national economic
problems."
HONG KONG: "Double Dealing"
The independent, Englishlanguage South China Morning Post editorialized
(12/17
): "It is striking how the delight over last weekend's 102nation pact
to liber
alize financial services has come from Americans and Europeans. It
is they who
stand to benefit most from the World Trade Organization accord to
open up mark
ets all over the world for powerful multinationals to
dominate U.S. Trade
Representative Charlene Barshefsky could scarcely
contain her jubilation, talki
ng of it in terms of a trade deal rather than a
genuine attempt at liberalizati
on, and frankly admitting that it would
provide tremendous opportunities for Am
erican firms
"It is not necessarily in Asia's interests to allow such unparalleled access
at
a time when its ability to compete on equal terms has been hampered by the
rec
ent crises. But a failure to reach agreement would have resulted in a
negative
response from international investors and accelerated capital
outflow from the
region. So Asia has little choice but to reluctantly accept
this onesided acc
ord and hope that the benefits it brings the United States
and Europe are recip
rocated."
MALAYSIA: "Gaining From The Crisis"
X' hp X (#
The governmentinfluenced Englishlanguage New Straits Times declared
(12/15):
"Few in the international community have bothered to notice how
badly Asia's tr
oubled economies are being served by the belated scramble to
counter the region
's financial problems. The justannounced WTO agreement on
financial servicesaf
ter six years of negotiations and strident developing
country objectionsoffers
the biggest hint so far of the Asian countries'
sharply reduced bargaining pos
ition. True, the deal would, as its proponents
say, increase capital flows, i
mprove quality competition, financial
stability and economic efficiency. But t
hat is only one side of the story.
The last round of WTO talks in 1995, had co
me up empty after Asia's emerging
economies balked from opening their markets u
p to betterequipped foreign
competitors. This time, equal market access was h
ardsold as a
confidencerestoring measure for the badly hit Asians. Several de
veloping
countries barely concealed their dismay at having to buy that line in
spite
of their justifiable fears. International perceptions about Asia have
c
hanged, and its once highflying economies are being made to pay
needlessly, wi
thout a voice of their own."
X' hp X (#
"Insurance War Looms At WTO"
The governmentinfluenced Business Times ran the following editorial
(12/12):
"It is clear that another 'shadow play' or 'wayang kulit' is about
to be stag
ed by the WTO as the United States is expected to make life
difficult for other
members with regards to the liberalization of financial
services And tr
ue to form, the United States is still hankering after
a greater role in the g
lobal trade and business drama
"Malaysia has nothing against liberalization per se, but we wish to be
comfort
able with the pace at which the markets are opened. Liberalization
has had a
drastic impact upon the currency and the stock market and it
simply cannot hap
pen overnight. Haste will only cause the underdeveloped
markets in developing
countries to suffer. The currency and stock market
turmoil in southEast Asia
is proof of this Malaysia needs to be
comfortable with the march too, jus
t as the United States took more than 50
years to grow into a global economic
titan, Malaysia and other developing
nations also need to be stable and strong
enough to face the challenges of
liberalization. Involving the people without
solid preparation would be
tantamount to economic suicide. Malaysia is just
beginning to develop its
insurance industry. Since insurance premiums have b
een eating into our
finances, the government has revived the Malaysian Interna
tional Re (Labuan)
Ltd in an effort to halt the huge outflow of capital to for
eign insurance
companies. With US$200 million in paidup capital, the company
will result
in savings of billions of ringgit a year in terms of shipping and
property
insurance premiums.
"Malaysia has never closed its doors to foreign insurance companies. It
would
be incorrect to assume that we wish to promote locals at the expense
of forei
gn investors. Foreigners are welcomed as they bring knowledge as
well as capi
tal with them. The United States took many years to establish
its insurance S
ector and they really ought to let us get ours on its feet.
Liberalization of
the financial services sector should be conducted
gradually in order to benefi
t every WTO member. The world no longer needs a
puppet master to order its ev
ery move. The developing world is capable is
directing its own growth. It ju
st needs a little guidance and the time and
space to develop at its own pace."
X' hp X (#
X' hp X (#SOUTH ASIA
X' hp X (# INDIA: "At Whose Service?"
X' hp X (#
The centrist Statesman commented (12/17): "Fifteen years of tortuous
negotiat
ions have produced an agreement, of sorts, on global financial
services Th
e member that matters most, the United States, has its
Congress to appease, esp
ecially over what American legislators from New York
to Nebraska view as 'inade
quate' market access offers by individual
countries. Still, the world has chan
ged from the feverish early '80s when
mere mention of financial services would
make developing countries, as well
as some Europeans, reach for the gavel. Ind
ia has changed very little. And
why does that surprise us. At the final stage
S of the global
telecommunications treaty, signed in February this year, India
barely took
its head out of the sand: the monopolies of DoT and VSNL, which exi
st to
mulct Indians, not foreigners, were defended in the name of national
inte
rest. The financial services treaty is no less proIndian government
officials
and antilndian citizens.
"Take banking, virtually the only financial services where the Indian team
offe
red 'greater' liberalization. The most favored nation principle will
cover for
eign banks in India now The Indian consumer would have benefited
from more
foreign banks, from more foreign investment in financial services,
from more ch
oice and better products. Some Indian producers of financial
services would ha
ve undoubtedly suffered. But should the course of progress
be charted accordin
g to how many shoals some inefficient producers may hit?
Till such time as the
answer remains yes, expect no real improvement even
after Indian officials com
e back waving treaties."
"WTO's Miracle Year"
The rightofcenter Indian Express concluded (12/16): "The financial
services a
greement is the third feather in the World Trade Organization's cap
this year,
after the information technology and telecoms agreements. Given
the Asian cris
is, any financial services pact is an achievement
Antifreetrade voices hav
e been particularly sharp in America of late. In
the end, what was won was a t
rue compromise. Perhaps this is just as well.
America is already a very open
economy, but countries whose starting point is
a far more closed economy are bo
und to be nervous of opening up in one go."
##
X' hp X (#%#Xx\ P6QyXP#
END ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 2
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE: 0 00:00:00.00
TEXT:
RFC-822-headers:
Received: from conversion.pmdf.eop.gov by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.0-4 #6879)
id <[email protected]>; Wed, 17 Dec 1997 11:48:00 -0500 (EST)
Received: from storm.eop.gov (storm.eop.gov)
by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.0-4 #6879) id <[email protected]>; Wed,
17 Dec 1997 11:47:53 -0500 (EST)
Received: from NOTES1.USIA.GOV ([198.67.64.251])
by STORM.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-7 #6879)
with SMTP id <[email protected]>; Wed,
17 Dec 1997 11:47:38 -0500 (EST)
Received: by NOTES1.USIA.GOV(Lotus SMTP MTA v1.06 (346.8 3-18-1997))
id 85256570.005BC288 ; Wed, 17 Dec 1997 11:42:15 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: USIA
END ATTACHMENT 2
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Paul J. Weinstein Jr. (CN=Paul J. Weinstein Jr./OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD
CREATION DATE/TIME:23-DEC-1997 11:04:26.00
SUBJECT: Jump Start For Fast Track
TO: Gene B. Sperling CN=Gene B. Sperling/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP OPD
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Daniel K. Tarullo CN=Daniel K. Tarullo/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD D
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Lael Brainard (CN=Lael Brainard/OU=CEA/O=EOP @ EOP [ CEA
READ:UNKNOWN
Rahm I. Emanuel CN=Rahm I. Emanuel/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
I do not know what your plans are for Fast Track next session, but I
thought I would offer an idea that might increase Democratic votes in
favor of the legislation.
Proposal -- South Africa Free Trade Agreement
In his 1998 State of the Union, the President announces that he is going
to fight for passage of Fast Track Authority in the Spring because he has
begun discussions with Nelson Mandela about a new free trade agreement
with South Africa. The President argues that a free trade agreement with
South Africa will bring the two countries closer together, promote
economic growth and strengthen Democracy in the most important of African
nations, and provide the U.S. with the benefits of free trade.
Analysis
I believe this announcement would fracture the Democratic/Labor coalition
against the Fast Track. The Black Caucus would through their support to
the President and Democrats who fought against the free trade agreement
would have a hard time opposing a free trade agreement with Mandela.
I didn't have a chance to analyze our trade balance with South Africa
before I wrote this, I am guessing they are a mid-range U.S. trade
partner. For those who criticize this as a political gesture, we could
point to the Reagan Administration's Free Trade pact with Israel as an
example of using free trade to tie important regional powers to the U.S.
One major issue is whether South Africa would be interested. Another
drawback is anger among Latin American nations such as Chile who were
hoping to join NAFTA. However, this strategy gets the President the
authority and makes expanding NAFTA a more likely possibility in the long
run.
Just some thoughts.
Happy Holidays.
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management System
[EMAIL] and Tape Restoration Project [Email]
This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative
marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff.
This marker identifies a responsive email, already made available
within another collection.
Collection: 2006-0540-F
Bucket: WHO
Creation Date: 1998-01-02
Subject: INTERNAL TRANSCRIPT 12/31/97 remarks by Pres.&
First Lady
Creator: Kevin S. Moran CN=Kevin S. Moran/OU=WHO/O=EOP
[ WHO ]
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (EXTERNAL MAIL)
CREATOR: [email protected]@INET@EOPMRX
CREATION DATE/TIME: 7-JAN-1998 12:27:00.00
SUBJECT: Daily Digest 1/7/98: TRENDS--U.S. STATUS AS SUPERPOWER
TO: Ckoppell
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Lehman k
(Lehman_k@A1@CD)(OMB)
READ:NOT READ
TO: K_Haley
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: anderson_1
(anderson_I@A1@CD) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: clibrary
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: libacq
( [email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Lou_Lantner
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: rodriguezl
( [email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: mconnell
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: glynnm
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: siegelm
( [email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: MIKE_HALTZEL
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: mkovacs
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: napsnet
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: NQuistor
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: boustanyn
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Clark_p
(Clark_p@A1@CD)(OA)
READ: 7-JAN-1998 12:33:19.94
TO: afpal
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: virdenr
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: rcomer
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: mikels
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: naplan_s
(naplan_s@A1@CD) (NSC)
READ:NOT READ
TO: tlvio
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TO: tlvpao
([email protected]@INET@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TEXT:
Over the last three months, musings on the role of the U.S. in the world
continued to figure prominently in foreign commentary. Once again, there
was agreement among almost all pundits that the U.S. has emerged as the
most powerful nation in the post-Cold War era--influential and preeminent
in the economic, political, security, military, technology and cultural
spheres. Only a few chose to highlight what they perceived as limits on
American power. On any given subject, a majority of analysts saw American
attitude and policies as the defining ones. This idea extended to the
ongoing dispute between Iraq and the U.S., U.S. trade sanctions policies,
the Middle East peace process, the Asian currency crisis, NATO enlargement,
the conflict in the former Yugoslavia, democracy building in Africa, China,
the land mines convention, the Kyoto climate conference, free trade, global
financial matters and a host of other issues and events. Most acknowledged
that "the U.S. is the only international player who can create constructive
movement" in deadlocked situations. Opinion on the nature of U.S. global
leadership and its implications, however, varied widely, and fell roughly
into three broad categories. The first consists of those observers who are
apparently at ease with the so-called "unipolar" world and welcome the
American "model" of democracy and economy. The second grouping, while
implicitly untroubled by the concept of the U.S. as the only superpower,
expressed deep dissatisfaction with its leadership. The last--and most
extensive--category comprises editorialists who lament the unipolar nature
of the post-Cold War era, find great fault with U.S. leadership and yearn
for a multipolar world. These are major themes found in commentary:
GOOD: U.S. SECURITY UMBRELLA, ECONOMY, AND SOCIAL MODEL-- A considerable
number of editorialists looked with much admiration and contentment upon
the "Pax Americana." Notably, an abundance of positive murmurings emanated
from opinion-makers in Germany, Scandinavia and Central Eastern Europe,
where U.S. leadership on security issues and NATO enlargement were the main
points of interest. These commentators generally lauded the U.S. role in
winning the Cold War. Other observers focused on the Balkan hot spot in
Europe, stressing that without President Clinton's leadership, Bosnia would
still be suffering the ravages of war. Even when it came to economic
issues, a Swedish daily observed that while "the U.S. certainly is no
paradise on Earth the countries in Europe with mass unemployment,
stagnating standard of living, crumbling security systems, and opinions
hostile to immigrants, have not very much to be proud of. We have more to
learn from the U.S. than we have to teach the Americans." Many others in
Asia, Latin America and Europe held up the phenomenal U.S. economy as a
model for all to emulate. A paper in India summed it up this way: "This
year made a formidable case for the American way of doing business--strong
on institutions, transparency and domestic answerability." In Brazil, a
nation that has emerged as a strong economic force in Latin America,
center-right O Estado de Sao Paulo extolled the virtues of the U.S.
economic example, advising Brazil not to "turn its eyes towards the
European model., The best example is here, in the New World." Several
writers wrote paeans to the internal social strengths of America--where,
according to one Belgrade daily, "freedom, democracy, legal order, justice,
wealth, abundance and happiness are really empirical categories."
SHOULD BE BETTER: U.S. LEADERSHIP--A number of columnists, while offering
diverse critiques of U.S. policies, all supported the same basic
proposition--that although there is no inherent problem with the U.S.
superpower status, America's leadership is not being exercised in the best
possible manner. This view was well captured by one German writer who
chastised the U.S. because generally its "weight does not translate into
the appropriate political influence in the world;" and more specifically
because the U.S. has been unable to solve a number of contentious
international issues--such as Saddam Hussein's intransigence and human
rights violations in China. Some of these critics also stressed their
concern over an alleged growth of U.S. isolationism, which is claimed to be
particularly strong in the U.S. Congress. The Clinton administration also
came under fire for its purported failure to inform the U.S. people
adequately on important foreign policy initiatives and its inability to
foster a more enduring internationalism among the public. Many saw in the
derailment of the president's request for fast track authority an
especially ominous sign--a harbinger of a possible broader U.S.
disengagement from the world. Some expressed concern about an alleged
growth in the influence of various single issue lobbyists in Washington--a
trend, they believed, that is likely to further weaken the U.S. ability to
formulate a coherent foreign policy. There were calls from many in this
group for the U.S. to act in a less "overbearing manner" in dealing with
its partners. London's independent Economist urged the superpower to "keep
its alliances in good repair," lest it find itself increasingly isolated in
its attempts to solve global problems--e.g. Iraq.
BAD AND UGLY: THE 'HEGEMONIC', UNILATERALIST, PROTECTIONIST, 'BRASH' UNCLE
SAM--What united an otherwise divergent and large third body of opinion was
an underlying belief that the U.S. status as the world's sole superpower
was an inherently undesirable situation and that moving toward a more
"balanced" international system was an important policy imperative. Within
this "down with American hegemony" school of thought, several distinct
themes could be discerned. One set of commentators waxed philosophically,
arguing that the U.S., left without any major international opponent, would
pursue a course of "soft imperialism." Critics also saw the U.S. behavior
on the international scene as disagreeable, and termed it "bullying,"
"arrogant" and "brash." They held that the superpower is not interested in
multilateral approaches to solving problems, and does not cooperate unless
all of its interests are protected. Several Russian commentators
expressed their own unique view of how the world should be. Moscow's
neo-communist Pravda Five, for example, contended that Russia's "vast
expanse should be preserved as an epitome of equilibrium in this unstable
world." The paper said that this Russian "shield between East and West"
would be an "insurmountable obstacle to hegemony-seeking powers." Other
Russian dailies cast Moscow in combinations with such countries as China,
France and Germany as a possible counterweight to American hegemony. In
France--a country that was seen by a number of analysts as continuing to
effectively challenge a number of U.S. initiatives--pundits were
predictably peevish, complaining frequently about U.S. policies and
leadership. Paris's left-of-center weekly Le Nouvel Observateur spoke
approvingly of a "weakness" in U.S. diplomacy that "leaves the door wide
open to a multi-polar world policy in which many average sized nations such
as France can play a role." On specific policies, there was a bevy of
standard condemnations of U.S. trade sanctions policies, with a particular
emphasis on the Helms-Burton law and the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act.
Numerous Muslim and Arab pundits reiterated all of the usual criticisms
about the U.S.' perceived pro-Israel tilt, excessive hostility toward Iraq,
and by extension, the Islamic world. A number of media voices in all
corners of the globe alleged U.S. hypocrisy in such matters as human
rights, global warming, banning land mines and world trade issues. They
held that U.S. policies in these areas were driven by parochial U.S.
interests rather than by any principled policy stances.
This survey is based on numerous commentaries appearing in previous media
reaction reports October 1, 1997-January 6, 1998. Comprehensive quotes are
available upon request.
EDITOR: Diana McCaffrey
ATTACHMENT 1
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE: 7-JAN-1998 12:28:00.00
ATT BODYPART TYPE:p
TEXT:
Unable to convert OA$SHARA479:ZXERHTBDE.WPC to ASCII,
The following is a HEX DUMP:
END ATTACHMENT
1
ATTACHMENT 2
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE: 7-JAN-1998 12:28:00.00
ATT BODYPART TYPE:D
TEXT:
RFC-822-headers:
Received: from conversion.pmdf.eop.gov by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.0-4 #6879)
id <[email protected]> for [email protected]; Wed,
07 Jan 1998 12:27:43 -0500 (EST)
Received: from storm.eop.gov (storm.eop.gov)
by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.0-4 #6879) id <[email protected]> for
[email protected]; Wed, 07 Jan 1998 12:27:39 -0500 (EST)
Received: from NOTES1.USIA.GOV ([198.67.64.251])
by STORM.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-7 #6879)
with SMTP id <[email protected]> for [email protected]; Wed,
07 Jan 1998 12:27:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: by NOTES1.USIA.GOV(Lotus SMTP MTA v1.06 (346.8 3-18-1997))
id 85256585.005F916A ; Wed, 07 Jan 1998 12:23:51 -0400
X-Lotus-FromDomain: USIA
END ATTACHMENT 2
FOIA Number: 2019-0155-F
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management
System [EMAIL]
This is not a presidential record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential
Library Staff.
Hex Dump file is not in a recognizable format, has been incorrectly
decoded or is damaged.
File Name: p_adbthrex_who_html_1.doc
Attachment Number: OA$SHARA479:ZXERHTBDE.WPC
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Eleanor S. Parker ( CN=Eleanor S. Parker/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1)
CREATION DATE/TIME:12-JAN-1998 09:34:15.00
SUBJECT: E.J.Dionne..
TO: Paul E. Begala (CN=Paul E. Begala/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Get Ready For Clinton's Third Act
He Seeks a Balance Between Hyperactive and
Reactive
By E.J. Dionne Jr.
Sunday, January 11, 1998; Page C01
You are present at the rise of the Third Clinton.
The First
Clinton governed from January, 1993 until the
Democrats'
disaster in the 1994 congressional elections. The
Second
Clinton reigned until the end of last year.
If all goes well, the Third Clinton will govern
until the
president's term expires in 2001. If he fails, a
Fourth and
probably much-diminished Clinton will have to
make his
appearance.
The First Clinton was compulsively activist and
won some
important victories, notably in the 1993 budget
battle. But he
also suffered a paralyzing defeat on health care,
helping the
Republicans take control of Congress.
The Second Clinton was relentlessly reactive,
mixing
accommodation with confrontation. He embraced the
Republicans' goal of a balanced budget, signed
their welfare bill
and declared big government kaput. But he also
battled -- and
bested -- the Republicans on the famous issue
quartet of
Medicare, Medicaid, education and the environment.
The Third Clinton will be activist with less
attitude. He will try
to pick fights he can win. Failing that, he will
try to make
arguments that can carry in the long-term, even
if his proposals
fail. He will be more aggressive than the
reactive president of
the second phase. He is already proposing
programs that force
the Republicans to react to him.
The Third Clinton is made possible by the end of
deficit
politics, which has given the president fiscal
room for initiative.
The new phase is made easier by the increasing
caution of the
Republicans, still smarting from the Second
Clinton's attacks.
And it's made necessary by the president's open
obsession
with his legacy and an awareness that legacies
are not built by
the cautious.
At a dinner on Wednesday with a group of
intellectuals,
according to one participant, Clinton spoke
passionately of
making his stand as a progressive president in
the Teddy
Roosevelt tradition and of the need for national
action to help
Americans through a time of difficult economic
transition.
If that's the legacy Clinton has decided to
pursue, he'll have to
take chances and defy certain expectations. His
record as a
counterpuncher is far more impressive than his
performance in
leading the fight.
Moreover, Clinton relishes popularity, and
boldness is not
always popular. His current high ratings are due
in part to an
above-the-fray image and his successes in working
with the
Republicans. A more aggressive and partisan
Clinton risks
some approval-ratings points. If the battles
become difficult, it
will be tempting to return to the quiet life of
accommodation.
With a Republican Congress, Clinton will not win
all the fights
he is picking. But there is a political logic to
the appearance of
the Third Clinton: The president is trying to unit
e his party for
this fall's elections and help Al Gore in 2000.
By offering new
programs, the Third Clinton is also trying to
achieve something
the earlier Clintons failed to do: construct a
sustainable political
project that will outlast his presidency.
The new phase is desperately important to the
Democratic
Party, which splintered badly in 1997.
Congressional
Democrats, especially in the House, watched
grimly as Clinton
made his own budget deal with the Republican
leadership. That
deal made Clinton look good, but it also helped
the
Republicans slip the extremist charge that
Clinton had laid on
them and gave the Republicans tax cuts that many
Democrats
despised.
House Democrats got revenge last fall by blocking
Clinton's
efforts to win "fast track" authority to
negotiate trade
agreements. The fast-track controversy
underscored the deep
splits within the Democratic Party on one of the
central issues
in American politics: whether the emerging global
economy is
good or bad for the average American. Clinton, as
one aide
put it, has "led a flank in the party" that sees
globalism as
inevitable and good. Many House Democrats --
Minority
Leader Dick Gephardt and Whip David Bonior
especially --
are decided skeptics.
But the fast-track defeat was about something
else as well:
many Democrats who are not critics of globalism
believe it will
hurt the average worker unless a new "social
contract" is
enacted to protect those caught in the
transition. Some of these
Democrats bucked the president on fast-track to
send him a
message: He had failed to construct the social
contract he
keeps promising.
Interestingly, the demand for a social contract
comes not only
from the left, but also from the party's
center-right, which
supports fast-track. "A lot of today's economic
insecurity
comes from the erosion of the old post-war or New
Deal
social bargain," said Will Marshall, president of
the Progressive
Policy Institute, the think tank for the centrist
Democratic
Leadership Council. "That bargain is being
dissolved by the
forces of economic change and global markets
There's a
vacuum to be filled now involving measures that
equip
Americans to succeed in the new economy." The
Third Clinton
has returned to the social bargain.
The Second Clinton declared big government to be
over, but
the Third is embracing substantial new federal
initiatives. They
include his plan to let the near-elderly buy into
Medicare, his
$21.7 billion child care program and new federal
spending on
education (likely to include school construction
money and
federal funding to hire 100,000 more teachers).
The Third Clinton won kudos last week from
leaders of both
wings of his party. "I'm pleased with what's
coming out of the
White House," said Bonior, who is a frequent
critic of the
president from the left. "It will make him more
in sync with us
and us with him."
Rep. Tim Roemer (D-Ind.), a moderate leader of
the New
Democratic Caucus, was similarly positive,
especially about
Clinton's pledge to balance the budget early. "He
really has
shown a way to expand the appeal to different
segments of the
Democratic Party," Roemer said.
Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) sees the Third Clinton
responding directly to the fast-track fallout.
"It's clear that the
fight over fast-track was mutually unpleasant,"
said Frank, who
spoke with Clinton recently. "He's stressing the
things we have
in common."
The real music to liberal ears came when
Republicans
denounced the new initiatives. "I think this is
an interesting
week we are in," said Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Texas).
"The
president has a new idea to create new massive
programs
every single day." Democrats would quibble about
how
"massive" the new programs are, but the
outpouring from the
Third Clinton is exactly what many in their ranks
have been
waiting for.
The Democrats face three major difficulties that
the Third
Clinton has only begun to address.
The first is that Democrats need to paint a
complicated -- some
might say contradictory - -- picture of the country
to justify both
their own stewardship and the new programs.
Because nothing
sells like success, they will boast about the
economy and the
end of the deficit. But to explain the need for
new initiatives,
they must argue that the new prosperity is un
evenly shared and
that families in the middle and at the bottom of
the economy
need more help.
The second difficulty is whether Clinton can
simultaneously
embrace globalism and speak urgently about the
need to
strengthen neighborhood institutions, old values
and the family.
In principle, as the bumper sticker would assert,
you can be
global and local at the same time. But in
practice, said Michael
Sandel, a Harvard political philosopher who was
part of the
group that dined with the president last week, "a
lot of people's
frustration about the culture and the fraying of
community are
connected" to the rise of a distant global econo
my.
The third problem is the state of the global
economy itself.
Robert Borosage, co-director of the liberal
Campaign for
America's Future, argues that the Asian economic
crisis and
fears of deflation could turn politics upside
down. There could
be new demands for regulating the global
marketplace and a
need to stimulate economic growth -- at the very
moment when
the United States is patting itself on the back
for the restrained
spending policies that ended the deficit.
Rahm Emanuel, a senior adviser to Clinton,
acknowledges that
Democrats will remain divided on trade and
globalism. "That's
the drawbridge within the party," he says. But he
said Clinton's
success in taming the deficit has healed other
divisions. "Once
you start reducing the deficit, you can have an
affirmative,
positive view of government," he said. "You can r
aise your
sights again."
That's exactly what shrewd conservatives fear. On
Friday,
Wall Street Journal columnist Paul Gigot
announced "the brave
old world of balanced budget liberalism." He
noted that a
government that "lives within its means" is "one
the public may
be willing to trust with more ways and means."
Clinton's new round of activism is better timed
than his first,
says Wendy Rahn, a political scientist at the
University of
Minnesota. The academic literature shows that in
good times,
confidence in government rises, so Clinton will
be making his
case for new programs to a more receptive public.
It should be said that some of the president's
aides bristle at the
notion of Three Clintons. Gene Sperling, the
president's senior
economic adviser, argues that Clinton has been co
nsistent on
two goals: reducing the deficit and seeking money
for new
programs, especially in education and health. "We
lived and
learned and took our environment as we had it,"
Sperling said.
"We're now in clearer waters."
The most intriguing aspect of the Third Clinton
will be his effort
to lay the groundwork for further gains after he
leaves office.
For example, many Democrats hope -- and many Repub
licans
fear -- that once one group of citizens is
allowed to buy into the
Medicare program, it could be opened to other
groups and to
employers seeking cheaper insurance for low-paid
workers.
Before long, Rep. Bill Thomas (R-Calif.) has been
saying, there
will be a demand to subsidize Medicare premiums
for those
who can't afford the full freight. Seen from the
Democrats'
point of view, that's an opportunity, not a
problem. The
Medicare buy-in could become the road to
universal coverage.
The Democrats, of course, are a diverse party
that is never
easy to unite. Already, some on the left see
Clinton's child care
proposal as too small. Any move to change the
Social Security
system would guarantee an intraparty struggle,
since many
Democrats don't want to touch the program at all.
And deficit
hawks such as Roemer have questions about the
Medicare
proposal.
But most Democrats are happy just to have a
chance to make
Medicare -- one of their best causes -- an issue
in the 1998
campaign. Borosage notes than even though some of
Clinton's
new programs are "small gestures," they're also
"defining
gestures."
The Republicans who control Congress are not
without tools at
their disposal, including the possibility that
any of the several
investigations of Clinton will heat up again. Guy
Molyneux, a
Democratic pollster, said the Republicans could
still win a
debate that tax cuts are preferable to new
programs - but only
if they have the discipline to direct a tax cut
to the middle class,
and not the wealthy. Otherwise, Democrats could
mobilize
class rhetoric against them.
For now, the initiative is with the Third
Clinton. He is out to
demonstrate that you can learn a thing or two in
the course of a
presidency. Disciplined by the imperative of
dealing with a
Republican Congress and tempered by his past
defeats and
miscalculations, he is trying to shift the
political dynamic in favor
of national action. Whether he succeeds or not,
trying a build a
legacy sure beats just talking about one.
E.J. Dionne is a columnist for The Washington
Post and a
senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.
.
Copyright 1998 The Washington Post Company
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Barry J. Toiv (CN=Barry J. Toiv/OU=WHO/O=EOP [WHO])
CREATION DATE/TIME:14-JAN-1998 14:01:01.00
SUBJECT: 1998-1-14 McCurry Briefing
TO: Sally Katzen (CN=Sally Katzen/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP [ OMB ])
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Phyllis Kaiser-Dark (CN=Phyllis Kaiser-Dark/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP [ OMB ])
READ:UNKNOWN
Elizabeth R. Newman (CN=Elizabeth R. Newman/OU=WHO/O=EOP [WHO])
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Forwarded by Barry J. Toiv/WHO/EOP on 01/14/98
02:00 PM
SUNTUM_M@ A1
01/14/98 01:39:00 PM
Record Type: Record
To: See the distribution list at the bottom of this message
cc:
Subject: 1998-1-14 McCurry Briefing
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
January 14, 1998
PRESS BRIEFING
BY MIKE MCCURRY
The Briefing Room
12:40 P.M. EST
MR. MCCURRY: Let me start with a couple of things this
afternoon. First, good news. Sally Katzen, who many of you know has
been the Administrator of the Office of Management Budget's Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs she's been there since 1993 --
she has agreed to join Gene Sperling at the National Economic
Council, and she will be Deputy Assistant to the President for
Economic Policy and Deputy Director of the NEC.
She for five years has played a very critical
behind-the-scenes role here, managing a lot of the work that we've
done to reform the regulatory process and improve its efficiency, and
I think has gotten to know a lot of you, particularly those of you
who are working the more technical areas. She has had a job that
required not only a wide-ranging knowledge of the President's policy,
but also an understanding of how the White House works and how
economic policymakers go about thinking through issues related to
federal regulation.
I think she's -- I describe her as something of a
diplomatic when it comes to dealing with all the different interests
that exist within the government, and she's learned, I think through
sheer will power, how to balance out a lot of the conflicting
interests that arise in government -- between government and the
private sector - and she's really mastered that art.
Now, those are all tools that I think will be very
useful to her as she joins Gene. And I'll say on Gene's behalf, if
you thought it was impressive that Bill Clinton retained the services
of Erskine Bowles, I think it's equally impressive that Gene
convinced Sally to join him on that staff, because that's -- it will
be a very important assignment. She's very excited about it and I
know Gene is very excited.
Item the second, I just want to let everyone know --
Does she replace anyone?
MR. MCCURRY: I don't think so. I think it's just a
reflection of a power grab by Sperling around here, obviously.
(Laughter.)
Q
What about you?
MR. MCCURRY: What?
Q
What about you? Are you staying?
MR. MCCURRY: I have four deputies, so I don't need
another deputy. (Laughter.) Now, on second --
I didn't mean were you going to be Gene Sperling's
deputy, I mean, what about you staying as Press Secretary?
MR. MCCURRY: That's a subject only of interest to you
apparently, Sam.
Well, it is.
MR. MCCURRY: I've got work to do. At 9:30 a.m. on
Saturday morning, I'd like to assemble an in-town travel pool. I
think there's been some speculation on what the President's
appointment that morning is, and that's most likely correct. My
understanding is they will be going nearby, and that's all the detail
I have for you at this point. But just so people are not imagining
scenarios that they can't deal with, I just wanted to make sure that
Q
Would that presage a departure around 10:00 a.m. or
something like that?
MR. MCCURRY: In that neighborhood, or just before.
So we don't imagine anything, just nearby mean Bob
Bennett's office?
MR. MCCURRY: That's been speculated upon in the press
and I'm always amazed at how good reporters are around this town.
Q
And are reporters going to be allowed to cover?
MR. MCCURRY: I think that you're all familiar with what
the court's rulings have been related to the content of discussion of
litigation before the court, and I don't anticipate any of that's
changed.
Q
Well, Bennett is being quoted by Reuter I
suppose you saw the story -- as saying that the President has no
upset or trepidation about being in the same room with Ms. Jones, he
faces down world leaders constantly.
MR. MCCURRY: The latter part of that I know to be true,
because I've been there. The first part of that I haven't talked to
the President about.
Item the third, I've got a statement from Mr. Ruff, the
Counsel to the President. The Independent Counsel, Kenneth Starr,
and his staff, conducted an interview of Mrs. Clinton at the White
House this morning. As the President has previously announced, he
and Mrs. Clinton are cooperating fully with the Independent Counsel.
Mrs. Clinton voluntarily agreed when an interview was requested. The
interview was conducted under oath.
The subject matter was the acquisition in 1993-'94 by
the White House of certain FBI filing information concerning former
White House employees. And consistent with past practice, no
further statements about the content of the interview will be made at
this time. Thus ends the statement by Mr. Ruff.
Can you tell us at least how long the interview
took place?
MR. MCCURRY: I can't, although I imagine it was rather
brief.
Where?
MR. MCCURRY: I believe it was -- we need to
double-check that. I think it was in the residence, but we'll
double-check
that. And it began around 11:00 a.m.
How long did you know about this?
MR. MCCURRY: I found out about it a short while ago,
but that's consistent with the way that we've handled previous
opportunities that the President has had to meet with Mr. Starr and
his staff.
And do you know that it is in fact over?
MR. MCCURRY: It is over.
And Starr himself conducted this?
MR. MCCURRY: I will refer you to his office on that.
There were a number of people from his office there and Mrs.
Clinton's - probably Kendall --
Q
But Starr was present?
He was there, right?
MR. MCCURRY: He was there and people from his staff was
there. The question was, did he conduct the questioning. And then
there were representatives of the White House Legal Counsel Office
there.
Why was Mrs. Clinton involved in this?
MR. MCCURRY: I can't speak to that.
Was Mr. Kendall there?
MR. MCCURRY: I think Mr. Kendall was there, and also
representatives of the White House legal counsel.
Ruff, himself, or --
MR. MCCURRY: Ruff and another associate counsel from
the White House Legal Counsel staff.
Any other subjects today?
Q
Mr. Aziz says "lies," that we're making this up
about human experiments.
MR. MCCURRY: I watched a little bit of what he said and
I think that's very consistent with what the line of the government
of Iraq has been in the past. I didn't, frankly, see anything new in
what he was saying. And I think one of the reasons why the United
Nations continues to press the inspections regime in Iraq is because
of the deliberate concealment of information that they have
discovered international he course of their inspections. They have
found that statements from Mr. Aziz and others in the government are
not only not authoritative, they are untrue and apparently in some
case deliberately untrue, which is why they've continued the
inspections regime that is in place.
Q
I'm sorry, can you clarify as to whether the United
States has any independent evidence of human testing, or whether
we've reviewed any evidence at the U.N. through the inspectors and
view it as credible, any threshold evidence that this is taking
place?
MR. MCCURRY: I'm not aware that we have any independent
information, but at the same time, I think the United States would
consider a serious matter some of the reports, some of the
allegations that have been made. And we consider it proper that the
United Nations Special Commission would want to pursue those issues.
Q
Mike, the United States has known for some time
that there are allegations of human experimentation. Have we not
taken any trouble to find out whether we believe these? You're
laying it all off on the U.N.
MR. MCCURRY: We've been fully supportive of UNSCOM on
the ground in Iraq as they conduct their work, and Mr. Butler has
indicated that that is a matter that they are aggressively pursuing
on behalf of the United States government and all members of the
world community, as perfectly appropriate.
Q
Right, but the question, though, is does the U.S.
have an independent assessment as to the credibility of these
reports.
MR. MCCURRY: I said I'm not aware that we do have any
independent assessment. And we're relying on those who are on the
ground, working in behalf of the entire world community to learn the
truth.
Q
There are reports that no action will be taken
until after Butler goes back to Baghdad and then reports back.
MR. MCCURRY: That's not true. The U.N. Security
Council will be meeting today and will be considering the matter and
I should have -- I meant military action. If it
comes to that.
MR. MCCURRY: I think that we're pursuing and
increasingly exhausting the diplomatic avenues that are available,
but
What do you mean by "increasingly exhausting"? Are
you sending a signal?
MR. MCCURRY: No.
What do you mean? May I ask you to explain?
MR. MCCURRY: I'm just giving you a realistic report on
our efforts. We're making determined diplomatic effort to address
the matter and to resolve the matter.
Q
I simply meant, surely -- is it the intention,
however, to make certain that Mr. Butler's visit occurs before
further military action might be contemplated?
MR. MCCURRY: You're smart enough to know I would not
even speculate on that.
Q
What is your basis for saying that we are
increasingly exhausting diplomatic avenues?
MR. MCCURRY: Well, I think that we have pursued this
matter, and we've always said that it's not -- this is not an endless
loop in which we will just keep repeating the same episodes over and
over again.
Q
And once the diplomatic avenues are exhausted,
what's next?
MR. MCCURRY: We will continue to pursue diplomacy, and
as you've heard us say before, other options have not been ruled in
or out.
Q
Mike, as these diplomatic channels are being
exhausted, can you outline for us what channels, specifically what
channels are left, in your mind?
MR. MCCURRY: We have been pursuing this in concert with
other members of the U.N. Security Council, and given that the
derivative authority for the inspections to occur and the
requirements on Iraq arise from the post-Gulf War resolutions of the
Security Council, that will likely be the venue.
So what are you saying here?
MR. MCCURRY: That's where were pursuing the matter.
I'm not aware that there are other channels. I mean, there are
bilateral diplomacy that were pursuing in furtherance of our own
objectives, but we're working at the moment on the issue at the
Security Council.
Q
So once all of the channels at the U.N. are
exhausted, then you will consider that --
MR. MCCURRY: We would continue to work that issue
aggressively through our own diplomacy, of course.
Q
Two questions. Do you expect the vote today in the
Security Council? Secondly, has the President been conducting any of
that bilateral diplomacy?
MR. MCCURRY: I'm not aware that he has been because
it's been done within the Council and the Council has been seized of
the matter and has been listening to the report from Chairman Butler
today, and we expect them to take it up this afternoon. Whether or
not they complete action on any of the President's statement today
remains to be seen.
Q
You said this morning that bombing the Iraqis to
oblivion might make some people feel good, but what good would it do.
Does this suddenly change if there's a U.N. Security Council
resolution that doesn't --
MR. MCCURRY: What I suggested is that we have a clear
objective here, which is to learn what we need to know about the
government of Iraq's program and activity with respect to biological
weapons, chemical weapons, nuclear weapons and delivery systems for
any of those weapons. That's what they are required to tell us
about, required to allow inspections about under the terms of U.N.
Security Council Resolution 687. They have not complied with that,
they are deliberately obstructing the work of the United Nations, and
the United Nations now is trying to figure out how they can bring
pressure about to declare the objective, and that's the objective.
Q
Have you taken a whip count, any count in the
Senate? Senator Lott's office believes that he does know more about
the tobacco tempo over there than you do.
MR. MCCURRY: We haven't taken a whip count, but we've
talked to people on both sides of the aisle and talked to people who
believe it is very important for the United States Congress to take
action to stop kids from smoking and to work hard to put this
proposed tobacco settlement into law, and we believe there is a
strong majority in Congress that wants to do that. And if Senator
Lott believes that that cannot happen or should not happen, he should
explain why in greater detail, other than to try to blame it on Bill
Clinton.
But that's, of course, what he's done.
MR. MCCURRY: Well, we just take issue with that, and we
think there are very strong allies in the effort to get a good public
health policy here which will protect kids from tobacco use. And if
Senator Lott does not want to be a part of that effort, then we will
work with those who do, and we think that we will find plenty of
takers.
Q
Mike, is the administration planning a special
meeting of industrialized countries to discuss the Asia crisis, ahead
of G-8?
MR. MCCURRY: I am not aware of any. We have been
working with other industrialized nations and have been in close
contact with finance ministers through some of the work that people
in our government are doing, but let me check and see if there has
been any suggestion that there should be some kind of conference or
meeting.
Q
Mike, do you have any more information about the
vandal yesterday, who she is or why she did what she did?
MR. MCCURRY: No, I don't. I kind of kicked that over
to the Service, and I believe they're now referring questions to the
U.S. Attorney's Office, which I guess tells you what the status is.
Q
Mike, you said this morning you would discuss the
situation with fast track. Where is the administration at with that
right now?
MR. MCCURRY: We are obviously, with the premise that
the President believes that negotiating authority is an important way
for him to continue the economic progress this country has enjoyed
because free and open trade has been one of the fundamental tenets of
the strong we have, we've been consulting closely with both
Republicans and Democrats on the Hill in an effort to determine what
the best avenue is for obtaining for the President the authority he
needs to negotiate those kinds of trade deals.
We fully intend to submit legislation for obtaining fast
track authority, and the primary purpose of these consultations on
the Hill has been to determine what for the legislation should take
so that we can address the concerns that have been raised on both
sides of the aisle, but especially in the House of Representatives.
I think all of you know in the Senate there's strong support for free
and open trade and fast track authority, and a majority of Democrats
who support the President's desire to have that authority.
But doesn't that still leave open the possibility
you might not put the legislation forward? You say you fully intend
to.
MR. MCCURRY: We fully intend to proceed and we're
working these consultations aggressively on the theory that we will
proceed.
Q
Besides the meeting with Jesse Jackson tomorrow,
what else is Clinton going to be doing in New York?
MR. MCCURRY: He's got one or two private meetings and
we may have an event that I think will be particularly important to
those who care about law enforcement in New York City and are
impressed with the effort to reduce crime in that city.
Has that come together yet, or we don't know?
MR. LOCKHART: It's not complete --
MR. MCCURRY: We may do that.
Q
Giuliani has been given credit by a lot of people
for lowering the crime rate in New York.
MR. MCCURRY: I don't know that we would necessarily
dispute that. There has been an aggressive effort in the city to
bring down crime rates, there's been a lot of effort to promote the
concept of community policing, which is something that the President
clearly feels very strongly about and fought hard to get the kind of
community policing effort through the Cops On The Street program that
he fought for. But I think that no one would doubt that Mayor
Giuliani has shown some leadership, as has the police force and
others.
Will he be there?
Would the Mayor be part of such an event?
MR. MCCURRY: I don't want to speculate further, given
that little head-nod that I just got from Mr. Lockhart.
Q
Yes, but mayors have welcomed Presidents, I mean,
that's routine, from both parties.
MR. MCCURRY: It's been fairly routine that Mayor
Giuliani does so from time to time when the President's in New York.
Q
Mike, what does he hope to accomplish in this
appearance at this Jackson forum?
MR. MCCURRY: He's very impressed with the arguments
that Reverend Jackson has been making about empowerment of minorities
and women in inner-city areas and how they can become the potential
entrepreneurs of the future, and most importantly, the potential
markets for many of this nation's leading private enterprises. The
argument that Reverend Jackson often makes on Wall Street and to
corporate America is, you are cheating yourselves if you do not
include in your plans for the future the market potential of
America's inner cities, and you have a vested interest in promoting
the inclusion of minorities and women in programs that will make them
more proficient in the skills they need for becoming the workers of
the future, the entrepreneurs of the future and capitalizing them so
they can start up businesses and it's a very, very impressive
argument.
I think hearing Jesse Jackson with great fervor and
passion and tout the merits of capitalism is always an interesting
thing to hear. The President has heard him on that, and I think
wants to respond to his message by participating in a conference that
the Treasury Secretary will be at, that Chairman Greenspan will be
at, that Chairman Levitt of the Exchange will be at, a number of
business and corporate leaders will be at. His message will be,
we've got to empower these communities so they can share in the
prosperity of a growing U.S. economy.
Q
Does he have any new initiatives or will he just be
reviewing what he's said in the past?
MR. MCCURRY: He'll talk about some of the efforts that
you are familiar with and may who a little bit of -- may preview a
little bit some of the things that will be coming up in the budget,
but they will be consistent with the this administration's commitment
to restoring the health of America's inner cities and pursuing the
kind of investment strategies that can help those communities and
neighborhoods grow.
Q
What are the private meetings about, holding hands
with the New Yorkers who are angry that he has taken all the
fundraising --
MR. MCCURRY: I believe he's going to be meeting with a
leader in the Jewish community and maybe some other things, stuff
like that.
Q
No fundraisers?
MR. MCCURRY: No fundraising aspect to this trip that
I'm aware of.
Q
He backs Ms. Ferraro's bid, I take it. Although
that's in the primary, so I take it he doesn't.
MR. MCCURRY: You can take it that we will honor the
tradition of letting good candidates vie for that office, but she
clearly is a good candidate as are some of the other rumored and
mentioned candidates and announced candidates.
Which Jewish community leader tomorrow?
MR. MCCURRY: We'll give you the full schedule and write
the story for you tomorrow.
Q
Some Western senators have apparently asked the
White House for help. They object to some Interior Department
proposal banning roads in national forests. Do you know anything
about that?
MR. MCCURRY: I know that we have been -- I'm sorry, who
did you say?
Q
I understood some Western senators complained
about --
Name one. (Laughter.)
MR. MCCURRY: I know that there haven't been -- there
has been some speculation that the Forest Service may be reviewing
our policy and our options regarding roadless areas currently in
national forests. The concern is one that is fairly obvious. We've
got -- they maintain already 372,000 miles of roads, and a lot of
them are in need of repair now. But the problem is that those that
are poorly built and are not adequately designed and constructed can
cause serious environmental damage to areas that are sometimes
important habitats for wildlife, and they're obviously important to
recreational users of national forests. They cause sometimes soil
damage and so forth.
So anyhow, the Forest Service has been considering how
they can proceed with building any new roads. They've been talking
to all those who have got some stake in the economic livelihood of
the forests and uses of the forests. They're not going to adopt any
new roadless policies without first taking input from all interested
parties, and that would presume that they would want to consult very
closely with members of the Senate as well. But the concern that
they've got and the reason why they are attempting to address the
issue I think are well-placed.
Q
Mike, a group of political leaders yesterday called
for relaxing the embargo on Cuba to allow food sales. Does the
administration have a position on that?
MR. MCCURRY: Have you guys got that? I forgot to take
a look at that. Yes, we have a position right here. Let me read it
first and see if I agree with it. (Laughter.)
Yes, what this is -- the bottom line is that we have
had, because of our humanitarian concerns, we have allowed food sales
under some conditions in the past. That's permitted under the Cuban
Democracy Act. We've also allowed firms to export medicines, medical
supplies and equipment to Cuba in that time, and we've licensed
donations of over $227 million in medicines and medical supplies.
Whether or not we would work to include other types of
humanitarian assistance or, for example, food is something that we de
pursue consistent with the Cuban Democracy Act, and there's most
likely authority under that act to take a look at.
Q
Existing authority then -- you'd see what could be
done under existing authority rather than supporting --
MR. MCCURRY: Existing authority and we would consult
with Congress further. But a point that I would make about that is
that we're talking about the conditions that arise because of the
economic policies and the political authority that suppresses the
people of Cuba, and the ability that they have to generate a
sustenance and livelihood for themselves, which is one of the
consequences of the totalitarian system that they have.
Q
The FCC said today that the cable TV rates are
rising four times as fast as inflation. Does it raise any concerns
here? Does the White House have any thoughts on how to control those
costs?
MR. MCCURRY: I think that we have been following the
debate about deregulation and paying attention to the conditions that
consumers face, particularly in the wake of telecommunications
deregulation. But let me get some more on that. I haven't looked at
that particular finding or study by the FCC.
Any Buddy news? We haven't heard from him in a
while.
MR. MCCURRY: No, I've kind of I think we've had
enough of that. (Laughter.)
Q
Can we find out how long the interview was?
MR. MCCURRY: Let me check and see if we can do
something further for you.
THE PRESS: Thank you.
END
1:02 P.M. EST
#454-01/14
Message Sent
To:
Sharolyn A. Rosier
Lori E. Abrams
Jeannetta P. Allen
Lori Anderson
Brenda M. Anders
Eli G. Attie @ OVP@EOP
Patrick Aylward
Robin J. Bachman
Kyle M. Baker
Kris M Balderston
Beverly J. Barnes
David S. Beaubaire
Marsha E. Berry
antony j. blinken
Alexander L. Boyle
Lanny A. Breuer
Patrick E. Briggs
Katharine Button
Robin J. Bachman
Allison Balderston
Barbara D. Woolley
Bradley M. Campbell
Phillip Caplan
Joseph W. Cerrell @ OVP@EOP
David K. Chai
Andrei H. Cherny @ ovp@eop
Nanda Chitre
Steven A. Cohen
Julianne B. Corbett
Michelle Crisci
Anna E. Cushing
Suzanne Dale
Lanny J. Davis
Elliot J. Diringer
Daniel W. Burkhardt
Diane Ikemiyashiro
Dorian V. Weaver
Dorinda A. Salcido
Anne M. Edwards
Rahm Emanuel
Karen C. Fahle
Julie A. Fernandes
Karen E. Finney
Carmen B. Fowler
Ben A. Freeland
Jeremy M. Gaines
Grace A. Garcia
Jessica L. Gibson
Adam W. Goldberg
Jason S. Goldberg
Dario J. Gomez
Peter D. Greenberger
Donald Goldberg
Richard Hayes
Russell W. Horwitz
Maureen A. Hudson
Thomas D. Janenda
david t. johnson
Leanne I. Johnson
Michele Jolin
James M. Teague
Jon P. Jennings
Julie E. Mason
David E. Kalbaugh
William R. Kincaid
Allison J. King
Catherine T. Kitchen
Sarah S. Freeman
Jim Kohlenberger @ OVP@EOP
Heidi Kukis @ OVP@EOP
Sara M. Latham
Christopher J. Lavery
Anne H. Lewis
Joseph P. Lockhart
Laura D. Schwartz
Lisa J. Levin
Christine N. Macy
Michael D. Malone
Laura S. Marcus
Tanya E. Martin
Doris O. Matsui
Andrew J. Mayock
Anne E. McGuire
Estela Mendoza
R. Scott Michaud
Elisa Millsap
Cheryl D. Mills
Megan C. Moloney
Tamara Monosoff
Kevin Moran
Jonathan Murchinson
Melissa M. Murray
Reuben L. Musgrave Jr.
Sean P. Maloney
Michael V. Terrell
Steven J. Naplan
Mark D. Neschis
Elizabeth R. Newman
Neera Tanden
Michael A. O'Mary
Jonathan Orszag
Peter R. Orszag
Kristen E. Panerali
Carole A. Parmelee
Sally P. Paxton
Julia M. Payne
Peter O'Keefe
Nicole R. Rabner
Victoria Radd
Nelson Reyneri
Charles F. Ruff
Peter Rundlet
Virginia N. Rustique
Evan Ryan
Roger V. Salazar
G. Timothy Saunders
Judithanne V. Scourfield
Brooks Scoville
Ruby Shamir
Douglas S. Sheorn
June Shih
Robert M. Shireman
Jake Siewert
Joshua Silverman
Brian D. Smith
Craig T. Smith
Richard Socarides
Douglas B. Sosnik
Maria E. Soto
Elisabeth Steele
Aviva Steinberg
Todd Stern
Darby E. Stott
Diane A. Stumpf
Michael J. Sullivan
Jonathan H. Schnur @ OVP@EOP
Tracy F. Sisser
Sylvia M. Mathews
Lisa Tamagni
Virginia M. Terzano @ ovp@eop
terri tingen
Amy W. Tobe
Barry J. Toiv
Serena C. Torrey
Paul A. Tuchmann
June G. Turner
Thurgood Marshall Jr
Dag Vega
Michael Waldman
Angelina Walker @ ovp@eop
Glen M. Weiner
Lowell A. Weiss
Woyneab M. Wondwossen
Debra S. Wood
William H. White Jr.
meglynn @usia.gov@INET@LNGTWY
SUNTUM_M@A1@CD@LNGTWY
SUNTUM_M@A1@CD@LNGTWY
[email protected]@INET@LNGTWY
COGDELL_C@A1@CD@LNGTWY
backup @wilson.ai.mit.edu@INET@LNGTWY
wh-outbox-distr @clinton.ai.mit.edu@INET@LNGTWY
BARBUSCHAK_K@A1@CD@LNGTWY
BARTHOLOME_M@A1@CD@LNGTWY
BARTHOLOW_T@A1@CD@LNGTWY
CROWLEY_P@A1@CD@LNGTWY
CUTLER_L@A1@CD@LNGTVY
DICKEY_L@A1@CD@LNGTWY
GERHARDT_K@A1@CD@LNGTWY
GRAY_W@A1@CD@LNGTWY
GRIBBEN_J@_A1@CD@LNGTVY
HAAS_L@A1@CD@LNGTWY
JOHNSON_WC@A1@CD@LNGTWY
LIZIK_C@A1@CD@LNGTWY
MOFFETT_J@A1@CD@LNGTWY
PR_U=TDIXON@PR_L=AVUOEOB@MRP@LNGTWY
RILEY_R@A1@CD@LNGTWY
NAPLAN_S@A1@CD@LNGTWY
SMITH_BD@A1@CD@LNGTWY
TCSmith@ dol.gov@INET@LNGTVY
WEINER_R@A1@CD@LNGTWY
WOZNIAK_N@A1@CD@LNGTWY
julie_green @ed.gov@INET@LNGTWY
usia01 @ access.digex.com@INET@LNGTWY
1=US@2=WESTERNUNION@3=@5=ATT.COM@ELN62955104@MRX@LNGTWY
62955104 @ eln.attmail.com@INET@LNGTWY
INFOMGT@A1@CD@LNGTWY
newsdesk @ usnewswire.com@INET@LNGTWY
usnwire @access.digex.com@INET@LNGTWY
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Russell W. Horwitz (CN=Russell W. Horwitz/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD
CREATION DATE/TIME:20-JAN-1998 18:24:44.00
SUBJECT:
TO: Michelle Crisci (CN=Michelle Crisci/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO]
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, D.C.
National Economic Council
Special Assistant to the National Economic Adviser
January
1997-Present
Assist the National Economic Adviser on all aspects of economic, political
and budgetary issues. Draft talking points, press guidance, message
documents and memoranda involving a wide range of international and
domestic issues.
Major issues include fast track authority, the Asian financial crisis,
China MFN, tax policy and budget issues. Serve as a conduit to and from
NEC Director and his 15 person policy staff. Responsible for prioritizing
and analyzing issues for the Director, and coordinating issue interaction
with staff from the NEC, other White House offices and Federal agencies.
Aided in the formulation, fact checking and proofreading of Presidential
briefing materials. Handled press inquiries for the Director and helped
in preparation for press conferences and press briefings. Responsible for
extensive system of economic statistics and information, briefing books,
policy briefs and classified materials.
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Elisabeth Steele CN=Elisabeth Steele/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO
CREATION DATE/TIME:22-JAN-1998 19:23:17.00
SUBJECT: For Your Separate Memo
TO: Thurgood Marshall Jr (CN=Thurgood Marshall Jr/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Martin Luther King,s Birthday: This week fifteen Members of the Cabinet
and the members of the Race Advisory Board joined you in commemorating Dr.
King,s birthday by participating in service projects around the country
that focus on bringing diverse communities together. The Attorney General
helped to rehabilitate a home in Jackson, MS, Secretary Slater joined
volunteers at Andrew Shue's "Do Something" event at the King Center in
Atlanta, Secretary Babbitt rang the liberty bell in Philadelphia, and
Secretary Shalala participated in a volunteerism event in Baltimore. In
Washington, DC, Director Raines and Chair Yellen spent the day with
Horton's kids.
Northeastern Ice Storms: Last week, your Administration, led by FEMA
responded aggressively to the ice storms that have hit the Northeast. The
Vice President and Director Witt visited ME and TN and the Director
visited NY. FEMA, SBA, USDA, and DOE maintained a strong presence in the
affected states. The Pentagon responded quickly to a request for air
support to transport power trucks from NC to ME.
The President's Initiative on Race: In early December, with the help of
the General Services Administration, the Regional Administrators set up
approximately 80 Local Town Meetings on race in 24 different states across
the country. Each site attracted local press coverage and hosted conve
rsations discussing your Akron Town Meeting. In October, Administrator
Alvarez introduced two iniatives to increase the participation of Hispanic
and African American-owned businesses in SBA,s programs over the next
three years. In the same month, USDA completed work on 56 of the 92
recommendations, or 60 percent, from Secretary Glickman,s Civil Rights
Action Team report, which was released last February.
Hate Crimes Conference: On November 10, seven members of your Cabinet and
Sub-Cabinet participated in the White House Conference on Hate Crimes.
Each member participated in breakout sessions addressing different aspects
of hate crimes. Following the breakout sessions, the Cabinet assembled to
discuss their findings.
72 regional satellite conferences were held around the country.
Childcare Conference: In October of last year, the Cabinet lent
significant support to the White House Conference on Childcare, with
events in Washington, D.C., and around the country. HHS, DOL, USDA and GSA
sponsored satellite conference sessions. Secretaries Shalala, Herman,
Glickman, Riley, Slater and Cuomo and Director Barram participated in
luncheon sessions at the agencies to solicit input from the participants.
Regional Administrators sponsored over 90 satellite conferences in 42
states. Reports from the 115 regional satellite sites confirmed an
intense interest in the White House Child Care Conference..
Climate Change: Also in October, eleven members of the Cabinet
participated in the White House Conference on Climate Change and created
constructive working relationships with many of the businesses and
environmental participants. The conference was telecast live into 33
Administration-sponsored working sessions in every region of the country.
The Cabinet made calls to key Senators and Members of Congress seeking
their views on the issue. Secretaries Peda, Glickman and Babbitt,
Administrator Browner and Under Secretary Wirth called 40 of the 50
largest editorial boards in the country after your climate change speech
at National Geographic. Cabinet and Sub-Cabinet officials have also
called numerous regional and national radio outlets.
Back to School: DOEd reported that from August to October, the Cabinet
attended over 90 "Back to School" events throughout the country. In
addition, Secretary Riley participated in 22 events, while the
Department's senior staff and regional administrators joined nearly 330
events in 40 states. The Administration's ten-point "Call to Action" was
the focus of each event.
Fast Track: In October, Members of the Cabinet sought the support of key
Senators and Members of Congress on Fast Track. The Cabinet held a number
of press events this week, including Secretary Albright ,S interview on
Larry King Live and Secretary Glickman and Ambassador Scher's press
roundtable on agriculture issues. Secretary Rubin addressed the Business
Round Table, met with outside trade groups on Capitol Hill, and delivered
a speech on globalization. Ambassador Barshevsky continued to conduct
extensive media interviews and visits to the Hill and met with the BRT and
trade groups. Secretary Herman used a visit to Houston to speak on Fast
Track and hosted the Labor Ministers from eight Central American nations.
Secretary Daley met with Washington Business Representatives.
Members of your Cabinet also conducted numerous regional media interviews
in key markets to educate the American people about the significance of
providing you with fast track authority.
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY [ WHO
CREATION DATE/TIME:27-JAN-1998 15:07:30.00
SUBJECT: State of the Union Background Packet on Initiatives
TO: Stephanie M. Gowen@eop ( Stephanie M. Gowen@eop [ ONDCP
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Lisa J. Levin
01/27/98 02:46:25 PM
Record Type: Record
To: See the distribution list at the bottom of this message
cc: David S. Beaubaire/WHO/EOP
Subject: State of the Union Background Packet on Initiatives
PREPARING AMERICA FOR THE 21st CENTURY
Background on President Clinton!,s Agenda for the Nation
State of the Union Address
January 27, 1998
AN ECONOMY THAT OFFERS OPPORTUNITY
ENTITLEMENT REFORM
Reserve Surplus until Social Security is Reformed
Over the next two years, President Clinton is firmly committed to
strengthening Social Security for the 21st century. He therefore
proposes that we should not spend any of the projected budget
surpluses on anything else until we have reformed Social
Security. This proposal, which continues the fiscally
responsible policies that have been the hallmark of this
Administration, is intended to reserve the surpluses in case they
are needed for Social Security reform.
EDUCATION
Small Classes with Qualified Teachers to Improve Reading in
Grades 1-3
President Clinton is proposing a $12.4 billion initiative over 7
years ($7.3 billion over 5 years) to help local schools provide
small classes with qualified teachers in the early grades. This
initiative will help ensure that every child receives personal
attention, learns to read independently, and gets a solid
foundation for further learning. The new initiative will reduce
class size from a nationwide average of 22 in grades 1-3 to an
average of 18, providing funds to help local school districts
hire an additional 100,000 well-prepared teachers. The
initiative will also provide funds to states and local school
districts to test new teachers, develop more rigorous teacher
testing and certification requirements, and train teachers in
effective reading instruction practices. School districts will
be accountable for demonstrating gains in reading achievement.
These steps will help ensure that first through third grade
students are receiving high-quality reading instruction in
smaller classes from competent teachers.
Modern School Buildings to Improve Student Learning
For students to learn, schools must be well-equipped and be able
to accommodate smaller class sizes. To address these and other
critical needs, President Clinton is proposing federal tax
credits to pay interest on nearly $22 billion in bonds to build
and renovate public schools. This initiative provides more than
double the assistance of the Administration!,s earlier school
construction proposal, which covered half the interest on an
estimated $20 billion in bonds. The tax credits will cost the
Treasury $5 billion over 5 years, and more than $10 billion over
ten years. Of the $22 billion in bond authority, nearly $20
billion for a new School Modernization Bonds. Half of this bond
authority will be allocated to the 100 school districts with the
largest number of low-income children, and the other half will be
allocated to the states.
Education Opportunity Zones:
Helping Students in Poor Communities Reach High Standards
This initiative will strengthen public schools and help students
master the basic and advanced skills where the need is greatest:
in high-poverty urban and rural communities where low
expectations, too many poorly prepared teachers, and overwhelmed
school systems create significant barriers to high achievement.
The Education Department will select approximately fifty high-
poverty urban and rural school districts with: (1) a demonstrated
commitment to use high standards and tests as tools to identify
and provide help to students, teachers and schools who need it;
(2) a strategy to prevent students from falling behind by
ensuring quality teaching, challenging curricula, and extended
learning time; (3) programs to end social promotion and turn
around failing schools; and (4) evidence of improved student
achievement. Added investments in these communities will
accelerate their progress and provide models of successful,
standards-based reform for the nation. The President's
initiative will invest $200 million in FY99, and $1.5 billion
over 5 years, in raising achievement and sharing lessons learned
with school districts around the country.
Early Intervention to Promote College Attendance
President Clinton will soon announce a long-term effort to bring
college opportunity to children in high-poverty areas by
providing their families with early information about financial
aid and appropriate academic preparation, as well as mentoring
and other support services to help the children stay on track
through high school graduation and into college.
LEADING THE GLOBAL ECONOMY
Fast Track
America needs fast track to continue to create higher-paying jobs
for more Americans. Without it, America!,s role as the largest
exporter in the world will be put in jeopardy. And with new
markets opening around the world, it is more important than ever
to give the President traditional trade authority to break down
trade barriers that put American products made by American
workers at a disadvantage. Fast track legislation is essentially
an agreement between Congress and the president on how Congress
will consider United States trade agreements negotiated by the
President. As part of that deal, the President agrees to
extensively consult and coordinate with Congress throughout trade
negotiations. In return, Congress votes on legislation
implementing trade deals within a fixed period of time, on a up
or down basis, and with no amendments. Every president since 1974
has enjoyed fast track authority.
Africa Trade Initiative
We are working with members from both parties to secure swift
passage of legislation that will bring the promise of 21st
century prosperity to African nations that are prepared to
undertake the hard work of reform. This legislation will
introduce a new era of prosperity and partnership between African
reformers and the United States, expanding trade opportunities
for African and American workers, farmers and companies, and hope
and opportunity for our children. This legislation will
encourage African nations to undertake sound growth policies by
expanding trade and encouraging investment.
Child Labor
This initiative will make the U.S. a world leader in the fight to
reduce child labor. The initiative focuses on reducing the most
intolerable forms on child labor --!&slavery!8 through forced
or
indentured labor, work by very young children, and work in
dangerous conditions -- by increasing the nation!,s contribution
to the International Program for the Elimination of Child Labor
(IPEC) from $3 million to $30 million. The proposal also calls
for additional agents for the U.S. Customs Service to enforce the
ban on the importation of goods made with forced or indentured
child labor, with a particular focus on rugs from South Asia. On
the domestic front, the proposal includes a $50 million increase
in migrant education to serve 100,000 more children of migrant
farm workers and a $9 million increase in the Department of Labor
budget to enforce U.S. child labor laws -- especially in the
agricultural sector.
Community and Economic Adjustment Initiative
To help communities compete in a global economy, the Community
and Economic Adjustment Initiative will borrow a page from the
Administration's successful adjustment effort for base closure
communities. Modeled after the Defense Department's highly
respected Office of Economic Adjustment, the Office of Community
and Economic Adjustment (OCEA) will provide grants and other
assistance to communities to develop an economic adjustment
strategy. The President will propose $50 million in additional
community adjustment assistance as part of the Commerce
Department's Economic Development Administration!,s (EDA)
budget.
This will allow us to do more for communities that have suffered
through sudden and severe economic dislocation, such as plant
closings. As OEA has done for base closure communities, OCEA
will closely with the Departments of Labor, Housing and Urban
Development, Transportation, and other federal agencies to make
communities aware of all available federal resources and to
provide a coordinated Administration response.
TRAINING
Reform of the Federal Job Training System
The President renewed his call for Congressional action to reform
the job training system. In his 1995 G.I. Bill for America!,s
Workers, he called for individual empowerment through skills
grants, streamlining through One Stop Career Centers, and better
results through tough performance standards. The House has
passed legislation based on his vision. The Workforce Investment
Partnership Act has bipartisan support and is under consideration
in the Senate.
A SOCIETY ROOTED IN RESPONSIBILITY
MOVING PEOPLE FROM WELFARE TO WORK
Welfare to Work Housing Vouchers
The President's budget will provide $283 million in FY99 for 50,
000 new housing vouchers for welfare recipients who need housing
assistance to get or keep a job. Families could use these
housing vouchers to move closer to a new job, to reduce a long
commute, or to secure more stable housing to eliminate
emergencies that keep them from getting to work every day on
time. These vouchers, awarded to communities on a competitive
basis, will give people on welfare a new tool to make the
transition to a job and succeed in the work place. The proposal
will complement the President!,s $100 million a year welfare to
work transportation plan, part of his NEXTEA bill, which will
help welfare recipients make their daily commutes.
Increasing Child Support Collections
President Clinton!,s crackdown on deadbeat parents is paying
off:
child support collections rose to a record $13 billion in 1997,
an increase of 63 percent since 1992. In the State of the Union,
the President set a goal of increasing collections to $20 billion
by the year 2000.
Falling Welfare Caseloads
The President announced that we have met -- two years ahead of
schedule the challenge he made in last year!,s State of the
Union to move two million more Americans off of welfare by the
year 2000. New caseload numbers show that welfare caseloads fell
by 4.3 million since President Clinton took office, two million
more than the 2.25 million decline he announced last year. The
new figures, from September 1997, show 9.8 million Americans on
welfare, down from 14.1 million in January 1993 -- a drop of 30
percent.
Business Welfare to Work Commitments
In his State of the Union address last year, the President
challenged the business community to create jobs so that people
can move from welfare to work. Today, nearly 3,000 companies
have accepted the President!,s challenge and joined a new
national
effort, called the Welfare to Work Partnership, which was
launched at the White House in May. Now, the President has
challenged thousands more companies to join the Partnership to
give even more people a chance to work their way off welfare.
HEALTH CARE
Protecting Patients Through a Consumer Bill of Rights and Genetic
Screening Protections
The President called on Congress to pass federally enforceable
consumer health care protections before it adjourns this fall.
This Health Care Bill of Rights should contain a range of
protections, including guaranteed access to needed health care
specialists to ensure that patients are provided appropriate high
quality care, access to emergency room services when and where
the need arises, an assurance that medical records are
confidential, and access to a meaningful internal and external
appeals process for consumers to resolve their differences with
their health plans and health care providers. The nation!,s
health care system has changed dramatically, with more than 100
million Americans now in managed care plans. This legislation
will ensure that whether Americans have traditional health
insurance or managed care, they are assured quality care. And to
ensure that new advances in genetics are used to improve health
rather than to discriminate, the President has called for
legislation prohibiting the use of genetic screening to
discriminate in health insurance and employment.
Creating a Historic !&21 Century Research Fund!8
With Unprecedented Increases in Biomedical Research at the
National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Scientists are on the cusp of important new breakthroughs in
biomedical research, which could revolutionize the way medical
experts understand, treat, and prevent some of our most
devastating diseases. To promote this progress, the
President!,s
budget contains a historic upfront investment in biomedical
research -- a 1.15 billion increase in FY 1999 -- and proposes an
increase in NIH funding of more than 50 percent over the next
five years. Under the President!,s proposal, the NIH will
devote
over $20 billion to biomedical research in 2003.
Providing New Options for Americans Ages 55 to 65 to Obtain
Health Insurance, Including Buying Into Medicare
Americans ages 55 to 65 are one of the most difficult-to-insure
populations: they have less access to and a greater risk of
losing employer-based health insurance; and they are twice as
likely to have health problems as the population generally. The
President!,s proposal gives this vulnerable population three new
ways to gain access to health insurance by: (1) allowing
Americans ages 62 to 65 to buy into Medicare, through a premium
that ensures that this policy is self-financed; (2) assisting
vulnerable displaced workers 55 and over by offering those who
have involuntarily lost their jobs and health care coverage a
similar Medicare buy-in option; and (3) giving Americans 55 and
over who have lost their retiree benefits access to their former
employers !, health insurance.
TOBACCO
Passing Comprehensive Bipartisan Tobacco Legislation That Reduces
Teen Smoking and Changes the Way Tobacco Companies Do Business
Every day 3,000 young people start smoking and 1,000 of them will
die prematurely from a tobacco-related disease. The President
called on Congress to pass comprehensive national bipartisan
legislation that includes five key principles: (1) it must
mandate the development of a comprehensive plan to reduce teen
smoking, including raising the cost of cigarettes by $1.50 per
pack over the next 10 years as necessary to meet youth smoking
targets; (2) it must affirm the FDA !,s full authority to
regulate
tobacco products; (3) it must include measures to hold tobacco
companies accountable, especially for marketing products to
children; (4) it must include concrete measures to improve public
health, from investing in research to reducing second-hand smoke
to expanding smoking cessation; and (5) it must protect the
financial well-being of tobacco farmers and their communities
from the loss of income caused by our efforts to reduce smoking.
CHILD CARE INITIATIVE
Double the Number of Children Receiving Child Care Subsidies
to More than Two Million
The President proposed to expand the Child Care and Development
Block Grant to help working families struggling to meet the costs
of child care. This block grant is the primary federal subsidy
program to pay for child care, enabling low-income parents to
work. Funds are distributed by formula to the states to operate
direct child care subsidy programs, as well as to improve the
quality and availability of care. The President !,s initiative
will more than double the number of children served from the one
million served in FY 95 (the latest year for which data are
available). The President !,s budget will increase funding for
the
block grant by $7.5 billion (plus a state match) over five years,
which will enable states to provide subsidies for more than two
million children by 2003.
Increase Tax Credits for Child Care for Three Million Working
Families
The Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit provides tax relief to
taxpayers who pay for the care of a child under 13 or a disabled
dependent or spouse in order to work. The credit is equal to a
percentage of the taxpayer !,s employment-related expenditures
for
child or dependent care, with the amount of the credit depending
on the taxpayer !,s income. The President !,s proposal
increases the
credit for families earning under $60,000, providing an
additional average tax cut of $358 for these families and
eliminating income tax liability for almost all families with
incomes below 200% of poverty ($35,000 for a family of four) that
claim the maximum allowable child care expenses. The
President !,s
budget will include $5.2 billion over five years to expand the
Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit for three million working
families.
Provide New Business Tax Credits
The child care initiative includes a tax credit to businesses
that provide child care services for their employees, by building
or expanding child care facilities, operating existing
facilities, training child care workers, or providing child care
resources and referral services. The credit covers 25% of
qualified costs, but may not exceed $150,000 per year. The
President !,s budget will include approximately $500 million over
five years for these tax credits.
Promote Early Learning
Research shows that children !,s experiences in the earliest
years
are critical to their development and future success. The
President !,s proposed Early Learning Fund provides challenge
grants to communities (distributed by states) to improve early
learning and the quality and safety of child care for children
ages zero to five. Funds may be used for the following
activities: providing basic training to child care providers
(including first aid and CPR); connecting individual child care
providers to centers for education and support; assisting child
care providers to meet accreditation and licensing requirements;
linking child care providers with health professionals, and
supporting the inclusion of young children with special needs in
quality child care settings; reducing group sizes and child-to-
staff ratios; and providing home visits, parent education, and
consumer education about child care. The President !,s Early
Learning Fund builds on state initiatives such as North
Carolina !,
S Smart Start, which helps North Carolina !,s children enter
school
healthy and ready to succeed. The President !,s budget will
include $3 billion over five years for this fund.
Increase Head Start and Double the Number of Children Served by
Early Head Start
Head Start provides early, continuous and comprehensive child
development and family support services, preparing children for a
lifetime of learning and development. The President !,s budget
will invest an additional $3.8 billion over five years to reach
his goal of serving one million children by 2002, and doubling
the number of infants and toddlers in Early Head Start to 80,000.
Step Up Enforcement of State Health and Safety Standards
Building on the military !,s model child care program, this
proposed initiative will fund state efforts to improve licensing
systems and enforce child care health and safety standards,
including by increasing unannounced inspections of child care
settings. The President !,s budget will include $500 million
over
five years for this program.
Facilitate Background Checks on Child Care Providers
On the day of the White House Conference on Child Care, the
President transmitted to Congress the National Crime Prevention
and Privacy Compact, which will facilitate effective background
checks on child care providers by eliminating state law barriers
to sharing criminal history information for non-criminal
purposes. Although the vast majority of child care providers are
dedicated to the teaching and nurturing of children, one tragedy
in child care is too many. Background checks are an important
way to ensure that the people watching our children are fit for
this responsibility.
Increase Scholarships and Training for Child Care Providers
At the White House Conference on Child Care, the President
proposed establishing a Child Care Provider Scholarship Fund to
enable states to provide scholarship funds to students working
toward a child care credential. Eligible child care workers must
commit to remaining in the field for at least one year for each
year of assistance received and will earn increased compensation
or bonuses when they complete their course work. The President
proposed a federal investment of $250 million over five years,
which will support 50,000 scholarships per year. The President
is also proposing to expand the Department of Labor !,s Child
Care
Apprenticeship Program to fund the training of child care
providers.
Invest in Research
Because too little is known about our child care system, the
President !,s budget will increase support for data, research,
and
evaluation. This research fund will also support a National
Center on Child Care Statistics and a child care hotline that
parents can call to get information about how to find child care
in their communities and how to identify appropriate, quality
care for their children. In addition, the research fund will
support demonstration projects to test approaches to help new
parents who choose to stay home to care for their newborns or
newly adopted children. The President !,s budget will include
$150
million over five years for this fund.
Provides After-School Care for up to Half a Million Children a
Year
The President proposes a dramatic expansion of the 21 st Century
Community Learning Center Program to provide start-up funds (with
a local match) to school-community partnerships to establish or
expand before- and after-school programs for school-age children.
The program increases the supply of after-school care in a cost-
effective manner by directing most funds to programs that use
public schools and their existing resources, such as computers,
gymnasiums, and sports equipment. The program also includes a
set-aside to fund programs run by community organizations. The
President !,s budget will request $800 million of new money for
this program, for a total of $1 billion over five years.
CRIME
Juvenile Crime Strategy
This initiative recognizes the threat juvenile crime poses to our
communities and calls on Congress to pass a comprehensive anti-
gang and youth violence strategy. The President !,s proposed
legislation targets gangs and violent juveniles by (1) funding
for new prosecutors ($100 million) and probation officers ($60
million); (2) helping our kids to stay gun- and drug-free by
preventing violent juveniles from buying guns when they turn 21;
(3) enacting tough new sentences to punish adults who sell drugs
to kids and use kids to sell drugs; (4) helping kids to stay in
school, off drugs, and out of trouble with new funding to keep
schools open later and to promote anti-truancy initiatives and
curfews ($95 million). In addition, the President !,s Child Care
Initiative increases five-fold current funding for Department of
Education-sponsored after school programs.
AMERICAN LEADERSHIP IN THE WORLD
NATO Enlargement
Europe's stability and America's security are closely linked.
The President !,s call for enlarging the NATO alliance
strengthens
the alliance's core mission of collective defense and helps meet
new threats such as regional instability. Enlargement furthers
other US objectives including: Encouraging states in the region
to settle border and ethnic disputes with neighbors; strengthen
civilian control of their militaries; and increase tolerance for
ethnic and religious minorities. NATO's enlargement, combined
with the Partnership for Peace program, the NATO-Russia Founding
Act and the NATO-Ukraine partnership will help erase the outdated
Cold War divisions and build, for the first time, an undivided,
democratic, and peaceful Europe.
Securing the Peace in Bosnia
The United States has an abiding interest in peace and stability
in Bosnia and a compelling interest in the implementation of the
Dayton peace accords. After 46 months of the worst war in Europe
since WWII, 24 months of implementing peace have helped put
Bosnia on the path to lasting peace and stability. Progress on
implementation was made possible because of prudent military
support. We can now see the point where civil implementation
and peace can be self-sustaining but Bosnia's fragile peace
still needs the support of American and allied troops when the
current NATO mission ends in June. The President still must
approve a detailed action plan being prepared by NATO military
authorities after a full review of all options. The President
will insist that this action plan have the following elements: an
achievable mission tied to clear benchmarks, not a deadline;
force must be able to protect itself; the U.S. must retain
command; European allies must shoulder their full share of
responsibility; costs must be manageable; and the plan must have
substantial support of the Congress and the American people.
Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction Program (WMD)
President Clinton made clear that Iraq's efforts to develop
nuclear, chemical and biological weapons are unacceptable. U.N.
inspectors have done a remarkable job - destroying more of
Iraq !,
S WMD potential than was destroyed during the Gulf War itself.
But Saddam is now refusing to allow inspectors to complete their
mission. All options are on the table to make sure Iraq does not
pursue their WMD program with impunity and threaten the
international community.
Biological Weapons
President Clinton announced tonight that the United States would
lead the effort to erect stronger international barriers against
the proliferation and use of biological weapons. Under this new
initiative, the United States will seek to strengthen the
Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) by requiring nations that
have joined the BWC to submit annual declarations about
facilities and activities that could be used for Biological
weapon purposes and agree to a tough international inspection
system including both voluntary and mandatory inspections.
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)
The President's call for Senate ratification of the CTBT will
allow America to maintain a safe and reliable nuclear deterrent
while constraining the proliferation of nuclear material and
technology to rogue states' weapons programs. CTBT will improve
America's ability to detect and deter nuclear explosive testing.
CTBT's global network of sensors will strengthen America's
ability to monitor nuclear explosive testing across the globe, as
well as deter any nation from believing it can conduct a nuclear
explosive test undetected by the international community.
U.S. Arrears to the United Nations
The President also highlighted the need for prompt action on the
payment of U.S. arrears to the United Nations. The failure to
pay undermines our ability to reform the U.N. and hinders our
leadership of that organization at very time the U.N. is working
to prevent Iraq from threatening neighbors and the world with
weapons of mass destruction. We also need to give the
International Monetary Fund the capacity to help prevent global
financial crises. Now, more than ever, our security at home and
our interests abroad demand that America meet our international
obligations, sharpen the tools to improve the stability of the
world economy, and increase our leverage in international
organizations.
A NATION THAT LIVES BY COMMUNITY
POLITICAL REFORM/REINVENTING GOVERNMENT
Free Television Time
Spending on congressional campaigns has increased more than three
times the rate of inflation in the last decades and spending on
television is the primary reason. In 1972, candidates spent $25
million for political ads; in 1996, they spent $400 million. In
his State of the Union, President Clinton announced that will
request that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) require
broadcasters to give candidates for Federal office free time as a
condition of receiving a new, lucrative license for digital
television. It is time to update broadcasters !, public interest
obligations to meet new political and technological realities.
Enact Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform
The President remains committed to the enactment of bipartisan
campaign finance reform. He is pleased that the leadership in
Congress has agreed to schedule a vote this Spring on the McCain-
Feingold and Shays-Meehan reform bills. But a vote on these
bills is not enough. In his State of the Union the President
challenged Congress to enact real reform this year. Acceptable
campaign finance reform legislation must meet five criteria: 1)
it must be bipartisan; 2) it must be comprehensive; 3) it must
reduce the amount of money that is raised and spent on federal
elections; 4) it must help level the playing field between
challengers and incumbents; and 5) it cannot favor one party over
the other.
IRS Reform
President Clinton is strongly committed to reforming the IRS.
This spring the Administration will launch the first of 33
Citizen Advocacy Panels. These new panels will be locally-based,
independent boards of citizens established to monitor how local
IRS offices treat taxpayers and help taxpayers get their problems
solved. These new panels are part of the new era of customer
service underway at the IRS. The successful new IRS problem
solving days, which have helped thousands of taxpayers get
relief, will continue around the country on a monthly basis.
Additionally, as of the first of the year, IRS phones are now
operating 16 hours a day, six days a week. For the first time,
IRS offices will be open Saturday mornings during the tax filing
season March through mid-April to provide taxpayers a
convenient opportunity to walk-in and get any questions answered.
Also, the IRS expects this year to expand its award-winning
Telefile program. This innovative program allowed 4.7 million
taxpayers to file their returns with a quick average 10 minute
phone call last year.
COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
Since its creation in 1986, the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
(LIHTC) has given states tax credits of $1.25 per capita to
allocate to developers of affordable housing. Even though
building costs have increased 40 percent in the last decade, the
amount of the credit has not been adjusted for inflation.
Therefore, President Clinton and Vice-President Gore propose to
increase the cap on the LIHTC from $1.25 per capita to $1.75 per
capita !* restoring the value of the credit to its 1986 level.
Estimates suggest that the LIHTC currently helps build 80,000-90,
000 affordable housing units each year. The President and Vice
President !,s proposal to increase the cap by 40 percent will
create an additional 160,000-180,000 new rental housing units for
low-income American families over the next five years. This
proposal will cost $1.6 billion over five years.
Empowerment Zones
Building on the Administration !,s successful first round of
Empowerment Zones which has helped spur the creation of jobs and
private investment in America !,s distressed communities, the
President's budget includes a request for $1.7 billion to support
flexible grants to 20 new Empowerment Zone designations. The
funding will be made available to the designated communities over
a 10 year period. The 15 urban designations will be funded at
$100 million each; and the five rural designations will be funded
at $40 million each. The Departments of Housing and Urban
Development and Agriculture will announce a competition this
Spring that will lead to the designation of the 20 new
Empowerment Zones by December 1998.
!&Play-by-the-Rules !8 Homeownership Proposal
The President !,s FY99 budget provides funds for the Neighborhood
Reinvestment Corporation to start a new initiative to help
provide the opportunity of homeownership to responsible families
with a perfect rental history. Under this initiative, we will
help 10,000 lower-income and often minority -- families become
homeowners. While the method of helping each family buy their
own home will differ, responsible families we will be provided
homeownership counseling, flexible assistance for downpayment or
closing costs, second mortgage loans for debt reduction, or
rehabilitation loans.
Homeownership Zones
The FY99 budget includes funds for Homeownership Zones to be used
by communities to reclaim abandoned and distressed neighborhoods
through the creation of large-scale developments of owner-
occupied single-family homes. Funds could be used for property
acquisition, housing construction, housing rehabilitation,
demolition, site preparation, homeownership counseling,
relocation, housing marketing, activities to ensure fair housing,
and other activities essential to homeownership.
ENVIRONMENT
Climate Change Initiative
Following the historic agreement reached in Kyoto in December
1997, and as part of the President !,s and Vice President !,s
ongoing
efforts to address climate change, the President is proposing a
dramatic new program of tax cuts and R&D aimed at cutting
greenhouse gas emissions. The proposed package contains tax cuts
to promote energy efficiency and additional research and
development spending covering the four major carbon-emitting
sectors of the economy (buildings, industry, transportation, and
electricity), plus carbon removal and sequestration, Federal
facilities, and cross-cutting analyses and research. This
package complements the other elements of the Administration !,s
climate change plan, which include working with industry to
develop sector-by-sector initiatives to cut emissions,
incorporating energy efficiency goals into Federal procurement
and energy use, and restructuring the electricity industry.
These efforts strive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by
improving efficiency and reducing costs to the consumer. They
provide a solid step on the way to meeting the goals of the Kyoto
Agreement.
Clean Water Initiative
This initiative will ease threats to the environment and public
health by helping states and communities curb polluted runoff
from farms and city streets, reducing exposure to harmful
organisms and toxic contaminants in drinking water and fish, and
promoting community-based watershed management in partnership
with landowners and affected industries. The initiative targets
the 40 percent of the nation !,s waterways still unsafe for
fishing
and swimming. It provides substantial new resources to assist
states in implementing these programs and to create incentives
for farmers to adopt practices that protect water quality.
Food Safety Initiative
The Clinton Administration launched a new food safety initiative
last year to put in place new science-based preventive systems to
improve the safety of seafood, meat, and poultry and begin work
on a new early warning system to help detect and respond to
outbreaks of food borne illness. Our budget will seek an even
more substantial increase in funding to further enhance food
safety. The resources will go to a variety of initiatives,
including: giving FDA authority to prevent the importation of
produce from countries without safety precautions equivalent to
our own; hiring FDA inspectors to improve the safety of fruits
and vegetables, both domestic and imported; developing new ways
for federal inspectors to detect foodborne illnesses in meat and
poultry and determine the source of contamination; improving
educational outreach on proper food handling; and further
expanding our early warning system and strengthening state
surveillance activities for foodborne illnesses.
CIVIL RIGHTS
Reforming and Strengthening the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
This initiative expands the EEOC !,s ADR program over three years
to allow as many as 70 percent of all complainants to choose
mediation, rather than the lengthy process of investigation and
litigation. In the first year, the EEOC will provide ADR in a
projected 16,000 cases -- 20 percent of all incoming cases and
double the number currently sent to mediation. In addition,
through a combination of increased use of mediation, improved
information technology, and an expanded investigative staff, the
EEOC will reduce the average time it takes to resolve a private
sector complaint from over 9 months to 6 months, and reduce the
backlog of cases from 64,000 to 28,000 by the year 2000. The
proposal provides $279 million for the EEOC for FY99 -- $37
million or 15 percent more than the enacted 1998 budget.
THE MILLENIUM PROJECT
TECHNOLOGY
A Family-Friendly Internet
President Clinton and Vice President Gore support a strategy to
protect children and create a safe, educational environment on
the Internet that is consistent with our First Amendment values.
This strategy includes cracking down on obscenity, child
pornography, and online stalking, and encouraging the private
sector to develop filtering and blocking technology for parents
and teachers that is widely available and effective. This fall,
the Administration will join the private sector and non-profit
groups to support !&Internet Teach-Ins !8 at schools and
libraries,
which are designed to increase awareness of safe on-line behavior
for children and access to good content.
Making the Internet a Global Free-Trade Zone
The Administration is committed to creating an environment in
which global electronic commerce can flourish, so that every
computer will be a window open to every business, large and
small. Over the next several years, Internet commerce could
increase to hundreds of billions of dollars per year, boosting U.
S. exports and creating new opportunities for small start-up
companies. President Clinton has directed the U.S. Trade
Representative to work with foreign governments to secure
agreement that all products and services delivered across the
Internet and all equipment from which the Internet is built - be
free from tariffs.
Cloning
President Clinton has proposed legislation banning the cloning of
human beings. The President !,s legislative proposal prohibits
for
five years the use of somatic cell nuclear technology to create a
human being. The legislation directs the National Bioethics
Advisory Commission to report to the President in four and half
years on whether to continue the ban. The proposal is carefully
worded to ensure that it will not interfere with beneficial
biomedical and agricultural activities. In March 1997, the
President imposed a ban on the use of federal money for cloning
human beings.
Save America !,s Treasures
Many of our most important cultural treasures -- such as the Star
Spangled Banner, the Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of
Rights are seriously at risk. !&Save America !,s
Treasures !8 is a
three year, $150 million initiative that will help stimulate
support for the Nation !,s most important preservation
priorities.
The funds will be administered by the Department of Interior
under the authority of the National Historic Preservation Act.
Half of the money will support preservation projects identified
at the national level -- the other half will go to support state
and local priorities.
Message Sent To:
Patrick.Steel @ usda.gov @ inet
Mike.Derian @ usda.gov @ inet
jason.solomon @ treas.sprint.com
allison.fansler @ treas.sprint.com
mark.merritt @ fema.gov @ INET
drossi @ ed.gov @ INET
tbish @ ios.doi.gov @ INET
eric.dodds @ gsa.gov @ INET
bdjamoos @ os.dhhs.gov @ INET
rhoda j._glickman @ hud.gov @ INET
rangell.jorge @ epamail.epa.gov @ INET
judi.gold @ ost.dot.gov @ INET
clare.giesen @ hq.doe.gov @ INET
Patrick_McDermott_at_WDCB02 @ ed.gov @ INET
dkwalker @ opm.gov @ INET
Jennifer Brown/ONDCP/EOP
Sandy.Mancini @ MS01.DO.treas.sprint.com @ INET @
LNGTWY
liz.montoya @ hq.doe.gov @ INET
debra.silimeo @ sba.gov @ INET
sheehan-kerri @ dol.gov @ INET
christopher.warren @ sba.gov @ INET
rosalind.delancy-mosley @ treas.sprint.com
Linda Dewan @ 6478947 @ fax
esther.watkins @ ms01.do.treas.sprint.com @ INET
Sherline @ osdpo.secdef.osd.mil @ INET
Ladan_Manteghi @ ios.doi.gov @ INET
mschultheis @ usda.gov @ INET
dtraynha @ doc.gov @ INET
Marty Rouse @ 6906616 @ fax
jacqueline a. dycke @ hud.gov @ INET
gardenswartz-craig @ dol.gov @ inet
catherine.grunden @ ost.dot.gov @ inet
Molly.Buford @ hq.doe.gov @ inet
regan_burke @ ed.gov @ inet
james_blanchard @ ed.gov @ inet
carterd @ mail.va.gov @ inet
schwarz.denise @ epamail.epa.gov @ inet
Isabelle Watkins @ 2124154303 @ fax
Gowen_S @ al.eop.gov
amy.falk @ sba.gov @ inet
elias.mark @ fema.gov @ inet
Kwallace @ opm.gov @ inet
jpickett @ usia.gov @ inet
mccarthy_colleen @ ustr.gov
robert.nickerson @ ssa.gov @ inet
ATTACHMENT 1
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE: 0 00:00:00.00
TEXT:
RFC-822-headers:
Received: from conversion.pmdf.eop.gov by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.0-4 #6879)
id <[email protected]> for [email protected]; Tue,
27 Jan 1998 15:01:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from gatekeeper.eop.gov by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.0-4 #6879)
id <[email protected]> for [email protected]; Tue,
27 Jan 1998 15:01:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mail3.eop.gov by gatekeeper.eop.gov;
(5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/17Oct95-0424PM) id AA01741; Tue, 27 Jan 1998 14:49:12 -0500
Received: by MAIL3.EOP.GOV(Lotus SMTP MTA v1.01.02 (238.7 10-8-1996))
id 85256599.006CBEF9 ; Tue, 27 Jan 1998 14:47:47 -0400
X-Lotus-Fromdomain: EOP
END ATTACHMENT 1
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (EXTERNAL MAIL)
CREATOR: [email protected]@INET@EOPMRX
CREATION DATE/TIME:27-JAN-1998 12:18:00.00
SUBJECT: scanner results
TO: binns_m
(binns_m@A1@CD) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: horn_s
(horn_s@A1@CD) (WHO)
READ:27-JAN-1998 12:39:19.91
TEXT:
SCANNER RESULTS
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980125/09/news-clinton">Lewinsky Wants to Tell Story</A>
(Jan 25 9:53 am ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980125/08/news-clinton">White House Readies Strategy</A>
(Jan 25 8:04 am ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980125/04/news-clinton">White House Continues to Wait</A>
MESSAGE BODY
From [email protected] Tue Jan 27 12:14:22 1998
Received: (from uucp@localhost) by WhiteHouse.gov (8.7.1/uucp-relay) id MAA02538 for
<[email protected]>; Tue, 27 Jan 1998 12:14:22 (EST)
Received: from storm.eop.gov/198.137.241.51 via smap
Received: from DIRECTORY-DAEMON by STORM.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-7 #6879)
id <[email protected]> for [email protected]; Tue,
27 Jan 1998 12:12:56 EST
Received: from SCAN-DAEMON by STORM.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-7 #6879)
id <[email protected]> for [email protected]; Tue,
27 Jan 1998 12:12:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: from alpha.shianet.org ([205.138.41.9])
by STORM.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-7 #6879)
with ESMTP id <[email protected]> for [email protected];
Tue, 27 Jan 1998 12:12:29 -0500 (EST)
Received: from shianet.org (ow184.tir.com [205.218.77.185])
by alpha.shianet.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA25092 for
<[email protected]>; Tue, 27 Jan 1998 12:12:04 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 12:11:02 -0800
From: Michael Minzey <[email protected]>
Subject: THIS IS THE BIGGEST BUNCH OF CRAP I'VE EVER HEARD !!!!!!!!!!
To: Slick Willie Clinton <[email protected]>
Message-id: <[email protected]>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; U)
Content-type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="Boundary_[ID_/cqFYkggsxoUwMupqZV9Og]"
Comments: This message scanned by SCAN version 0.1 jms/960226
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
-Boundary_[ID_/cqFYkggsxoUwMupqZV9Og]
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
http://my.excite.com/news/r/980127/12/news-clinton
--Boundary_ID_/cqFYkggsxoUwMupqZV9Og]
Content-type: text/html; name=news-clinton; charset=us-ascii
Content-disposition: inline; filename=news-clinton
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-Base: "http://my.excite.com/news/r/980127/12/news-clinton"
<HTML<HEAD>
<TITLE>Excite News
: Mrs. Clinton Charges 'Right-Wing Conspiracy'</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<!-- Copyright (c) 1997 Excite Inc
<BODY BGCOLOR=FFFFFF LINK=0000CC VLINK=99099>
<CENTER>
<A HREF=http://www.excite.com/>
<IMG SRC=/img/head/news.gif BORDER=0 WIDTH=600 HEIGHT=35 ALT="Excite News" ISMAP
USEMAP=#navstripe></A><BR>
<MAP NAME=navstripe>
<AREA SHAPE=rect COORDS=511,14,601,33 HREF=http://my.excite.com>
<AREA SHAPE=rect COORDS=421,15,511,33 HREF=http://www.excite.com>
<AREA SHAPE=rect COORDS=421,0,601,15 HREF=http://nt.excite.com>
<AREA SHAPE=rect COORDS=34,1,120,36 HREF=http://www.excite.com>
</MAP>
<FONT SIZE=0><BR></FONT>
<a href="/relocate/ad=27136_zauction1218_raffle_2.gifpk=236344;http://www.zauction.com"
onMouseOver="window.status=Click Here"';return true" language="Javascript"><img
src="/img/ads/27136_zauction1218_raffle_2.gif ALT="Click HerelTHEIGHT=60 WIDTH=4
<FONT SIZE=0><BR></FONT>
<TABLE CELLPADDING=2 CELLSPACING=0 BORDER=0 WIDTH=600>
<TR><TD ALIGN=center>
<NOBR>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/><B>News</B></A>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/82/>Business</A>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/122/>Sports</A>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/142/>Entertainment</A>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/162/>Sci-Tech</A>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/183/>Nation</A>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/222/>World</A>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/202/>Lifestyle</A>
</NOBR>
</TD></TR></TABLE>
<FONT SIZE=1><BR></FONT>
<TABLE BORDER=0 CELLPADDING=2 CELLSPACING=0 WIDTH=600>
<TR BGCOLOR=B5BCD6>
<TD> <FONT SIZE=+1 FACE=arial,helvetica COLOR=000000><B>Top Stories</B></FONT></TD>
<TD ALIGN=right><FONT COLOR=000000><B><FONT SIZE=1 FACE=geneva,arial>Updated 12:03 PM ET
January 27, 1998</FONT></B>
</TR></TABLE>
<FONT SIZE=0><BR></FONT>
<TABLE WIDTH=600 CELLPADDING=0 CELLSPACING=0 BORDER=0>
<TR><TD VALIGN=top>
<TABLE CELLPADDING=3 CELLSPACING=0 BORDER=0 WIDTH=100%><TR>
<TD VALIGN=top>
<FONT FACE=arial,helevtica COLOR=000000><B>Mrs. Clinton Charges 'Right-Wing Conspiracy'</B></FONT>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN=top>
<FONT SIZE=1>By Randall Mikkelsen</FONT<P>
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - First lady Hillary Clinton Tuesday
charged a "vast right-wing conspiracy" was behind allegations
of sexual impropriety against President Clinton, as he prepared
to deliver his State of the Union speech to Congress. <P>
In an extraordinary interview on the NBC breakfast program
"Today", Mrs Clinton said Kenneth Starr, the prosecutor
investigating the allegations, was aligned with the president's
political opponents.
"Bill and I have been accused of everything, including
murder, by some of the very same people who are behind these
allegations," she said.
"So from my perspective, this is part of a continuing
political campaign against my husband." She accused Clinton's enemies of seeking to "undo the results of two
elections.
Among those she named as part of the conspiracy were the
Rev. Jerry Falwell, a conservative televangelist; two North
Carolina Republican senators, Jesse Helms and Lauch Faircloth;
and investigator Starr.
Clinton has been accused of having a sexual affair with a
former White House intern, Monica Lewinsky, and urging her to
lie about it under oath. Starr has been investigating the
charges against the president as part of a wide-ranging probe
into Clinton's financial dealings.
The scandal was having a mixed effect on world financial
markets. The dollar had weakened against the yen in Tokyo amid
concerns over the case, but the U.S. stock market appeared to
shrug it off, with the Dow Jones industrial average trading up
almost 76 points at mid-morning.<P
A grand jury, hearing evidence in the case, met on Tuesday
for the first time since the scandal erupted. The first person
to appear was John Whitehead, the head of the Rutherford
Institute, a conservative legal group in Virginia that has been
helping represent former Arkansas state employee Paula Jones in
her sexual harassment suit against Clinton.
After his grand jury appearance, Whitehead told reporters
outside the federal courthouse in Washington that he turned over
documents to the panel, but did not testify.
Asked to comment on Mrs Clinton's charge that the president
was the victim of a conspiracy, Whitehead replied: "Show us the
facts. Who conspired and where? Who's conspiring to do what? Who
are these people?"
Whitehead did not specify which documents were delivered to
the grand jury, but possible key documents in the Jones case
could include a sworn statement by Lewinsky and a deposition in
the case by Clinton.
It was to Jones's lawyers that Lewinsky allegedly denied in
a sworn statement that she had an affair with Clinton. However,
Lewinsky is reported to have described just such an affair in
graphic detail in conversations recorded by a friend, Linda
Tripp.
Clinton on Monday forcefully reiterated denials of the
allegations that he had sexual relations with Lewinsky and told
her to lie about it.
A lawyer for Lewinsky -- now 24 and no longer working for
the government -- gave Starr a summary, or proffer, on Monday of
what she would tell a federal grand jury in exchange for
immunity from prosecution.
It was in this superheated environment that Clinton is to give his State of the Union speech to Congress at 9:00 p.m.
EST,
outlining his agenda for the year.
The nationally televised speech is normally one of the most
important speeches a president makes in a year, but the run-up
has been drowned out by the furious scandal consuming the White
House.
Asked if Clinton had any plans to mention the sex scandal in
his speech, White House spokesman Mike McCurry said: "None.
None in the draft and I'm not aware of any plans for the
president to do that.
Clinton will try to shrug off the scandal and promote a view
of a reinvigorated government tackling long-term challenges in
his State of the Union speech, White House aides said.
Clinton was expected to call for a major overhaul of the
Social Security retirement system and urge lawmakers to shore it
up with a portion of projected budget surpluses, the aides
said.
He also was likely to challenge Congress to reform the
Internal Revenue Service as soon as possible. <P>
Other major domestic proposals already previewed include
building new public schools and hiring 100,000 teachers,
expanding the Medicare health system and widening government
assistance for child care.
On foreign policy issues, Clinton was expected to call
attention to the continuing standoff with Iraq over weapons
inspections and say Iraq's efforts to develop weapons of mass
destruction were unacceptable, aides said.
He was also expected to revive his campaign for "fast
track" authority to negotiate expanded trade agreements and lay
out a case for U.S. involvement in international assistance to
struggling Asian economies.
<P>
<B><I>Related Stories</I></B><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980127/08/news-clinton">Clinton Issues Emphatic Denial</A>
(Jan 27 8:08 am ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980127/04/news-clinton'">Clinton Issues Emphatic Denial</A>
(Jan 27 4:03 am ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980127/02/news-clinton">Clinton Issues Emphatic Denial</A>
(Jan 27 2:49 am ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980127/01/news-clinton">Clinton Issues Emphatic Denial</A>
(Jan 27 1:37 am ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980126/22/news-clinton">Clinton Issues Emphatic Denial</A>
(Jan 26 10:39 pm ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980126/19/news-clinton">Clinton Makes Forceful Denial</A>
(Jan 26 7:46 pm ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980126/15/news-clinton">Clinton Denies Affair, Coverup</A>
(Jan 26 3:32 pm ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980126/12/news-clinton">Clinton Denies Affair, Coverup</A>
(Jan 26 12:10 pm ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980126/09/news-clinton">Clinton May Speak Out</A>
(Jan 26 9:05 am ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980126/07/news-clinton">Clinton, Aides Consider Moves</A>
(Jan 26 7:04 am ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980126/04/news-clinton">Clinton, Aides Consider Moves</A>
(Jan 26 4:12 am ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=-1><A HREF="/news/r/980125/23/news-clinton">Allies Defend Clinton</A>
(Jan 25 11:52 pm ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980125/15/news-clinton">Clinton Allies Fire Back</A>
(Jan 25 3:54 pm ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=-1><A HREF="/news/r/980125/13/news-clinton">Clinton Allies Fire Back</A>
(Jan 25 1:04 pm ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980125/09/news-clinton">Lewinsky Wants to Tell Story</A>
(Jan 25 9:53 am ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980125/08/news-clinton">White House Readies Strategy</A>
(Jan 25 8:04 am ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980125/04/news-clinton">White House Continues to Wait</A>
(Jan 25 4:58 am ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980125/03/news-clinton">White House Continues to Wait</A>
(Jan 25 3:12 am ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980124/23/news-clinton">New Lurid Reports on Sex Scandal</A>
(Jan 24 11:33 pm ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=-1><A HREF="/news/r/980124/18/news-clinton'">Panetta Questions Clinton Future</A>
(Jan 24 6:27 pm ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980124/15/news-clinton">Panetta Questions Clinton Future</A>
(Jan 24 3:52 pm ET)</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=1><A HREF="/news/r/980124/13/news-clinton">Panetta Questions Clinton Future</A>
(Jan 24 1:34 pm ET)</FONT><BR>
<P>
<A HREF="/news/r/980127/12/news-japan">Japan's Finance Minister Quits Over Scandal</A>
<I>(Previous story)</I><BR>
<A HREF="/news/r/980127/11/news-address">Clinton Prepares Address</A>
<I>(Next story)</I><BR>
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD>
<TD WIDTH=15> </TD>
<TD VALIGN=top WIDTH=30%>
<TABLE WIDTH=100% CELLPADDING=3 CELLSPACING=0 BORDER=0 BGCOLOR=FFFFCC>
<TR><TD BGCOLOR=B5BCD6 VALIGN=top>
<FONT FACE=arial,helevtica COLOR=000000><B> More Top Stories</B></FONT></TD>/TR>
<TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<A HREF=/news/r/980127/12/news-japan>Japan's Finance Minister Quits Over Scandal</A>
</FONT></TD>>/TR>
<TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<B>Mrs. Clinton Charges 'Right-Wing Conspiracy'</B>
</FONT>>/TD></TR>
<TR<TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<A HREF=/news/r/980127/11/news-address>Clintor Prepares Address</A>
</FONT>>/TD>/TR>
<TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<A HREF=/news/r/980127/11/news-albright>Albright to Consult on Iraq</A>
</FONT></TD>>/TR>
<TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<A HREF=/news/r/980127/11/news-grandjury>Grane Jury Business Underway</A>
</FONT</TD>>/TR>
<TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<A HREF=/news/r/980127/10/news-hillary>Mrs Clinton Blasts Opponents</A>
</FONT></TD>>/TR>
<TR<TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<A HREF=/news/r/980127/10/news-caffeine>Too Much Caffeine Linked to SIDS</A>
</FONT></TD>>/TR>
<TR<TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<A HREF=/news/r/980127/10/news-iraq>Russian Envoy in Iraq</A>
</FONT</TD>>/TR>
<TR<TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<A HREF=/news/r/980127/10/news-witness>Grand Jury Business Underway</A>
</FONT></TD>>/TR>
<TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<A HREF=/news/r/980127/09/news-mideast>Arafat Rejects Gradual Pullback</A>
</FONT></TD>>/TR>
<TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<BR><B>Earlier Headlines</B><BR>
<A HREF=/news/r/980127/08/news-polls>Polls Show Skepticism of Clinton</A>
</FONT></TD>>/TR>
<TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<A HREF=/news/r/980127/08/news-parade>Denver's Football Champs Honored</A>
</FONT></TD>>/TR>
<TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<A HREF=/news/r/980127/08/news-irish>Blair to Intervene in Talks</A>
</FONT></TD>>/TR>
<TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<A HREF=/news/r/980127/08/news-valentine>Paper Publishes Valentine</A>
</FONT></TD>>/TR>
<TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<A HREF=/news/r/980127/08/news-union>Clinton Prepares Key Speech</A>
</FONT></TD>/TR>
<TR<TD><FONT SIZE=-1>
<A HREF=/news/r/980127/08/news-lewinsky>Starr Hears from Lewinsky</A>
</FONT></TD>>/TR>
</TABLE>
<IMG SRC=/img/news/reuterslogo.gif WIDTH=164 HEIGHT=41 ALT=Reuters><BR>
<FONT SIZE=-1>
© 1997 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication and
redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly
prohibited without Reuters prior written consent.
<A HREF=mailto:[email protected]>Contact Reuters</A>
</FONT>
</TD>
</TR></TABLE>
<HR>
<CENTER>
<B>Archive:</B>
<A HREF=/news/news/980127/><NOBR>Tue Jan 27</NOBR></A>
<A HREF=/news/news/980126/><NOBR>Mon 26</NOBR></A>
<A HREF=/news/news/980125/><NOBR>Sun 25</NOBR></A>
<A HREF=/news/news/980124/><NOBR>Sat 24</NOBR></A>
<A HREF=/news/news/980123/<NOBR>Fri23</NOBR></A>
<A HREF=/news/news/980122/<NOBR>Thu 22</NOBR></A>
<A HREF=/news/news/980121/><NOBR>Wed21</NOBR></A>
<BR>
</CENTER>
<FORM ACTION="http://www.excite.com/search.gw">
<INPUT NAME=search SIZE=25>
<INPUT type=hidden NAME=collection value=timely>
<INPUT type=hidden NAME=trace value=NT>
<INPUT type=hidden NAME=c value=timely>
<INPUT TYPE=submit VALUE="News Search">
</FORM>
<HR NOSHADE=1 WIDTH=600>
<TABLE CELLPADDING=2 CELLSPACING=0 BORDER=0 WIDTH=600>
<TR><TD ALIGN=center>
<NOBR>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/><B>News</B></A>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/82/>Business</A>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/122/>Sports</A>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/142/>Entertainment</A>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/162/>Sci-Tech</A>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/183/>Nation</A>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/222/>World</A>
<A HREF=http://nt.excite.com/202/>Lifestyle</A>
</NOBR>
</TD></TR></TABLE>
<FONT SIZE=1><BR></FONT>
<FONT SIZE=2>©1997 <A HREF="http://corp.excite.com">Excite Inc.</A></FONT>
</CENTER>
</BODY</HTML>
--Boundary_[ID_/cqFYkggsxoUwMupqZV9Og]--
ATTACHMENT 1
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE:27-JAN-1998 12:18:00.00
ATT BODYPART TYPE:D
TEXT:
RFC-822-headers:
Received: from conversion.pmdf.eop.gov by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.0-4 #6879)
id <[email protected]>; Tue, 27 Jan 1998 12:18:22 -0500 (EST)
Received: from storm.eop.gov (storm.eop.gov)
by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.0-4 #6879) id <[email protected]>; Tue,
27 Jan 1998 12:18:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from WhiteHouse.gov ([198.137.241.30])
by STORM.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-7 #6879)
with ESMTP id <[email protected]>; Tue,
27 Jan 1998 12:17:33 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from uucp@localhost) by WhiteHouse.gov (8.7.1/uucp-relay)
id MAA03147; Tue, 27 Jan 1998 12:17:30 -0500 (EST)
END ATTACHMENT 1
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Dag Vega@EOP@LNGTWY@LNGTWY (Dag Vega@EOP@LNGTWY@LNGTWY [ WHO ])
CREATION DATE/TIME:28-JAN-1998 11:52:58.00
SUBJECT: ABC: SOTU Coverage, 1/27/98
TO: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY ([email protected]@INET@LNGTWY OSTP )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Barry J. Toiv@EOP ( Barry J. Toiv@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Darby E. Stott@eop ( Darby E. Stott@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Joshua Silverman@EOP (Joshua Silverman@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Christa T. Robinson@eop (Christa T. Robinson@eop [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Alison Muscatine@eop ( Alison Muscatine@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Julie E. Mason@eop (Julie E. Mason@eop [ WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Russell W. Horwitz@eop (Russell W. Horwitz@eop [ OPD 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jason S. Goldberg@EOP (Jason S. Goldberg@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Karen E. Finney@eop (Karen E. Finney@eop [ WHO )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Rahm Emanuel@eop (Rahm Emanuel@eop [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michelle Crisci@eop (Michelle Crisci@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jill M. Blickstein@eop ( Jill M. Blickstein@eop [ OMB ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michael Waldman@eop (Michael Waldman@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Virginia M. Terzano@ovp@eop (Virginia M. Terzano@ovp@eop [ UNKNOWN ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Gene B. Sperling@eop (Gene B. Sperling@eop [ OPD
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Laura D. Schwartz@eop ( Laura D. Schwartz@eop [ WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Steven J. Naplan@eop ( Steven J. Naplan@eop [ NSC])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Kevin Moran@eop (Kevin Moran@eop [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Heidi Kukis@OVP@EOP Heidi Kukis@OVP@EOP [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Daniel J. Gunia@eop (Daniel J. Gunia@eop [ OA
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jeremy M. Gaines@eop (Jeremy M. Gaines@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Paul K. Engskov@eop Paul K. Engskov@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Anne M. Edwards@eop ( Anne M. Edwards@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Steven A. Cohen@eop Steven A. Cohen@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Lori Anderson@eop (Lori Anderson@eop [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Message Creation Date was at 28-JAN-1998 11:44:00
ABC News Special Report
Aired on JANUARY 27, 1998
THE STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS
SAM DONALDSON, COKIE ROBERTS, PETER JENNINGS
ANNOUNCER: This is an ABC News Special -- the State of the Union Address
and the
Republican Response. Now reporting from Capitol Hill, Peter Jennings.
PETER JENNINGS, ABC News: Good evening, and welcome to our coverage of Bill
Clinton's State of the Union address to the 105th Congress.
This is, as many of you know, the traditional response to the
constitutional
requirement that the president shall, from time to time, report to the
Congress
on the State of the Union. Since radio and especially since television,
this is
also an address to the nation.
Tonight, Bill Clinton comes to Capitol Hill not only to lay out his
legislative
wish list in the sixth year of his presidency, but to try to change the
subject.
He is deeply embroiled in a political crisis, as you know. And not many
people
he will speak to up here tonight are willing to say with absolute
conviction
tonight that he will make it through the seventh and eighth years of his
presidency.
Our intention tonight, as always, is to listen with you to his address and
then
to talk about the substance of it and the politics of this week in
Washington.
Let's go to the House chamber. Members of the House and the Senate have
gathered. The members of the Supreme Court is here. The diplomatic corps
is
here. Friends of the President's -- interesting cross-section of the
people in
the President and Mrs. Clinton's box this evening.
Mr. Gingrich has been spending most of the day trying to avoid the subject
of
the President's political crisis. Senator Gore has been talking to many of
us in
the press today about the President's mood today, which he describes as
very
upbeat.
The President has rehearsed his State of the Union a number of times, both
over
the weekend and yesterday. Senator Gore, as we know, is taking the
position
that everybody -- or Vice President Gore -- is taking the -- the President
of
the Senate, of course, his role here tonight.
Vice President Gore taking the position that everybody else in the White
House
does, that they will not be criticizing Kenneth Starr at all. But there is
concern, as you heard from Mrs. Clinton particularly today, that the
President
is being attacked by his enemies. Sam Donaldson is with us. Sam, a quick
comment, as we get under way, about the President's mood, as you know it?
SAM DONALDSON, ABC News: Well, the mood seems to be all right, as far as
it's
been reported to us by aides. Mr. Clinton is prepared to give one heck of
a
speech. He's going to emphasize all of these initiatives he has. Most of
them
have been leaked already.
And he's not going to talk about the one thing that people will be
expecting him
to talk about, that is the scandal. So it's kind of like the dog that
didn't
bark from the standpoint of the way the audience is going to look at this.
PETER JENNINGS: Mrs. Clinton, as we said, has been out front of everybody
in the
administration today -- there arriving with Mrs. Gore. And as we said, a
cross
section of people tonight, a cross section of the country, in their view,
joining her in their box this evening.
Mrs. Clinton will also be on Good Morning America tomorrow to talk about
this.
But she has been very clear and very angry and very forthright today about
what
she regards as a vast right-wing conspiracy. She gets a warm welcome.
Cokie Roberts is with us, of course, tonight on Capitol Hill. Cokie, the
mood
up here as you pick it up?
COKIE ROBERTS, ABC News: It's subdued is the way I would describe it.
I've been
in the House dining room on many a State of the Union night, and it was
much
quieter than usual and fewer people than usual. But you have had the same
number of people line up on either side of the aisle to be shown with the
President as he comes in. Nobody's avoiding him here. They're eager to
be seen
with him.
SERGEANT AT ARMS: Mr. Speaker, the President's Cabinet.
(Applause)
PETER JENNINGS: The President's cabinet. We're not altogether sure, I'm
sorry
to say, who the one Cabinet member is left at the White House today. But
here's
Madeleine Albright, the Secretary of State, more out front. Bob Rubin is
Secretary of the Treasury. Ms. Albright more up front than almost anybody
else
in the Cabinet on saying that she believes in President. The President's
being
attacked by his enemies.
There will be a lot of talk about foreign policy tonight. And up on the
Hill
here, there is, among Republicans and Democrats, great concern. Bruce
Babbitt,
Secretary of the Interior. And of course, the Attorney General Janet
Reno, who
may not be the most popular person at the White House today, as it was she
who
gave Kenneth Starr, the independent prosecutor, the permission to go ahead
and
expand his investigation, which has led to all of the controversy in
Washington
this week.
Secretary Riley just coming in there, the Secretary of Education. It was
at the
-- an educational event yesterday in the White House in the Roosevelt Room
that
the President said again, even more emphatically than the first time, that
he
had not had a relationship with Monica Lewinsky.
Sandy Berger there right in the center of your screen, the head of the
President's council. And right behind him is one of the men who has been
most
responsible, Gene Sperling, most responsible for the drafting of the
President's
State of the Union address. Been in democratic politics for a very long
period
of time.
We are been told that Bill Daley, the Secretary of Commerce, is left
behind.
The President's chief of staff Erskine Bowles.
Sam, all of these Sam Donaldson, all of these members of the President's
Cabinet tonight have been cautiously supportive, in some cases, very overt
in
others and staying out of the limelight yet in others. Right?
SAM DONALDSON: Well, the other day, the President asked four members, as
you
know, to come out and talk to reporters. Madeleine Albright, the Secretary
of
State, among them. And they each one said they believed the President.
Other members of the Cabinet, as you say, have been cautious.
Bill Cohen, the Secretary of Defense, has been quoted in the papers as
having
told a private gathering that -- and I'm certain he didn't realize he was
going
to be quoted that if there is evidence against the President, he is
going to
have to resign. And that's the only note that we've heard from the Cabinet
that's a little out of place.
PETER JENNINGS: You hear the same thing, of course, from some senior
members of
the Democratic Party up here, Cokie, including Senator Moynihan of New
York.
COKIE ROBERTS: Yes. Yes, you do. And you have people being privately very
hostile and publicly very cautious. Part of what's happening here, Peter,
is
the Democrats like this speech that the President's going to give
tonight. This
is what they call "their agenda."
The Republican agenda they say the President did before -- welfare reform,
balancing the budget. Now, this is what they're interested in -- educat
ion,
child care, Social Security, and they're really disappointed that they
think
they're going to have trouble getting it through because of what they all
describe as this cloud hanging over the presidency.
So it's not just that they are uncertain about his future. It's that
they're
uncertain about the agenda and then, of course, uncertain about their own
futures, which makes them very unpleasant.
PETER JENNINGS: One of the things we will undoubtedly get tonight, which
will
certainly please Madeleine Albright, is an expression of bipartisanship on
Capitol Hill in the Congress on the issue of foreign policy. And there
are any
number of foreign policy issues which are pressing, not the least of which
is
Iraq, financial crisis in Asia, how long American troops will stay --
that's
Erskine Bowles, the President's chief of staff.
How long American troops will stay in Bosnia, whether the International
Monetary
Fund will be refinanced. Bill Cohen -- he's about to go off on a tour of
Europe
and Russia and may extend his trip to go down and talk to some of the
member
American allies in Persian Gulf. But one of the things we can certainly
expect
up here tonight is to hear universal support for the President to put
Saddam
Hussein on notice one more time. Whether it has any effect is yet another
matter.
But John McWethy, a quick comment from you over at the Pentagon. The mood
everywhere here seems to be that military action is now inevitable, right?
JOHN MCWETHY, ABC News: I think that the prospect of military action,
Peter, is
now quite likely. They're barreling down that road at a rapid pace,
hoping that
diplomacy will replace the threats they are now making.
PETER JENNINGS: So you can expect from the President tonight, as we said,
not a
long passage on Iraq, but certainly an attempt to make him clear that they
are
getting closer.
SERGEANT AT ARMS: Mr. Speaker, the President of the United States.
PETER JENNINGS: Wilson Livingood (ph), Sergeant at Arms -- the traditional
introduction of the President.
(Applause)
PETER JENNINGS: We believe that every member of the House and all but one
member
of the Senate are in this chamber tonight. Some possibility that Senator
Craig
(ph) of Idaho is watching this from his office. He said he would.
President saying hello to Donna Shalala, Health and Human Services. And
he is,
we believe -- he may be there because Senator Trent Lott, the Majority
Leader in
the Senate, said he would urge all members to come. But he did say earlier
today that he would sit out in his office.
And none of the members of the escort committee for the President, no one
offered an opportunity to escort the President today chose not to take it.
(Applause)
Pres. BILL CLINTON: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
PETER JENNINGS: Any number of commentators up here today have made the
point
that this is an occasion to salute the office of the presidency, if not
always
the individual in question, and that they are here to honor the message
and the
history of the message, not necessarily the messenger.
Pres. BILL CLINTON: Thank you very much. Thank you.
PETER JENNINGS: And here to pay tribute, as it happens in no other country
in
the world, to American democracy.
Pres. BILL CLINTON: Thank you very much. Thank you.
Rep. NEWT GINGRICH, Speaker of the House: Members of Congress, I have the
high
privilege and the distinct honor of presenting to you the President of the
United States.
(Applause)
Pres. BILL CLINTON: Thank you. Thank you. Please. Thank you very much.
Thank
you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank You. Thank You.
(Applause)
[President Clinton delivers the State of the Union Address.]
(Applause)
PETER JENNINGS: Second longest State of the Union speech the President has
ever
given -- 72 minutes, an hour and 12 minutes. One hundred and three
applause
lines. Counting such things, a tradition in many respects, State of the
Union
address. Not overly partisan. Talking about the heroes of both parties,
inclusion of real Americans and certainly optimistic about the country's
future.
We'll take a couple of minutes now to ask some of my colleagues with us
this
evening to give me a quick take just on the speech and its impact. And
we'll
come back and discuss the details a little later on. Sam Donaldson?
SAM DONALDSON: Well, Peter, it sounded more like a speech that was a speech
rather than a call to arms. A great list of things to do, but there was
no real
focus.
You know, a President can get done one, maybe two big things if he's lucky
at a
time. This president didn't tell us of all that laundry list, what the
things
were that were more important than others.
PETER JENNINGS: OK, Sam.
SAM DONALDSON: But it was a good speech to listen to.
PETER JENNINGS: Come back to you. Cokie Roberts?
COKIE ROBERTS: But Bill Clinton does very well with these kinds of
speeches,
Peter. Even when we are getting tired, the American people are paying
attention, and these are issues they care about child care, education,
Social
Security, saving Social Security. Very important issues. I think this
was an
important moment for him and that he will benefit from it.
PETER JENNINGS: Student of presidential speeches, our resident historian
tonight, Michael Beschloss.
MICHAEL BESCHLOSS, Presidential Historian: You know, Peter, I think what
Bill
Clinton hoped this would do would signal that he's changing the tone of his
administration, coming back to certain democratic ideas traditionally, like
health care and the environment. But I still think that, as we look back
on
this years from now, the big test of this night is going to be whether it
has
helped him to surmount his personal political crisis that descended upon
him
only six days ago.
PETER JENNINGS: We will come back to that after Senator Lott responds for
the
Republicans. But on the speech and impact, George Will in our Washington
bureau.
GEORGE WILL, ABC News: Peter, the President began by wrapping himself in
that
which Americans love most -- I refer not to the flag, but to Social
Security.
So he did identify with the broadly popular activities of the federal
government.
However, everything a president says is in the subjunctive mood until
Congress
is persuaded. He mentioned in one passage rather plaintively that he had
been
denied already in his second term what every president for two decades has
had,
fast-track authority. He was denied that largely because his own party
deserted
him. He's already in a rocky patch.
PETER JENNINGS: OK, George, thanks very much. Various other people want
to have
things to say, both about the speech and about the political environment in
which it was given tonight.
We will come back in just a couple of minute now to hear the Republican
response
from Senator Trent Lott. First time he's ever made a big televised speech
like
this. And then, we shall follow that with some pretty hard-hitting
analysis
from my colleagues on what this night means in political and historical
terms.
Hope you'll stay with us. We'll be right back.
ANNOUNCER: This ABC News Special -- the State of the Union Address and the
Republican Response from Washington -- will continue in a moment.
(Commercial Break)
END
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Jordan Tamagni (CN=Jordan Tamagni/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO
CREATION DATE/TIME:30-JAN-1998 17:44:36.00
SUBJECT:
TO: Michele Jolin (CN=Michele Jolin/OU=CEA/O=EOP @ EOP [CEA])
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
To the Congress of the United States:
For the last five years, this Administration ,S economic
agenda has been guided by a simple but profound vision: to ensure that the
American Dream within reach for everybody who is responsible enough to
work for it, and to find a way to bring our people together into one
America. The Administration ,S philosophy of opportunity, responsibility
and community is now our guidepost to the 21st century.
When this Administration took office in 1993, deficits were much too big
and growing bigger, unemployment was unacceptably high, and wages were
stagnant. To reverse this course, we took a new approach, putting in
place a bold three-part strategy to shrink the deficit and balance the b
udget, invest in our people and open markets to American goods and
services. Our goal was to give America ,S workers the tools and training
they need to help them thrive in our changing economy.
The strategy has succeeded: American businesses have
generated more than 14 million new jobs; unemployment reached its lowest
level in 24 years, while core inflation fell to its lowest level in 30
years; economic growth last year was the strongest in a decade; and the
benefits of that growth are being shared by all Americans, as poverty is
dropping and wages are on the rise. We also saw the biggest drop in
welfare rolls in history, as our efforts to move people from welfare to
work paid off. Many challenges remain, but Americans are enjoying the
fruits of an economy that is steady and strong.
The Clinton Administration ,S Economic Strategy
From the beginning, this Administration ,S economic strategy
has had three crucial elements - reducing the deficit, investing in our
people, opening markets abroad and expanding U.S. exports.
Deficit reduction. The Administration ,S 1993 deficit reduction
plan set our nation on a course of fiscal responsibility, while making
critical investments in the skills and well-being of our people. When
President Clinton took office, the deficit was $290 billion and projected
to go much higher. This year the deficit will fall to just $10 billion
and possibly lower. That is a reduction of $280 billion - more than 90
percent. Our deficit today is the smallest share of our economy since
1970. And, for the first time in 50 years the deficit has gone down five
years in a row. And this year, the President has proposed a budget that
will eliminate the deficit, the first balanced budget in 30 years.
Investing in our People. In the new economy, the most precious
resources America has are the skills and ideas of working Americans.
Investing in the education and health of our people will help all
Americans reap the rewards of the our growing, changing economy. Those
who are better educated, who are flexible, who have the skills to move
from one job to another and seize new opportunities, will be rewarded.
The 1997 balanced budget agreement includes the largest
increase in aid to education since 1965, and the biggest increase to help
people go to college since the G.I. Bill was passed 50 years ago. The
budget has $1 billion more for Head Start, it establishes the America
Reads program to mobilize a million volunteers to promote literacy, and
contains money to help connect every classroom and library in this country
to the Internet by the year 2000.
It also contains a new HOPE Scholarship to guarantee all Americans
access to at least two years of college; other tuition tax credits for all
college and skills training; an IRA that allows tax-free withdrawals to
pay for education; the biggest increase in Pell Grants in two decades; a
million, total, work-study slots; and doubling of aid for dislocated
workers.
There is still more that needs to be done to address the
challenges of educating our people. We need to increase the quality of
education in our public schools. We need to provide more options to
parents in public school through public school choice and allowing
teachers to organize new charter schools within public school districts.
We need national standards and voluntary national exams to begin with 4th
grade reading and 8th grade math.
We have also taken measures to enhance worker security and improve
the well-being of working families. The Family and Medical Leave law
signed into law in 1993 ensures that millions of people do not have to
choose between being good parents and good workers. The Kennedy-Kassebaum
law helps millions to keep their health care if they take a new job or if
someone in their family gets sick. The minimum wage was increased, the
earned income tax credit (EITC) was expanded, and a $500-per-child tax
credit was provided. The new balanced budget also spends $24 billion to
expand health care to 5 million of the most vulnerable Americans -- 5
million children, almost all in working families, without health
insurance. That is the largest investment in health care since the
creation of Medicaid in 1965.
Opening Markets and Expanding Exports. To create good jobs and
increase wages, we must open markets abroad and expand U.S. exports.
Indeed, about a third of the economic growth that has produced 13 million
new jobs over the past five years has come from selling more American
products overseas.
We have concluded more than 240 trade agreements in the first
four years of this administration. In the areas covered by the over 20
agreements signed with Japan, our exports are up by more than 80 percent.
And the recently signed information technology agreement, covering 90
percent of information technology services in the world, amounts to a
$5-billion tax or tariff cut on high-value added American products.
Because of the importance of trade to our economy and our
workers, it is critically important that fast track negotiating authority
be renewed. In general, U.S. markets have been more open to the world for
decades. Our goal is to open more foreign markets to U.S. exports.
Fast track authority is a tool that has been given to
Presidents of both parties for more than 20 years. It allows the
President to negotiate a trade agreement, and then requires that Congress
take an up or down vote on the agreement as a whole. This authority gives
the President the ability to create open and fair trade for business and
working people, and to advance our nation ,S prosperity.
Seizing the benefits of our growing, changing economy
Going forward, the central challenge for our nation ,S economy is
ensuring that American workers are equipped to seize the benefits of our
changing economy. Information and technology and global commerce are
leading the transformation of the global economy. The new strength of a
nation will be found in the skills, knowledge, and imagination of its
people.
This Administration ,S strategy -- balancing the budget, investing
in our people, opening markets abroad -- will support and enhance
America ,S strength in this new economic era. It is a strategy for an
economy of the 21st century, removing barriers to our economy ,S
potential and providing our people with the strength, the skills, the
security, and the flexibility needed to reap the rewards of our growing,
changing economy.
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Anna E. Cushing (CN=Anna E. Cushing/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ])
CREATION DATE/TIME:30-JAN-1998 16:04:34.00
SUBJECT: fast-track
TO:KYLE_R(KYLE_R@ Al @ CD @ LNGTWY [ UNKNOWN ]) (OPD)
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Bob, is this lang. still o.k. to go out to people writing in urging POTUS
to continue efforts to gain f.t.a.? Pls. let me know. thx. anna
Thank you for your letter supporting fast-track authority for the
President.
As you know, I believe that fast-track authority is crucial to enhancing
America's ability to bring down trade barriers - - - giving American
companies the opportunity to open new markets and ensuring U.S. leadership
in the world. The renewal of fast-track authority remains a priority for
my Administration, and we will work hard to secure it this year.
I appreciate knowing your views and look forward tow working with you and
other interested parties on this vital issue. Again, thanks for writing.
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Dag Vega@EOP@LNGTWY@LNGTWY (Dag Vega@EOP@LNGTWY@LNGTWY [ WHO ])
CREATION DATE/TIME: 2-FEB-1998 06:33:54.00
SUBJECT: ABC: This Week, 2/1/98
TO: [email protected]@INET@LNGTWY ([email protected]@INET@LNGTWY OSTP )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Barry J. Toiv@EOP ( Barry J. Toiv@EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Darby E. Stott@eop ( Darby E. Stott@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Joshua Silverman@EOP ( Joshua Silverman@EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Christa T. Robinson@eop (Christa T. Robinson@eop [ UNKNOWN D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Alison Muscatine@eop ( Alison Muscatine@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Julie E. Mason@eop (Julie E. Mason@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Russell W. Horwitz@eop (Russell W. Horwitz@eop [ OPD ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jason S. Goldberg@EOP (Jason S. Goldberg@EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Karen E. Finney@eop (Karen E. Finney@eop [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Rahm Emanuel@eop (Rahm Emanuel@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michelle Crisci@eop (Michelle Crisci@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jill M. Blickstein@eop (Jill M. Blickstein@eop [ OMB 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Michael Waldman@eop (Michael Waldman@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Virginia M. Terzano@ovp@eop (Virginia M. Terzano@ovp@eop [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Gene B. Sperling@eop ( Gene B. Sperling@eop [ OPD )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Laura D. Schwartz@eop ( Laura D. Schwartz@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Steven J. Naplan@eop ( Steven J. Naplan@eop [ NSC
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Kevin Moran@eop (Kevin Moran@eop [ WHO )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Heidi Kukis@OVP@EOP (Heidi Kukis@OVP@EOP [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Daniel J. Gunia@eop (Daniel J. Gunia@eop [OA])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jeremy M. Gaines@eop ( Jeremy M. Gaines@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Paul K. Engskov@eop (Paul K. Engskov@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Anne M. Edwards@eop ( Anne M. Edwards@eop [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Steven A. Cohen@eop ( Steven A. Cohen@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Lori Anderson@eop (Lori Anderson@eop [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Message Creation Date was at 2-FEB-1998 06:23:00
ABC This Week
Aired on FEBRUARY 01, 1998
Interviews with WILLIAM GINSBURG, ATTORNEY FOR MONICA LEWINSKY
REP. JOHN KASICH (R-OH), CHAIRMAN, REP. RICHARD GEPHARDT (D-MO),
ANN COULTER, CENTER FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS,
PATRICIA IRELAND, PRESIDENT OF NOW, RONALD NOBLE,
and JOSEPH DIGENOVA, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY
ANNOUNCER: From ABC News, This Week, with Sam and Cokie, and featuring
George Will.
ROBERTS: This Week, as the president takes the high road.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAM J. CLINTON, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The state of our
union
is strong.
(APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERTS: the investigation into the alleged affair with Monica
Lewinsky
moves to a grand jury.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEON PANETTA, FORMER WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: I believe I answered
all of
the questions that were asked of me.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DONALDSON: While the president's polls are the highest ever,
Republicans
begin to attack.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
U.S. SENATOR JOHN ASHCROFT (R-MO)?: If these allegations are true, you
have
disgraced yourself, you have disgraced this country, you have disgraced
the
office, and you should leave.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DONALDSON: How is this crisis going to affect the agenda on Capitol
Hill as
the president sends up his budget? We'll ask House Minority Leader
Chairman
Richard Gephardt and Budget Committee Chairman John Kasich.
ROBERTS: And how are women reacting to all this? We'll ask the
president of
the National Organization for Women, Patricia Ireland, and conservative
attorney Ann Coulter.
DONALDSON: And our roundtable with ABC News analyst Bill Kristol and
George
Stephanopoulos.
Welcome to our program. According to the public opinion polls, the
majority
of the American people don't believe the president. They don't believe him
when
he says he didn't have a sexual affair with Monica Lewinsky. But at the
same
time, a significant percentage of those people say it doesn't matter to
them.
And the president's approval rating, his job approval rating, is at an
all-time
high.
Cokie, as they say outside the Beltway, go figure.
ROBERTS: Well, of course, a lot of that could change depending on the
evidence. And here to tell us what's happening along those lines and in
the
negotiations is ABC's Jackie Judd.
JUDD: Good morning, Cokie.
Well, the arm-wrestling match between William Ginsburg, Monica
Lewinsky's
attorney, and the independent counsel, Ken Starr, goes on. Ginsburg is now
talking about taking his client home to California to see her father.
Ken Starr is telling reporters: "We are proceeding. We are collecting
the
facts of this investigation." A clear signal he's sending that with or
without
Lewinsky he's proceeding.
What's interesting here, Cokie, is the evolution of William Ginsburg's
comments through the week. Earlier on when - when the talks with Starr's
office seemed to be on track, he seemed to be at least suggesting that
what she
had said in her sworn affidavit that there was no sexual relationship was
not
the complete story.
By the end of the week, when the talks had broken off, he was talking
about
the possibility of joining the president's attorneys, if they chose to do
this,
to try to quash the Ken Starr's grand jury. And also, he was trying to
severely undercut the credibility of Linda Tripp. She's, of course, the
woman
who taped the conversations and started this whole thing.
Cokie.
ROBERTS: Thank you very much, Jackie.
Well, joining us now is Monica Lewinsky's attorney, William Ginsburg.
Thank
you for being back with us. And of course, George Will, from ABC.
Mr. Ginsburg, what about what Jackie just said? Has this been an
evolving
story?
GINSBURG: No, it's the same story this week as it was last week. The
press
has evolved it and respun it every way that they conceivably can. The
story
remains the same. Nothing has changed.
ROBERTS: Nothing has changed in terms of your negotiations with Kenneth
Starr? Or in terms of what exactly it is that Monica will say, if she says
something?
GINSBURG: I'm not in negotiation with Kenneth Starr. The prosecutor and
the
office of the independent counsel has the ability to give limited or full
immunity. When he or they are ready to do that, whether it's limited or
full
immunity, they will do so.
DONALDSON: Mr. Ginsburg, you said at one point, you'd offered a full
proffer
-- that is, what your client would say. But there are sources elsewhere
who
say, in fact, it was sort of a verbal thing. It was all at sea. And she is
not
prepared to say what she said on those tapes.
GINSBURG: Well, you know, 1-- I -- I may - I used the Harry Truman
quote
the other day on Barbara Walters show. I said they --they -- they think we
give
them hell. In fact, we give them the truth. And sometimes they think it's
hell.
It's up to them to fit what we say is a complete proffer into their case
if
they choose to do so.
DONALDSON: I'm glad you mentioned Barbara Walters, because you also
said to
Barbara -- and I quote -- about the relationship from the standpoint of
phone
calls the president might have made to your client. You said it was a hi,
hello, how are you doing, fine. That's it. "They were colleagues. I know
that's hard to believe, but the president and his staff do talk."
Mr. Ginsburg, I think to most people that's impossible to believe.
GINSBURG: I don't know. And as a matter of fact, I am seeking now in my
investigation information from other White House interns and people who
work in
legislative affairs where Monica worked to determine just how interactive
the
president is with those people. It's not inconceivable to me that someone
working in an area where people work together could be interactive there.
The president's a human being.
DONALDSON: Well, are you telling me while others are desperately trying
to
find, to put it delicately, other women that might have been associated
with
the president, you're trying to find other people who he's just called up
late
at night and said, hi, hello, how are you, fine
GINSBURG: No.
DONALDSON: interns who were on his staff and two years later he
just
wants to make a call?
GINSBURG: That's not what I'm saying.
DONALDSON: Well, then, what are you saying?
GINSBURG: What I'm saying -- I'm saying I'm talking to other interns to
find
out what the inner workings of the White House is with interns
DONALDSON: What are they telling you?
GINSBURG: and other people in legislative affairs.
People who work close to the president in legislative affairs are
telling me
there is interaction with the president. I'm not --
I haven't fully completed my investigation. So
DONALDSON: By interns?
GINSBURG: No, I was about to say
DONALDSON: OK.
GINSBURG: But I am finding that interns don't usually have that inte
raction.
GINSBURG: Interns generally look and peek around corners and see people
in
the White House. Legislative affairs employees have a different
relationship.
DONALDSON: Well, what was the difference, then, with Monica Lewinsky?
GINSBURG: Monica Lewinsky was a legislative affairs person, and that's
where
I'm trying to focus my investigation at this point.
DONALDSON: Not when she was at the Pentagon?
GINSBURG: No, at the Pentagon she was not a legislative affairs. That's
true.
WILL: Part of this unfolding drama began when Ms. Tripp felt that Mr.
Bennett had called her a liar the president's lawyer. You have recently
said
that Ms. Tripp, in spite of what she says, was never privy to any
conversation
between your client and Mr. Clinton. And you said of Ms. Tripp, "People
often
do what they have to do to make their story sound right." It sounds as
though
you're saying she's embroidering or lying.
GINSBURG: No, not at all. I am so frustrated that I don't know what to
do
with myself. I have no right to get the evidence against my client or in
favor
of my client or what's out there.
ROBERTS: You mean the tapes?
WILL: The tapes.
GINSBURG: The tapes.
WILL: But you've not heard the tapes?
GINSBURG: I've not heard the tapes. Until I have all of the pieces of
the
puzzle in place, the context, the situation, I am in no position to call
anyone
a liar. I was very careful to say that the statement released by Ms. Tripp
sounded like prepublicity for a book. But I can't put anything in context
until
I have all the pieces of the puzzle in place, and I won't try.
WILL: Mrs. Clinton and others have faulted the independent counsel's,
Mr.
Starr, tactics in this. Can you tell me, in your judgment, is Mr. Starr
using
tactics that (a) are not used every day against poor people in Southwest
Washington? And when he uses them in Northwest Washington involving the
president, is he doing something inappropriate?
GINSBURG: I think the tactics being used by the prosecutors in this
case
have some unusual aspects to them. But in general
WILL: What are they?
GINSBURG: In general, they are used against all people, including poor
people in other parts of Washington and the country.
The unusual part of this is the stings and the wires - that is, the
intervention of phone calls. And that's what scares me the most about all
of
this.
WILL: Doesn't that happen all the time
GINSBURG: I don't think so.
WILL: to get more pieces?
GINSBURG: Very rarely, no.
WILL: I know your answer when asked about whether or not your client
met
with the president on the evening of December 28th is that's an
attorney-client
privilege. You won't talk about it, right?
GINSBURG: I won't. That's right.
WILL: OK. Now when someone takes the Fifth Amendment, that is that
person's
right, but it's also right to make certain inferences about the person who
has
to take the Fifth Amendment. Is it not reasonable for Americans to come to
an
invidious conclusion about the president when he will not confirm that
there
even was such a meeting?
GINSBURG: No, it's not
WILL: Why not?
GINSBURG: It's not appropriate. First of all, assertion of your
constitutional rights under the Fifth Amendment, or any other amendment --
and
there are a bevy of constitutional rights is part of what makes this
democracy work and frankly has a lot to do, if it's used, with legal
strategy
and the ability to try a case. Invidious innuendo and suggestion is an
issue
that we as lawyers have to handle.
But just the assertion of a right under the Fifth Amendment or the
Fourth
Amendment or the First Amendment is not enough
DONALDSON: What's Ms. Lewinsky's mood these days? I mean, how does she
feel
being cooped up?
GINSBURG: She's having fits. That's why I'm taking her back to
California to
see her dad. She'll be there for a few days. And I'm hoping the change of
environment will do her some good.
ROBERTS: And then is that it? Does it all just blow over, Mr. Ginsburg?
We've just have two weeks of drama, and it's over.
GINSBURG: No, it -- hardly for her. She is going to have to remake her
life.
ROBERTS: No, but I mean legally?
GINSBURG: Oh, that's a great question. I don't know where we're going
legally. I really don't. I can work this case in California as well as I
can
work here, and that's what I'll do.
By the way, if there is anyone out there who wants to say something
nice
about Ms. Lewinsky -- and I know there are people because they've called
me and
they've asked when -- the time is now. I'm asking people to come forward.
If they call you people, I would hope you would entertain them instead
of
just looking at the one side of evidence.
DONALDSON: I haven't found a lot of people within the White House who
would
call you now. Thanks very much, Mr. Ginsburg.
Still to come, the minority leader of the House of Representatives,
Richard
Gephardt, and the chairman of the House Budget Committee, John Kasich.
Next, the women's reaction to the crisis in the White House with
Patricia
Ireland, the president of NOW, and Republican attorney Ann Coulter.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DONALDSON: Patricia Ireland and Ann Coulter, welcome. Glad to see you.
COULTER: Thank you.
IRELAND: Thank you.
DONALDSON: I don't know sort of where to begin. So let me just begin
this
way. If people say, I don't believe the president, I think he did have an
affair with her, but it doesn't matter, what do you make of that? Ms. I
reland.
IRELAND: Well, I think that people draw a clear distinction, despite
the
radio talk show hosts or commentators who are trying to blur that
distinction,
that sexual harassment is unwanted sexual attention. And if the president
had a
sexual relation with Monica Lewinsky, it was consensual.
That is a distinction that I think people are trying to blur that
people who
oppose women's rights issues.
DONALDSON: Does the word ``adultery" mean anything any more?
IRELAND: Oh, I think it...
COULTER: Crime in the district.
(LAUGHTER)
IRELAND: I think it does mean something, and I think that many of us
are not
going to rise to the bait of saying that a charge made is a charge proven.
ROBERTS: But you say that, Ms. Ireland, but at the same time there are
all
kinds of regulations coming out in companies all over America saying that
chief
executives cannot have consensual sexual relations with lower people on
the
staff. Certainly the military --we've seen lots of examples this year. Why
is
this different?
IRELAND: Well, in our own office we have a policy against officers or
staff
having personal relations with interns. And I think certainly that the
president of the United States or a county supervisor should not be using
what
Kissinger identified as the aphrodisiac of power to have sexual relations.
But
that's a different question than the legal questions.
DONALDSON: Let me put the same question to Ann Coulter, which is if
people
say they don't believe the president but it doesn't matter, what do you
make of
that?
COULTER: I think it's a staggering Orwellian spectacle. It is just like
in
'1984" where, you know, Winston Smith is harangued into saying two plus
two
equals five. That is what the American people, at least according to the
polls,
a certain percentage are willing to say.
We'll engage in this ritualized public lying. We think he had sex with
Monica Lewinsky. He came on TV. And it was an important enough issue for
him to
come on TV and tell us he didn't have sex with her. He lied to us. We
don't
care. Our mutual funds are doing well.
DONALDSON: But they are saying that. Again, you started to give the
answer.
Why do you think the people who are saying that are saying it? Would they
say
it would a woman say that about her own husband? Hey, he's providing a
good
living for me.
COULTER: No, it's worse than that. He's our leader. This is a free
country.
It's a self-governing country. It's either for ideological purposes, which
is
frightening, or because their mutual funds are doing all right. And I
would
like to say I do not think this is a political issue. This is completely
nonpolitical.
I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican or a man or a woman,
the
polls seem to indicate if you believe the polls -- and I don't
particularly
that women are giving him more favorable ratings than men. I don't care
about
that. He has lied to the American people on TV. I don't care if it's
about
IRELAND: You don't know that, Ann. How do you know that?
DONALDSON: We don't know that.
COULTER: I do not believe anyone sitting at this table
IRELAND: That's not the question.
COULTER: thinks that Monica Lewinsky did not have sex with
President
Clinton. I do not believe any American believes that.
How can you maintain these two positions at the same time? On one hand,
we
all believe he had sex with Monica. On the other hand
IRELAND: Look, last week
DONALDSON: Not everyone. Mrs. Clinton doesn't believe it.
COULTER: I don't believe that.
IRELAND: Last week we were hearing, for instance, that the president
had
said under oath that he had had a sexual affair with Gennifer Flowers.
This
week we're hearing no, that's not so. The rumors are flying.
COULTER: No, we haven't heard that.
IRELAND: I've heard that on network news. I've heard one story versus
another story all week long. And I think that the American public, and
women in
particular, are not about to be rushed to judgment.
ROBERTS: Well, why did women rush to judgment on Clarence Thomas?
IRELAND: Well, we weren't. In fact, what we were dealing with in
Clarence
Thomas' case is a Senate that was trying to sweep it under the rug, that
was
trying their own little cover-ups, saying we don't have to reopen
hearings, we
don't have to ask a question.
ROBERTS: But this was these women were marching up the steps of the
Senate office building. We haven't seen anything like that.
WILL: Ms. Ireland, Ms. Ireland
IRELAND: We were trying to force a hearing, and we did.
DONALDSON: Let George in here.
WILL: In the Anita Hill case, Anita Hill followed Clarence Thomas from
one
federal agency to another. She called him repeatedly when she left
Washington.
She invites him to come to Oklahoma afterwards.
WILL: And then, 10 years later, at a crucial moment in a confirmation
hearing, she says, I just remembered he's been sexually beastly. And women
at
that point said, these are self-legitimizing claims because women don't
make
such things up. Wasn't that said then?
IRELAND: You have perverted the history of that, George. In fact, she
was a
reluctant witness. The Senate was trying to bury those charges. The
outrage
that built between the news media getting those leaks and the time that
the
demonstrations took place was because we wanted to make sure that the
public
had a right to hear both sides and make on judgment.
WILL: Women don't make these things up we were told.
IRELAND: When we saw her under oath, him under oath, heard there
evidence,
judged their demeanors, that's when people put on Anita Hill -- "We
Believe
Anita Hill" buttons.
WILL: When Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Monica
Lewinsky
-- some people think there's a pattern here.
IRELAND: If there is a pattern, it appears to be a pattern of
consensual
sex. If we believe Paula Jones
(CROSSTALK)
When Paula Jones said that when she said no to President Clinton, he
said,
I wouldn't want you to do anything you don't want to do and never made
another
pass.
COULTER: It's still a felonious assault.
IRELAND: He didn't touch her.
COULTER: It's still a criminal act, as what he did to Willey was. This
isn't
just, you know, saying, honey, or even any thing about pubic hairs. These
are
crimes in every state of the union.
What Clarence Thomas did, even if true, it's only speech. What he did
to
Kathleen Willey, what he did -- or is alleged to have done -- to Paula
Jones,
these are crimes, these are torts (ph).
DONALDSON: We'll give you your time. Go ahead. We'll give you
COULTER: That was it. These are crimes, they're torts (ph). Sexual
assault,
indecent exposure.
(CROSSTALK)
only In New Jersey, it's called the NOW bill, because it was pushed
through by the National Organization for Women, a law that makes dropping
your
pants, indecent exposure essentially the equivalent of rape in New Jersey,
to
dropping your pants the NOW bill.
ROBERTS: Now, I'm puzzled about your reaction, that you seem to think
that
as long as its consensual, it's OK.
IRELAND: No, I didn't say that.
ROBERTS: Well, but that seemed well, then, what are you saying?
IRELAND: Well, I'm saying that if we're talking about sexual
harassment, I
think it's an effort by those who oppose women's rights to get Clinton,
get the
feminists, and demean the laws by saying, oh, now you're talking about
free
speech, consensual sex. That's not what the laws require.
DONALDSON: Do you think they planted this woman? I mean, the idea of a
conspiracy, a lot of people don't like the president, particularly on the
right.
IRELAND: I also didn't say conspiracy.
WILL: But do you really think that there was a conspiracy that was able
to
plant Monica Lewinsky to seduce an unsuspecting commander in chief?
IRELAND: No, I think that in fact that opponents of women's rights and
opponents of Clinton have jumped on this like wild and want to take us to
task
as if we've been inconsistent when in fact
ROBERTS: Well, let me ask you about this then. The president said this
week,
I didn't have sex with that woman. Do you think that's language that's
appropriate?
IRELAND: I think it's an unfortunate phrase. Absolutely. I think that
he is
not coming forward in a forthright, complete way that the American public
can
believe. And I think that's a different question than whether Monica
Lewinsky
is being coerced, not by Bill Clinton, but by the FBI and Ken Starr.
They ambushed her, held her for nine hours without her attorney,
threatened
she and her mother with an indictment.
COULTER: She was shopping at Crate n' Barrel. That's not
IRELAND: And suddenly it's Clinton who is supposed to be the one who
coerced
her?
DONALDSON: George.
WILL: Ms. Ireland, federal employees are shown sort of as a group a
film, a
sensitizing film about sexual harassment, introduced by President Clinton,
in
which it says even consensual sex is intolerable because there's a
third-party
damage here, to the work force and morale and all of that.
Is that wise? I mean, if you agree with that, you agree that the
consensual
aspect that you're making so much of is not sufficient.
IRELAND: I would distinguish between what the law requires and what
good
policy requires. And the law does require that it be unwanted. Good
policy, as
we have said, might very well dictate that an elected official at any
level
should not be having sex with employees or interns.
COULTER: No, that's not true. All the male interns
DONALDSON: We're going to give you the last word. We're about out of
time.
So please go ahead.
COULTER: Male interns and the female interns have a cause of action
against
Clinton because they didn't get job benefits for, you know, having sex
with him.
IRELAND: That was due Walter Cain (ph), not to any sexual relation.
COULTER: You know, I don't care if Monica Lewinsky or Linda Tripp are,
you
know, Nazis bombing Oklahoma City building or crack addicts. It's just
irrelevant.
DONALDSON: You don't?
COULTER: All that matters is everyone knows the president had sex with
this
woman, and he went on TV and gave this ritualized line
IRELAND: Did you see it?
COULTER: saying I didn't have sex. Nixon never did this, ever, ever.
DONALDSON: OK.
COULTER: He was never so bold and crude in his lies.
DONALDSON: Thank you very much, Ms. Coulter, Ms. Ireland. We appreciate
this
spirited debate.
(LAUGHTER)
And coming up, the leading Democrat in the House, Congressman Richard
Gephardt. And next the chairman of the Budget Committee, Republican
Congressman
John Kasich.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROBERTS: Joining us now, John Kasich, chairman of the House Budget
Committee. Thank you for being with us.
KASICH: Thanks, Cokie.
ROBERTS: Mr. Kasich, if the president did have an affair with Monica
Lewinsky, should he resign?
KASICH: Well, the issue really is, Cokie, if the president lied, he's
going
to have
ROBERTS: Well, he's told the American people he didn't have an affair.
So if
he had one
KASICH: Well, if if he if he lied, he's going to pay a very high
price. We're going to have to look at the facts and determine what that
really
means. But if, in fact, the president lied, it will severely wound his
presidency and will -- will erode the office of president, not here in
Columbus, Ohio.
Most people would just like the president to be found innocent. But
they
want to find out what the facts are.
It's been interesting. I've been listening to you talk about his
approval
rating. His personal approval rating, by the way, has plummeted about 20 po
ints.
The people out here at the dry cleaner or the gym or the -- the
pharmacy say
they really want to know whether he told the truth or not. And if he did
not
tell the truth, there will be a very high price to pay. And then the
Congress
will look at what the facts are. And I think we've got to wait until we
know
precisely what the facts are.
But let's make it clear: If he did not tell the truth, he will have
very
serious problems. Whether he's removed, no one can judge. But it will be
such
an erosion of the presidency, it will be very, very unfortunate for our
country. But it will be a reality.
ROBERTS: Well, as you know, some Republicans are saying privately that
this
would be politically ideal for them to have the president stay as a
weakened
president for the next couple of years and just make it easier to run
against
him, both in '98 and 2000.
KASICH: Look, Cokie. You I didn't see your show last week, but I
heard
about it. The fact is no one in this country should be hoping that the
president did this, because we've got enough young people who don't
believe in
-- in any authority figures. We've got tremendous cynicism in this
country. And
to create more would be negative for our country.
And, Cokie, at some point, who cares about politics? We've got to care
about
our country. So I hope the president will have been found not to have done
this.
But if he did, we also know that if you -- if you lie, if you do not
tell
the truth, you'll pay a price for it.
WILL: Cokie asked you for a judgment of political morality. And,
Congressman, you really gave her a political prediction. She said, "Sh
ould he
resign if he lied?"
And you said, "If he lied, he'll have a lot of problems."
Let me reinvite you to make a judgment of the sort that Senator
Ashcroft
made yesterday.
KASICH: George, we have
WILL: Should he resign if he lied?
KASICH: George, we'd have to know exactly what the facts are. I don't
think
that -- that will be a decision for the president.
WILL: Yes.
KASICH: If the president told a lie on that, it will then be up to the
Congress to take a look at whether -- if he told a lie under oath, then
he's
got a problem legally
WILL: My -- forgive me...
KASICH: and then we take a look at it.
WILL: Forgive me. But my question is, should he feel obligated to
resign, in
your judgment, if he lied?
KASICH: George, I -- I don't want to speak for him.
WILL: OK.
KASICH: If I were in that position, I would have to think hard about
what my
decision would be. But I'm not sure that -- that because you tell a lie,
or
somebody else tells a lie, I ought to be in a position to tell them what
actions they ought to take.
If he tells a lie, it's going to be so severe that, I'm sure, it's one
of
the things he'll consider.
WILL: Let me ask you how all this might seep back into your business,
which
is legislation. A lot of Americans, perhaps a majority today, say: He
lied, but
so what? We'll judge him on other grounds.
WILL: When you come to consider, say, day care, which is family policy,
and
the president says, trust me, I know right from wrong about families and
day
care ought to be done in the following way, will this all this episode
weaken his authority to address right from wrong regarding families and
children, for example?
KASICH: Well, George, there's no question that if in fact he lied, his
whole
presidency will have been eroded. You know, when you ask me what should he
do,
and I give you a little sound byte, and somebody can put it on the air,
we're
talking about the presidency. I want to be very precise and very careful
about
this kind of a discussion.
But I can tell you that if in fact he did not tell the truth, his p
rograms
are in deep trouble. Frankly, his programs are in deep trouble now,
because on
one hand, he declares the era of big government at an end, and then he
turns
around and gives us 50 examples as to why he wants to expand the
government as
in his State of the Union.
WILL: Congressman, when you read all the help that came suddenly
pouring
forth for Ms. Lewinsky when she was about to be deposed regarding her
relations
with the president and when the president will not even say whether a
meeting
occurred let alone what happened at a meeting on December 28th, what
inference
do you draw from this strategy of silence?
KASICH: Well, George, you know, look, people can say things about you.
They
can say things about me. What I'm interested in are what the facts are.
And at
some point, the president will have to make a full accounting for this
relationship.
But I think in our country - and you're a scholar of the Constitution
because you keep your silence or because you wait to speak at a certain
time
doesn't mean we presume that you're guilty. We're all interested in the
facts.
But let's let the facts come out before we make a lot of statements and
start
calling on people to do certain things.
DONALDSON: Mr. Kasich, you're the budget chairman in the House. This
may
shock you, but I want to ask you about the budget.
KASICH: Good.
DONALDSON: The president is sending one up tomorrow. It's the first
balanced
budget in 20, 30 years. What is it that you like about it, and what is it
that
you don't like about it, in a brief moment?
KASICH: Well, what I don't like, Sam, is that there's going to be an
awful
lot of new spending, an awful lot of new taxes in that budget. And
frankly, we
really need to achieve, I think, three things. One
is we need to return power to people by breaking the trusts or
monopolies of
the federal government. The president is rebuilding those monopolies and
trying
to expand government.
Secondly, you know, I think in our country we need a renewed sense of
values
that comes from faith in God.
And finally, I think that it really gets down to personal
responsibility.
People need to heal this country without more lawyers or more laws or
relying on somebody else. And I think the president makes a stronger
federal
government. It actually makes the case as to why you should eliminate
state and
local government and run everything from Washington. That's wrong.
DONALDSON: Well, the president says any surpluses in the future ought
to be
set aside because of the Social Security problem as a short-term solution
while
you're working out a long-term solution. But is it not correct that any
surpluses, absent new legislation, would simply reduce the national debt,
and
that in the future, if you needed more money for Social Security, you'd
have to
reborrow?
KASICH: Well, Sam, the fact is that I think that's what the president
is
talking about, reducing debt as it comes due. And Americans are for paying
down
debt. But if the surplus is big enough, then I think we can have some tax
cuts
for Americans where they can have a little money back to solve their day
care
problems or their health care problems.
DONALDSON: Well, the reason I bring it up, I mean, it's one thing to be
able
to say, using the third rail of American politics, Social Security, touch
not
this money because it's for Social Security, when in fact -- correct me if
I am
wrong -- it's not being set aside, if there's a surplus for Social
Security. It
simply reduces the national debt.
KASICH: Well, Sam, that is exactly right. Now let me make it clear.
Republicans are for preserving Social Security and for fixing it. Chairman
Archer and I have just put a bill in to create
a commission. But you're right. It just would be used to reduce the
national
debt, which is a good thing for all Americans, young and old.
ROBERTS: Mr. Kasich, we're about out of time. But tell us when are you
going
to announce for president?
KASICH: Well, I don't have any intention of announcing today, Cokie.
I've
got to make a long assessment. Things are looking pretty good. I've got a
good
team. People seem to respond pretty well, and I seem to be raising some
money
to help me keep a Republican majority in the Congress.
But this is a long assessment period. And if I have the money, you
know, I
may just come on the show and tell you. I'm going to need you and Sam to
go out
and put up yard signs, and maybe George can drive the truck.
(LAUGHTER)
ROBERTS: Thank you.
DONALDSON: Will, the truck driver. I never thought of it that way. It's
good.
ROBERTS: Thank you very much, Chairman Kasich. We'll see about those
yard
signs.
Next, the House minority leader, Democrat Richard Gephardt.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DONALDSON: Joining us now from St. Louis, Missouri, the Democratic
leader in
the House of Representatives, Dick Gephardt.
Mr. Gephardt, welcome.
GEPHARDT: Good morning.
DONALDSON: It's good to have you on our program.
GEPHARDT: Good to be with you.
DONALDSON: I think everyone understands that the evidence, if there is
any,
against the president has not been presented, and obviously he has said he
had
no sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky. And at this point, I think a
lot
of people take him at his word.
DONALDSON: But the question is, if he turns out to be lying about that,
what
should happen to him?
GEPHARDT: Well, Sam, that's a hypothetical question, and Harry Truman,
another Missourian once said, I don't answer iffy questions. I really
think we
shouldn't jump to conclusions. I think the president deserves the benefit
of
the doubt. I think we all ought to take a deep breath, slow down, and wait
and
see how this occurs. But really to jump to conclusions is not fair to
anybody.
DONALDSON: Mr. Gephardt, do you think it would be all right to have a
sexual
relationship with a intern?
GEPHARDT: I don't. And the president has denied that. And again,
I don't think we ought to jump to these conclusions.
The American people are stable and smart. They're taking their time.
They're
not getting carried away. And frankly, Sam, what I hear out here I was
in a
neighborhood meeting yesterday. People here are not interested in the
scandal a
day in Washington. They want to know about health care, education, child
care.
And in my district, we're trying to repair Highway 21, the most dangerous
road
in Missouri.
DONALDSON: Certainly is, Mr. Gephardt. I've been on it.
But let me just say to you that the reason we're asking this question
is not
because of some prurient interest, but because all the polls, which say
that
the majority of the American people don't believe the president, but a
very
significant portion of that number say it's all right with them. And I
simply
want to ascertain whether you think it's all right if in fact he's lied
about
it.
GEPHARDT: Look. Again you're assuming facts that aren't there.
DONALDSON: I'm not. I'm simply citing.
GEPHARDT: We haven't established these facts.
DONALDSON: You say the public is not rushing to judgment. The public
apparently has some opinions, and I've just recited them to you.
GEPHARDT: Look, I don't think that's a good thing to do. But let's wait
and
see what the facts are before we start into a million hypotheticals. We
could
think up a million things that we might think are wrong and say, do you
think
this is wrong. Of course, a lot of things are wrong.
WILL: Congressman, Hillary Clinton says that Ken Starr is on a
political
vendetta and that among his abuses is he's intimidating witnesses. Do you
share
her criticism of Ken Starr?
GEPHARDT: Well, George, I think he's been at this for four years. He
spent
$40 million. I think any objective observer could say, when is he going to
bring this to an end? I mean, how long does this go on? I think we've got
to
look at this special prosecutor law and make changes in it.
WILL: Well, I'll come to that in just a moment. But the president can
fire
an independent counsel for cause, and cause would be abuse of power. And
the
first lady clearly has accused him of abuse of power.
Isn't by logic the president almost required to fire him? If he's
intimidating witnesses and on a vendetta?
GEPHARDT: I don't think the president will do that. I don't think the
president should do that. This special counsel has been --independent
counsel's
been appointed under the law. He is supposedly doing his job.
But I just think that after four years and $40 million, we got to start
asking some questions about how this law is working. I think, maybe, it's
not
working at all well, and we ought to change the law, limit an independent
counsel to one particular fact situation, get it done in a meaningful
time, and
let's move on.
WILL: Let me ask you about another proposal coming from across the
river in
Carbondale, Illinois, from former Senator Paul Simon, who says, let's get
rid
of the independent counsel with all its separation of powers problems
anyway.
Let's politicize the attorney general by having the attorney general
picked for
a 10-year term from --confirmed by the Senate, but from a short list
prepared
by, say, a panel of judges. Does that sound reasonable to you?
GEPHARDT: It's something we ought to look at. What we're doing now is
not
working. We've had two recent independent counsels. One went for seven
years
and cost multiples of millions of dollars. This one's gone for four years
and
spent $40 million and really hasn't come up with much of anything.
ROBERTS: Mr. Gephardt, I will only ask you one thing on this line, and
then
we'll move on to the Democratic Party.
But I'm just curious -- Congress is filled with interns. Have you ever
had a
situation where you've given interns a series of gifts and had many
telephone
conversations with interns over and over?
GEPHARDT: No, and obviously you've got to treat people in the right
way, in
the appropriate way.
GEPHARDT: Again, these facts are not established. We've got to get this
out.
We can't rush to judgment and try to jump to conclusions. The president
has
denied that any -- all the allegations that have been made. And he
deserves the
benefit of the doubt.
And I must tell you again the people that I talk to out here in my
district
are interested in their problems. And they want to know when we're going
to get
to their problems and stop talking about other problems in Washington.
ROBERTS: Well, what about that? We've just heard John Kasich say that
the
agenda, which is, I would assume, would be your way of dealing with their
problems, isn't going to happen any way. That regardless of the
president's
problems, that the agenda's in trouble.
GEPHARDT: Cokie, I think it is going to happen. The president's speech
the
other night and the agenda he laid out is very popular with the American
people. That's one of the reasons that his ratings are high. He is
addressing
problems that people feel very strongly about.
They are worried about their children's education. They're worried
about
child care. They are worried about doing something about Medicare and
Social
Security.
The economy is good, I say that. But they feel very strongly about
these
concerns, and they want us to solve these problems, and
I think we're going to do it this year.
ROBERTS: Well, it's interesting. At the same time that the president's
approval is so high, polls are showing that the Republicans on that
question
of which party should hold the House of Representatives, that the
Republicans
are winning that question. So what are we seeing here?
GEPHARDT: Well, Cokie, those aren't the surveys I'm looking at. The
last
four major surveys I've seen show that we're about 10, 11 points ahead in
the
generic poll for the control of Congress. I think Democrats are going to
regain
control of the Congress primarily because of what I just said.
Democrats are the party that appears to be trying to solve the problems
that
people feel very strongly about. The Republicans are the party of no. They
don't want to do anything. They don't want to address the problems. They
just
think that incumbents will be popular, and we'll just go to the election.
People don't want to do that.
DONALDSON: Are you going to continue to say no to the president's
request
for fast track" authority?
GEPHARDT: I am very much for fast-track authority. I am for free trade
treaties. But I want the legislation to say to other countries that they
must
include an agreement that they will try to enforce their workers laws and
their
environment laws. I think that's only fair and reasonable, and I think
there's
a majority in Congress who would vote for that kind of trade authority.
DONALDSON: Is that a yes? You'll continue to say no?
GEPHARDT: It's a yes to the right kind of fast track.
(LAUGHTER)
And if we can get that, we'd pass it.
DONALDSON: Thank you very much, Congressman Gephardt. Thanks for
coming. And
come back, will you?
GEPHARDT: Thank you.
DONALDSON: All right. Up next, our weekly roundtable with George
Stephanopoulos and Bill Kristol.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROBERTS: Well, last week at this time this table declared that Bill
Clinton
could not survive. Some even said he might not make it through the week.
We
will not name names.
But joining us again, ABC News analyst George Stephanopoulos, Bill
Kristol.
Now gentlemen, what say ye?
DONALDSON: Well, write a personal reply.
(LAUGHTER)
I'm still sticking to what I said last week, but you have conveniently
forgotten what I said. I'll repeat it. If the evidence demonstrates the
president is not telling the truth -- we don't know that yet. Maybe there
is no
evidence. But if the evidence shows the president is not telling the
truth,
he's lied about this,
I believe he'll resign. And I think he'll resign within days of the
presentation of that evidence.
STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't think he'll resign.
DONALDSON: And that's what I said last week, and I'm sticking to my
story.
STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't think he'll ever resign. But he will be in big
trouble.
You know, there is a historical precedent here, and it goes back to
1992.
After the Gennifer Flowers story broke in New Hampshire, the
president's approval ratings went -- well, he was governor then. The
approval ratings went up, because people don't really want this rubbed in
their
faces. But then the draft came in. Second question's about credibility. He
dropped 17 points in three days.
STEPHANOPOULOS: This is a long, long game. The White House had a very
good
week, but it's not over.
WILL: In July, going into July 1973, which was the 13th month, going
into
the second year of the Watergate affair, Nixon had won. And then Herbert
Butterfield got debriefed and a taping system was revealed.
I'm not saying that tapes are going to go forward. You have to be
confident
of the president's position. You have to assume that all the shoes have
dropped. And given the pattern of this gentleman, you can't assume that.
ROBERTS: Imelda Marco's closet could be there. Yes. But
KRISTOL: Well, given the pattern, you know, it will some facts will
come
out about three more interns over the next month, and he'll be at 92
percent in
the polls.
(LAUGHTER)
WILL: I don't think so.
KRISTOL: It's really quite remarkable, though.
WILL: I don't think that.
KRISTOL: It's been a pretty amazing week.
WILL: I think what the public he has a constituency for an "even
if"
answer. That is, people are saying no when asked should the president
resign
even if he lied. That's a hypothetical. What if it becomes should the
president
resign even though he lied. Then things change.
STEPHANOPOULOS: You know, there's a different word. And it's when the
word
"because" comes in that he gets into trouble.
He's sticking with a hard-core denial right now. Sooner or later, he
has to
explain why he was talking to Monica Lewinsky, sending her gifts. And in
some
ways, the explanation will be more problematic than the denial.
ROBERTS: But does he have to? I mean
STEPHANOPOULOS: Of course, he does.
ROBERTS: Mrs. Clinton said on GOOD MORNING AMERICA this week that the
president and Vernon Jordan were not going to say anything more. The
investigation is ongoing. It's very convenient. And that that's that.
DONALDSON: Well, there are two courts -- the court of public opinion is
the
stronger one. That's the dangerous one.
ROBERTS: Well, that's the one where he's having a good time.
DONALDSON: The court that Kenneth Starr is well, the court that
Kenneth
Starr is working on, though, is a court that could provide the evidence t
hat
changes public opinion.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But you know, the president is helped by Ken Starr,
because
he's just incompetent or unethical or both. He hauls in low-level White
House
officials. He can't control his informants, like Linda Tripp, and he has a
lot
of leaks out of his grand jury.
DONALDSON: But, George, he may not have the evidence.
ROBERTS: But really, what is the deal with Ken Starr? I mean, it does
look
like I mean, we just heard $40 million. What's happening here?
KRISTOL: I don't think he's unethical. But I have talked to several
members
of the vast right-wing conspiracy this week. I wish it were as vast as
Mrs.
Clinton thinks it is.
ROBERTS: Well, we are all part of it. It's exciting.
KRISTOL: Yes, it's got about 32 people in it.
DONALDSON: When they accuse me of being a right winger, I think it's
all
through.
KRISTOL: I think it's all through, too.
(LAUGHTER)
And there's not a whole lot of confidence in Kenneth Starr. I mean,
he's a
decent man. He was a good judge. He was a serious solicitor general. He is
not
a prosecutor.
And the truth is when you are dealing with, in my view, a president
who's
willing to lie and a White House that is willing to stonewall, you need a
real
prosecutor.
DONALDSON: But, Bill
KRISTOL: You need a Rudy Giuliani who's going to go in there and put
people
up before the grand jury one after another, no preparation, no messing
around,
no building a case from the little guy to the medium-sized guy to the big
guy,
put Clinton under oath, put these people under oath - what happened on
the
night of December 28th in the White House? And if they don't tell the
truth,
indict them for perjury the next day. But that's not Kenneth Starr.
STEPHANOPOULOS: And, Bill, you're right, because he's holding Monica
Lewinsky out there. It now looks like he's trying to get her to change her
story by sweating her out in public for a week. And it just doesn't make
any
sense.
DONALDSON: But you're talking about the president's strong statement.
You're
right. He came out last Monday and couldn't have been more forceful. He
wagged
his finger at the American public and said you listen to me. And the body
language was terrific, and he made a forceful denial.
ROBERTS: About that woman.
DONALDSON: About that woman - I'm quoting him. But if he turns out to
have
lied, I think people are not going to think that that was a wonderful
statement, and someday he will have to explain it.
STEPHANOPOULOS: I agree with you. I totally agree with you.
ROBERTS: George
DONALDSON: I mean, this incomprehensible thing for Mr. Ginsburg that
somehow
presidents of United States call up interns just to say, how are you
doing, I'm
just fine. Nobody in the world believes that.
(LAUGHTER)
ROBERTS: Do you -- we've alluded to the polls here. But what do you
make of
them?
WILL: Well, I think the country is decent and wants the results of the
election to hold. They don't want to reverse. They want to think well of
the
president, and I understand that.
Look what they now have to believe, though.
They have to believe that Gennifer Flowers lied, that the
Clinton-Flowers
tapes were essentially lies, that Paula Jones was sent forward to the
hotel
room for innocent reasons, that she then lied about what happened in the
room,
that Kathleen Willey lied, and that Monica Lewinsky spent 20 hours lying
to Ms.
Tripp. It's getting real hard.
You know, the Queen of Hearts in "Through The Looking Glass" says I
can
believe impossible things. I believe six impossible things before
breakfast.
But it's getting hard to do.
DONALDSON: But most of the public would agree with you. They don't
believe
that, but they still say it's OK, some of them.
STEPHANOPOULOS: No, no, no, it's not that. It's just they prefer not to
think about it.
DONALDSON: Yes.
STEPHANOPOULOS: In many ways, it's like this whole episode has turned
the
whole country into a dysfunctional family.
ROBERTS: Great.
STEPHANOPOULOS: They just want it to go away. Don't tell us. We don't
want
to see this guy.
DONALDSON: But suppose it won't go away.
STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't disagree with that.
DONALDSON: We're going to have this spectacle next...
ROBERTS: How do you -- how do you interpret the polls? How do you
explain
the polls?
KRISTOL: No, 1-- I think we're all right. The American people are
nice. The
president of the United States went on television and looked them in the
eye
and said, there's nothing to this story. They want to believe the
president of
the United States.
ROBERTS: Would they want to believe it if their pocketbooks were empty
and
that the
WILL: Yes, yes.
ROBERTS: Yes?
WILL: Yes.
KRISTOL: Yes, but I don't think the economy is the key. And I think it
is
that the American people are nice people. They're too nice, in fact, too
trusting.
And also let's -- remember this, no one else has gone on TV and said
the
president of the United States isn't telling the truth. The Republican
leader
had a response to the State of the Union and did not even make a
hypothetical
statement.
If it's true, he has to go. The Economist magazine this week, a
centrist
magazine that endorsed Bill Clinton for president in 1992, has on its
cover,
"If It's True, Go."
People take cues from their leaders. And I do think that was a clever
political move
ROBERTS: Well, you know
KRISTOL:
for the Republicans to stay out of it.
ROBERTS: the question is
KRISTOL: But -- but they have not seen anyone on TV
ROBERTS: But you said that they take cues from their leaders.
KRISTOL: saying.
ROBERTS: And one of the questions that we now have is, what is this
going to
mean for the country, the parties down the line? And one of the most
disturbing
polls I saw this week was one that said 44 percent of the people said that
if
their 21-year-old daughter had the opportunity to serve as an intern at
Bill
Clinton's White House that they would not want their daughters to do that.
Now, what kind of cue is that to take from a leader?
STEPHANOPOULOS: And that's where the long-term, chronic political
problems
are going to be for the president. You know, he's -- he also has to do
something for Democrats and for his Vice President Al Gore. He said there
was
nothing -- no improper relationship.
Eventually, when this discussion of what the relationship is comes out,
he's
going to have to either apologize or concede mistakes. Or he's going to
leave a
lot of Democrats in the country thinking that we are really lowering
standards.
DONALDSON: You say eventually. We're going to have a spectacle next
Friday.
There's a news conference scheduled with the president of the United
States and
the prime minister of Britain, Tony Blair. Now the first question from
Helen
Thomas, whoever gets that, is going to be, Mr. President, what was your
relationship?
I suppose he'll say, I can't discuss that, the proper time's not now.
But there will have to be additional questions? We're not going to be
quiet,
because these questions have to be asked
STEPHANOPOULOS: And that will work for the president. You guys will
make
ROBERTS: Right.
DONALDSON: It will. I understand that. It will work for the president
to be
seen as these yapping curs of the press. I would like to suggest to the
White
House that they ought to have a news conference with Tony Blair and then a
separate news conference with
the president, at which time we would not ask those questions at the
Tony
Blair
STEPHANOPOULOS: Good luck
DONALDSON: Bill Clinton news conference.
(LAUGHTER)
ROBERTS: When you say you say the American people are too nice.
George
says that this could lead to a lowering of the standards for the country.
I
mean, is that one of the long-term effects of this whole thing?
KRISTOL: Sure, I mean, Bill Bennett has an explanation of this. If the
polls, he -- if the polls go down, Clinton's in trouble. If the polls stay
high, the country's in trouble. And I really do believe that.
What was that famous C.S. Lewis, the great British author? If we -- if
we --
"if we mock honor, we shouldn't be surprised to find traitors in our
midst."
If we have a culture that mocks honesty, we're not going to take lying
seriously.
WILL: This is
KRISTOL: And I do think that is worrisome.
WILL: This is a great uncontrolled experiment now under way about
having
vulgarians in the most conspicuous offices in the republic. And it can't
be
good. It has to add to the coarsening of life in America.
But let me say conservatives are complicit in this. First of all,
because
they have not adequately policed the lunatics on their side, giving Mrs.
Clinton an opportunity to wave them as a bloody banner.
But second, conservatives have gone round over the years saying the
government is incompetent and run by liars and can't deliver the mail. And
then
they turn around and say, this is terrible because it's not delivering
values
and moral lessons. If you can't deliver a post card, you can't deliver the
mail. And the general libeling of government is part of the problem.
DONALDSON: Well, we're certainly already coarsening the dialogue. I
mean,
the kinds of jokes that are now accepted in not just newsrooms, but
everywhere,
and women as well as men initiate them, are ones that I would not have
thought
we would have told. Certainly, three months ago, had we told them, we'd be
up
in sexual harassment charges immediately.
ROBERTS: Well, that's something that we right away, we've had that
conversation here. But there are stories in the paper today that people
who are
experts on this subject say, well, now, the rules could all change. Are we
really seeing a change here?
STEPHANOPOULOS: I think that's probably overrating a little bit. This
is not
over yet, and I think that there still can be a very strong reaction
against
all of this talk, if it turns out to be true.
People are suspending judgment. They're not making judgments yet, and
we
have a long way to go.
ROBERTS: Is it possible we'll never know?
DONALDSON: No, we'll know. Oh, no, the system will work. The mills of
the
gods grind slow but exceedingly fine.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Even if we don't know, people will make judgments.
KRISTOL: But I don't know. Whatever happens to Clinton -- and I still
think
he will not make it through this -- it seems to me we could have a
cultural
reaction to this that could be very important over the next five or 10
years.
ROBERTS: Well, and we will see. That's all for now. Sam and I will be
back
with some final notes.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DONALDSON: Well, this week, the president is going to be busier than
that
one legged man at a kicking contest, Cokie.
On Monday, he unveils his budget. On Tuesday, he goes to Albuquerque,
New
Mexico I'll be with him -- to sell his budget.
On Wednesday, a big East Room ceremony on another subject.
Thursday, the prime minister of Britain comes. Big pomp and
circumstance.
On Friday, the joint news conference.
Lots of stuff in the air, perhaps no answers though.
ROBERTS: Well, and we don't know how this all plays out in terms of
this
legal case. It is reported that Bruce Lindsey, the president's aide and
good
friend, will be going before the grand jury this week. And of course, we
don't
know what will happen in the Monica Lewinsky immunity situation.
Congress, meanwhile, will be up there, and word now on the Hill, as the
Democrats say, we want the president's agenda.
DONALDSON: OK. For the latest in the crisis in the White House, stay
with
ABC News. Tomorrow morning, GOOD MORNING AMERICA, with Charlie Gibson and
Lisa
McRee -- we'll have all the latest developments.
ROBERTS: And finally, at 11:30 a.m. Eastern Time, Bill Kristol will be
online. That's abcnews.com on America Online. Key word --"ABC News."
That's all for this Sunday morning. Have a good week.
END
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Robert D. Kyle (CN=Robert D. Kyle/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD D
CREATION DATE/TIME: 4-FEB-1998 19:22:49.00
SUBJECT: fast-track
TO: Anna E. Cushing (CN=Anna E. Cushing/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Anna - I made a few edits. It's good, as you see below. Bob
Forwarded by Robert D. Kyle/OPD/EOP on 02/04/98
07:22 PM
Anna E. Cushing
02/04/98 09:57:21 AM
Record Type: Record
To: Robert D. Kyle/OPD/EOP
cc:
Subject: fast-track
Bob, could you let me know about this language ...
anything we should
add/change? thx. anna
Forwarded by Anna E. Cushing/WHO/EOP on 02/04/98
09:43 AM
Anna E. Cushing
01/30/98 04:04:27 PM
Record Type: Record
To: KYLE_R@ A1 @ CD @ LNGTWY
cc:
Subject: fast-track
Bob, is this lang. still o.k. to go out to people writing in urging POTUS
to continue efforts to gain f.t.a.? Pls. let me know. thx. anna
Thank you for your letter supporting fast-track authority for the
President.
As you know, I believe that fast-track authority is crucial to enhancing
America's ability to bring down trade barriers - giving American
companies the opportunity to open new markets and ensuring U.S. leadership
in the world. Please be assured that I will continue to work with
Congress to renew this authority.
I appreciate knowing your views and look forward tow working with you and
other interested parties on this vital issue. Again, thanks for writing.
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Christopher J. Lavery (CN=Christopher J. Lavery/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1)
CREATION DATE/TIME:18-FEB-1998 13:42:10.00
SUBJECT: Chuck, I think this is what you were looking for.
TO: Honorable Jimmie Lou Fisher ( Honorable Jimmie Lou Fisher @ 15016823842 @ fax [ UNKNOWN 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
PREPARING AMERICA FOR THE 21st CENTURY
Background on President Clinton,s Agenda for the Nation
State of the Union Address
January 27, 1998
PREPARING AMERICA FOR THE 21st CENTURY
B,s Agenda for the Nation
State of the Union Address
January 27, 1998
ECONOMY THAT OFFERS OPPORTUNITY
Entitlement Reform
Social Security
Education
Smaller Classes with Qualified Teachers to Improve Reading in Grades 1-3
Modern School Buildings to Improve Student Learning
Education Opportunity Zones: Helping Students in Poor Communities Reach
High Standards
Expanding Access to Safe After-School Care
Mentoring: Early Intervention to Promote College Attendance
Leading the Global Economy
Community Economic Adjustment Initiative
Fast Track Trading Authority
Africa Trade Initiative
Child Labor
Training
GI Bill for Workers
A SOCIETY ROOTED IN RESPONSIBILITY
Moving People from Welfare to Work
Welfare-to-Work Housing Vouchers
Increasing Child Support Collections
Falling Welfare Caseloads
Business Welfare-to-Work Commitments
Health Care
Consumer Bill of Rights & Genetic Screening Protections
Providing New Options for Americans Ages 55 to 65
to Access Health Insurance
21st Century Research Fund
Tobacco
Passing Bipartisan Tobacco Legislation
Child Care
Double the Number of Children Receiving
Child Care Subsidies to More than Two Million
Increase Tax Credits for 3 Million Families
Provide New Business Tax Credits
Promote Early Learning
Provide After-School Care
for up to Half a Million Children
Step Up Enforcement of State Health
and Safety Standards
Facilitate Background Checks on
Child Care Providers
Increase Scholarships for Training
for Child Care Providers
Invest in Research
Increase Head Start and Double the Number of Children Served by Early
Head Start
Crime
Juvenile Justice Crime Bill
-- Preventing Under 21s from buying guns
-- New Prosecutors and Probation Officers
-- Tough, New Sentences on Drug Dealers
-- Funding to Keep Schools Open Later and Promote Anti-Truancy Initiatives
and Curfews
Foreign Policy
NATO Enlargement
Securing the Peace in Bosnia
Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
Strengthening the Biological Weapons Convention
U.S. Arrears to the United Nations
A NATION THAT LIVES BY COMMUNITY
Political Reform/Reinventing Government
Free Television Time
Enact Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform
IRS Reform
Community Empowerment
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
Second Round of Empowerment Zones
&Play-By-the-Rules8 Homeownership Proposal
Homeownership Zones
Environmental Protection
Climate Change initiative
Clean Water Initiative
Food Safety
Civil Rights
Reforming and Strengthening the EEOC
THE MILLENIUM PROJECT
Technology
A Family-Friendly Internet
Making the Internet a Global Free-Trade Zone
Cloning
Culture
Save America,s Cultural and Historical Treasures
AN ECONOMY THAT OFFERS OPPORTUNITY
ENTITLEMENT REFORM
Reserve Surplus until Social Security is Reformed
Over the next two years, President Clinton is firmly committed to
strengthening Social Security for the 21st century. He therefore proposes
that we should not spend any of the projected budget surpluses on anything
else until we have reformed Social Security. This proposal, which
continues the fiscally responsible policies that have been the hallmark of
this Administration, is intended to reserve the surpluses in case they are
needed for Social Security reform.
EDUCATION
Small Classes with Qualified Teachers to Improve Reading in Grades 1-3
President Clinton is proposing a $12.4 billion initiative over 7 years
($7.3 billion over 5 years) to help local schools provide small classes
with qualified teachers in the early grades. This initiative will help
ensure that every child receives personal attention, learns to read
independently, and gets a solid foundation for further learning. The new
initiative will reduce class size from a nationwide average of 22 in
grades 1-3 to an average of 18, providing funds to help local school
districts hire an additional 100,000 well-prepared teachers. The
initiative will also provide funds to states and local school districts to
test new teachers, develop more rigorous teacher testing and certification
requirements, and train teachers in effective reading instruction
practices. School districts will be accountable for demonstrating gains
in reading achievement. These steps will help ensure that first through
third grade students are receiving high-quality reading instruction in
smaller classes from competent teachers.
Modern School Buildings to Improve Student Learning
For students to learn, schools must be well-equipped and be able to
accommodate smaller class sizes. To address these and other critical
needs, President Clinton is proposing federal tax credits to pay interest
on nearly $22 billion in bonds to build and renovate public schools. This
initiative provides more than double the assistance of the
Administration,s earlier school construction proposal, which covered half
the interest on an estimated $20 billion in bonds. The tax credits will
cost the Treasury $5 billion over 5 years, and more than $10 billion over
ten years. Of the $22 billion in bond authority, nearly $20 billion for a
new School Modernization Bonds. Half of this bond authority will be
allocated to the 100 school districts with the largest number of
low-income children, and the other half will be allocated to the states.
Education Opportunity Zones:
Helping Students in Poor Communities Reach High Standards
This initiative will strengthen public schools and help students master
the basic and advanced skills where the need is greatest: in high-poverty
urban and rural communities where low expectations, too many poorly
prepared teachers, and overwhelmed school systems create significant
barriers to high achievement. The Education Department will select
approximately fifty high-poverty urban and rural school districts with:
(1) a demonstrated commitment to use high standards and tests as tools to
identify and provide help to students, teachers and schools who need it;
(2) a strategy to prevent students from falling behind by ensuring quality
teaching, challenging curricula, and extended learning time; (3) programs
to end social promotion and turn around failing schools; and (4) evidence
of improved student achievement. Added investments in these communities
will accelerate their progress and provide models of successful,
standards-based reform for the nation. The President's initiative will
invest $200 million in FY99, and $1.5 billion over 5 years, in raising
achievement and sharing lessons learned with school districts around the
country.
Early Intervention to Promote College Attendance
President Clinton will soon announce a long-term effort to bring college
opportunity to children in high-poverty areas by providing their families
with early information about financial aid and appropriate academic
preparation, as well as mentoring and other support services to help the
children stay on track through high school graduation and into college.
LEADING THE GLOBAL ECONOMY
Fast Track
America needs fast track to continue to create higher-paying jobs for more
Americans. Without it, America,s role as the largest exporter in the
world will be put in jeopardy. And with new markets opening around the
world, it is more important than ever to give the President traditional
trade authority to break down trade barriers that put American products
made by American workers at a disadvantage. Fast track legislation is
essentially an agreement between Congress and the president on how
Congress will consider United States trade agreements negotiated by the
President. As part of that deal, the President agrees to extensively
consult and coordinate with Congress throughout trade negotiations. In
return, Congress votes on legislation implementing trade deals within a
fixed period of time, on a up or down basis, and with no amendments. Every
president since 1974 has enjoyed fast track authority.
Africa Trade Initiative
We are working with members from both parties to secure swift passage of
legislation that will bring the promise of 21st century prosperity to
African nations that are prepared to undertake the hard work of reform.
This legislation will introduce a new era of prosperity and partnership
between African reformers and the United States, expanding trade
opportunities for African and American workers, farmers and companies, and
hope and opportunity for our children. This legislation will encourage
African nations to undertake sound growth policies by expanding trade and
encouraging investment.
Child Labor
This initiative will make the U.S. a world leader in the fight to reduce
child labor. The initiative focuses on reducing the most intolerable
forms on child labor --&slavery8 through forced or indentured labor,
work by very young children, and work in dangerous conditions -- by
increasing the nation,s contribution to the International Program for the
Elimination of Child Labor (IPEC) from $3 million to $30 million. The
proposal also calls for additional agents for the U.S. Customs Service to
enforce the ban on the importation of goods made with forced or indentured
child labor, with a particular focus on rugs from South Asia. On the
domestic front, the proposal includes a $50 million increase in migrant
education to serve 100,000 more children of migrant farm workers and a $9
million increase in the Department of Labor budget to enforce U.S. child
labor laws especially in the agricultural sector.
Community and Economic Adjustment Initiative
To help communities compete in a global economy, the Community and
Economic Adjustment Initiative will borrow a page from the
Administration's successful adjustment effort for base closure
communities. Modeled after the Defense Department's highly respected
Office of Economic Adjustment, the Office of Community and Economic
Adjustment (OCEA) will provide grants and other assistance to communities
to develop an economic adjustment strategy. The President will propose
$50 million in additional community adjustment assistance as part of the
Commerce Department's Economic Development Administration,s (EDA)
budget. This will allow us to do more for communities that have suffered
through sudden and severe economic dislocation, such as plant closings.
As OEA has done for base closure communities, OCEA will closely with the
Departments of Labor, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, and
other federal agencies to make communities aware of all available federal
resources and to provide a coordinated Administration response.
TRAINING
Reform of the Federal Job Training System
The President renewed his call for Congressional action to reform the job
training system. In his 1995 G.I. Bill for America,s Workers, he called
for individual empowerment through skills grants, streamlining through One
Stop Career Centers, and better results through tough performance
standards. The House has passed legislation based on his vision. The
Workforce Investment Partnership Act has bipartisan support and is under
consideration in the Senate.
A SOCIETY ROOTED IN RESPONSIBILITY
MOVING PEOPLE FROM WELFARE TO WORK
Welfare to Work Housing Vouchers
The President's budget will provide $283 million in FY99 for 50,000 new
housing vouchers for welfare recipients who need housing assistance to get
or keep a job. Families could use these housing vouchers to move closer
to a new job, to reduce a long commute, or to secure more stable housing
to eliminate emergencies that keep them from getting to work every day on
time. These vouchers, awarded to communities on a competitive basis, will
give people on welfare a new tool to make the transition to a job and
succeed in the work place. The proposal will complement the President,s
$100 million a year welfare to work transportation plan, part of his
NEXTEA bill, which will help welfare recipients make their daily commutes.
Increasing Child Support Collections
President Clinton,s crackdown on deadbeat parents is paying off: child
support collections rose to a record $13 billion in 1997, an increase of
63 percent since 1992. In the State of the Union, the President set a
goal of increasing collections to $20 billion by the year 2000.
Falling Welfare Caseloads
The President announced that we have met two years ahead of schedule --
the challenge he made in last year,s State of the Union to move two
million more Americans off of welfare by the year 2000. New caseload
numbers show that welfare caseloads fell by 4.3 million since President
Clinton took office, two million more than the 2.25 million decline he
announced last year. The new figures, from September 1997, show 9.8
million Americans on welfare, down from 14.1 million in January 1993 -- a
drop of 30 percent.
Business Welfare to Work Commitments
In his State of the Union address last year, the President challenged the
business community to create jobs so that people can move from welfare to
work. Today, nearly 3,000 companies have accepted the President,s
challenge and joined a new national effort, called the Welfare to Work
Partnership, which was launched at the White House in May. Now, the
President has challenged thousands more companies to join the Partnership
to give even more people a chance to work their way off welfare.
HEALTH CARE
Protecting Patients Through a Consumer Bill of Rights and Genetic
Screening Protections
The President called on Congress to pass federally enforceable consumer
health care protections before it adjourns this fall. This Health Care
Bill of Rights should contain a range of protections, including guaranteed
access to needed health care specialists to ensure that patients are
provided appropriate high quality care, access to emergency room services
when and where the need arises, an assurance that medical records are
confidential, and access to a meaningful internal and external appeals
process for consumers to resolve their differences with their health plans
and health care providers. The nation,s health care system has changed
dramatically, with more than 100 million Americans now in managed care
plans. This legislation will ensure that whether Americans have
traditional health insurance or managed care, they are assured quality
care. And to ensure that new advances in genetics are used to improve
health rather than to discriminate, the President has called for
legislation prohibiting the use of genetic screening to discriminate in
health insurance and employment.
Creating a Historic &21st Century Research Fund8
With Unprecedented Increases in Biomedical Research at the National
Institutes of Health (NIH).
Scientists are on the cusp of important new breakthroughs in biomedical
research, which could revolutionize the way medical experts understand,
treat, and prevent some of our most devastating diseases. To promote this
progress, the President,s budget contains a historic upfront investment
in biomedical research a 1.15 billion increase in FY 1999 -- and
proposes an increase in NIH funding of more than 50 percent over the next
five years. Under the President,s proposal, the NIH will devote over $20
billion to biomedical research in 2003.
Providing New Options for Americans Ages 55 to 65 to Obtain
Health Insurance, Including Buying Into Medicare
Americans ages 55 to 65 are one of the most difficult-to-insure
populations: they have less access to and a greater risk of losing
employer-based health insurance; and they are twice as likely to have
health problems as the population generally. The President ,S proposal
gives this vulnerable population three new ways to gain access to health
insurance by: (1) allowing Americans ages 62 to 65 to buy into Medicare,
through a premium that ensures that this policy is self-financed; (2)
assisting vulnerable displaced workers 55 and over by offering those who
have involuntarily lost their jobs and health care coverage a similar
Medicare buy-in option; and (3) giving Americans 55 and over who have lost
their retiree benefits access to their former employers , health
insurance.
TOBACCO
Passing Comprehensive Bipartisan Tobacco Legislation That Reduces Teen
Smoking and Changes the Way Tobacco Companies Do Business
Every day 3,000 young people start smoking and 1,000 of them will die
prematurely from a tobacco-related disease. The President called on
Congress to pass comprehensive national bipartisan legislation that
includes five key principles: (1) it must mandate the development of a
comprehensive plan to reduce teen smoking, including raising the cost of
cigarettes by $1.50 per pack over the next 10 years as necessary to meet
youth smoking targets; (2) it must affirm the FDA ,S full authority to
regulate tobacco products; (3) it must include measures to hold tobacco
companies accountable, especially for marketing products to children; (4)
it must include concrete measures to improve public health, from investing
in research to reducing second-hand smoke to expanding smoking cessation;
and (5) it must protect the financial well-being of tobacco farmers and
their communities from the loss of income caused by our efforts to reduce
smoking.
CHILD CARE INITIATIVE
Double the Number of Children Receiving Child Care Subsidies
to More than Two Million
The President proposed to expand the Child Care and Development Block
Grant to help working families struggling to meet the costs of child care.
This block grant is the primary federal subsidy program to pay for child
care, enabling low-income parents to work. Funds are distributed by
formula to the states to operate direct child care subsidy programs, as
well as to improve the quality and availability of care. The President ,S
initiative will more than double the number of children served from the
one million served in FY 95 (the latest year for which data are
available). The President ,S budget will increase funding for the block
grant by $7.5 billion (plus a state match) over five years, which will
enable states to provide subsidies for more than two million children by
2003.
Increase Tax Credits for Child Care for Three Million Working Families
The Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit provides tax relief to taxpayers
who pay for the care of a child under 13 or a disabled dependent or spouse
in order to work. The credit is equal to a percentage of the taxpayer ,S
employment-related expenditures for child or dependent care, with the
amount of the credit depending on the taxpayer ,S income. The
President ,S proposal increases the credit for families earning under
$60,000, providing an additional average tax cut of $358 for these
families and eliminating income tax liability for almost all families with
incomes below 200% of poverty ($35,000 for a family of four) that claim
the maximum allowable child care expenses. The President ,S budget will
include $5.2 billion over five years to expand the Child and Dependent
Care Tax Credit for three million working families.
Provide New Business Tax Credits
The child care initiative includes a tax credit to businesses that provide
child care services for their employees, by building or expanding child
care facilities, operating existing facilities, training child care
workers, or providing child care resources and referral services. The
credit covers 25% of qualified costs, but may not exceed $150,000 per
year. The President ,S budget will include approximately $500 million
over five years for these tax credits.
Promote Early Learning
Research shows that children ,S experiences in the earliest years are
critical to their development and future success. The President ,S
proposed Early Learning Fund provides challenge grants to communities
(distributed by states) to improve early learning and the quality and
safety of child care for children ages zero to five. Funds may be used
for the following activities: providing basic training to child care
providers (including first aid and CPR); connecting individual child care
providers to centers for education and support; assisting child care
providers to meet accreditation and licensing requirements; linking child
care providers with health professionals, and supporting the inclusion of
young children with special needs in quality child care settings; reducing
group sizes and child-to-staff ratios; and providing home visits, parent
education, and consumer education about child care. The President ,S
Early Learning Fund builds on state initiatives such as North Carolina ,S
Smart Start, which helps North Carolina ,S children enter school healthy
and ready to succeed. The President ,S budget will include $3 billion
over five years for this fund.
Increase Head Start and Double the Number of Children Served by Early Head
Start
Head Start provides early, continuous and comprehensive child development
and family support services, preparing children for a lifetime of learning
and development. The President ,S budget will invest an additional $3.8
billion over five years to reach his goal of serving one million children
by 2002, and doubling the number of infants and toddlers in Early Head
Start to 80,000.
Step Up Enforcement of State Health and Safety Standards
Building on the military ,S model child care program, this proposed
initiative will fund state efforts to improve licensing systems and
enforce child care health and safety standards, including by increasing
unannounced inspections of child care settings. The President ,S budget
will include $500 million over five years for this program.
Facilitate Background Checks on Child Care Providers
On the day of the White House Conference on Child Care, the President
transmitted to Congress the National Crime Prevention and Privacy Compact,
which will facilitate effective background checks on child care providers
by eliminating state law barriers to sharing criminal history information
for non-criminal purposes. Although the vast majority of child care
providers are dedicated to the teaching and nurturing of children, one
tragedy in child care is too many. Background checks are an important way
to ensure that the people watching our children are fit for this
responsibility.
Increase Scholarships and Training for Child Care Providers
At the White House Conference on Child Care, the President proposed
establishing a Child Care Provider Scholarship Fund to enable states to
provide scholarship funds to students working toward a child care
credential. Eligible child care workers must commit to remaining in the
field for at least one year for each year of assistance received and will
earn increased compensation or bonuses when they complete their course
work. The President proposed a federal investment of $250 million over
five years, which will support 50,000 scholarships per year. The
President is also proposing to expand the Department of Labor ,S Child
Care Apprenticeship Program to fund the training of child care providers.
Invest in Research
Because too little is known about our child care system, the President ,S
budget will increase support for data, research, and evaluation. This
research fund will also support a National Center on Child Care Statistics
and a child care hotline that parents can call to get information about
how to find child care in their communities and how to identify
appropriate, quality care for their children. In addition, the research
fund will support demonstration projects to test approaches to help new
parents who choose to stay home to care for their newborns or newly
adopted children. The President ,S budget will include $150 million over
five years for this fund.
Provides After-School Care for up to Half a Million Children a Year
The President proposes a dramatic expansion of the 21st Century Community
Learning Center Program to provide start-up funds (with a local match) to
school-community partnerships to establish or expand before- and
after-school programs for school-age children. The program increases the
supply of after-school care in a cost-effective manner by directing most
funds to programs that use public schools and their existing resources,
such as computers, gymnasiums, and sports equipment. The program also
includes a set-aside to fund programs run by community organizations. The
President ,S budget will request $800 million of new money for this
program, for a total of $1 billion over five years.
CRIME
Juvenile Crime Strategy
This initiative recognizes the threat juvenile crime poses to our
communities and calls on Congress to pass a comprehensive anti-gang and
youth violence strategy. The President ,S proposed legislation targets
gangs and violent juveniles by (1) funding for new prosecutors ($100
million) and probation officers ($60 million); (2) helping our kids to
stay gun- and drug-free by preventing violent juveniles from buying guns
when they turn 21; (3) enacting tough new sentences to punish adults who
sell drugs to kids and use kids to sell drugs; (4) helping kids to stay
in school, off drugs, and out of trouble with new funding to keep schools
open later and to promote anti-truancy initiatives and curfews ($95
million). In addition, the President ,S Child Care Initiative increases
five-fold current funding for Department of Education-sponsored after
school programs.
AMERICAN LEADERSHIP IN THE WORLD
NATO Enlargement
Europe's stability and America's security are closely linked. The
President ,S call for enlarging the NATO alliance strengthens the
alliance's core mission of collective defense and helps meet new threats
such as regional instability. Enlargement furthers other US objectives
including: Encouraging states in the region to settle border and ethnic
disputes with neighbors; strengthen civilian control of their militaries;
and increase tolerance for ethnic and religious minorities. NATO's
enlargement, combined with the Partnership for Peace program, the
NATO-Russia Founding Act and the NATO-Ukraine partnership will help erase
the outdated Cold War divisions and build, for the first time, an
undivided, democratic, and peaceful Europe.
Securing the Peace in Bosnia
The United States has an abiding interest in peace and stability in Bosnia
and a compelling interest in the implementation of the Dayton peace
accords. After 46 months of the worst war in Europe since WWII, 24 months
of implementing peace have helped put Bosnia on the path to lasting peace
and stability. Progress on implementation was made possible because of
prudent military support. We can now see the point where civil
implementation and peace can be self-sustaining - but Bosnia's fragile
peace still needs the support of American and allied troops when the
current NATO mission ends in June. The President still must approve a
detailed action plan being prepared by NATO military authorities after a
full review of all options. The President will insist that this action
plan have the following elements: an achievable mission tied to clear
benchmarks, not a deadline; force must be able to protect itself; the
U.S. must retain command; European allies must shoulder their full share
of responsibility; costs must be manageable; and the plan must have
substantial support of the Congress and the American people.
Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction Program (WMD)
President Clinton made clear that Iraq's efforts to develop nuclear,
chemical and biological weapons are unacceptable. U.N. inspectors have
done a remarkable job destroying more of Iraq ,S WMD potential than was
destroyed during the Gulf War itself. But Saddam is now refusing to allow
inspectors to complete their mission. All options are on the table to
make sure Iraq does not pursue their WMD program with impunity and
threaten the international community.
Biological Weapons
President Clinton announced tonight that the United States would lead the
effort to erect stronger international barriers against the proliferation
and use of biological weapons. Under this new initiative, the United
States will seek to strengthen the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) by
requiring nations that have joined the BWC to submit annual declarations
about facilities and activities that could be used for Biological weapon
purposes and agree to a tough international inspection system including bo
th voluntary and mandatory inspections.
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)
The President's call for Senate ratification of the CTBT will allow
America to maintain a safe and reliable nuclear deterrent while
constraining the proliferation of nuclear material and technology to rogue
states' weapons programs. CTBT will improve America's ability to detect
and deter nuclear explosive testing. CTBT's global network of sensors will
strengthen America's ability to monitor nuclear explosive testing across
the globe, as well as deter any nation from believing it can conduct a
nuclear explosive test undetected by the international community.
U.S. Arrears to the United Nations
The President also highlighted the need for prompt action on the payment
of U.S. arrears to the United Nations. The failure to pay undermines our
ability to reform the U.N. and hinders our leadership of that organization
at very time the U.N. is working to prevent Iraq from threatening
neighbors and the world with weapons of mass destruction. We also need
to give the International Monetary Fund the capacity to help prevent
global financial crises. Now, more than ever, our security at home and
our interests abroad demand that America meet our international
obligations, sharpen the tools to improve the stability of the world
economy, and increase our leverage in international organizations.
A NATION THAT LIVES BY COMMUNITY
POLITICAL REFORM/REINVENTING GOVERNMENT
Free Television Time
Spending on congressional campaigns has increased more than three times
the rate of inflation in the last decades and spending on television is
the primary reason. In 1972, candidates spent $25 million for political
ads; in 1996, they spent $400 million. In his State of the Union,
President Clinton announced that will request that the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) require broadcasters to give candidates
for Federal office free time as a condition of receiving a new, lucrative
license for digital television. It is time to update broadcasters
,
public interest obligations to meet new political and technological
realities.
Enact Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform
The President remains committed to the enactment of bipartisan campaign
finance reform. He is pleased that the leadership in Congress has agreed
to schedule a vote this Spring on the McCain-Feingold and Shays-Meehan
reform bills. But a vote on these bills is not enough. In his State of
the Union the President challenged Congress to enact real reform this
year. Acceptable campaign finance reform legislation must meet five
criteria: 1) it must be bipartisan; 2) it must be comprehensive; 3) it
must reduce the amount of money that is raised and spent on federal
elections; 4) it must help level the playing field between challengers and
incumbents; and 5) it cannot favor one party over the other.
IRS Reform
President Clinton is strongly committed to reforming the IRS. This spring
the Administration will launch the first of 33 Citizen Advocacy Panels.
These new panels will be locally-based, independent boards of citizens
established to monitor how local IRS offices treat taxpayers and help
taxpayers get their problems solved. These new panels are part of the
new era of customer service underway at the IRS. The successful new IRS
problem solving days, which have helped thousands of taxpayers get relief,
will continue around the country on a monthly basis. Additionally, as of
the first of the year, IRS phones are now operating 16 hours a day, six
days a week. For the first time, IRS offices will be open Saturday
mornings during the tax filing season March through mid-April to
provide taxpayers a convenient opportunity to walk-in and get any
questions answered. Also, the IRS expects this year to expand its
award-winning Telefile program. This innovative program allowed 4.7
million taxpayers to file their returns with a quick average 10 minute
phone call last year.
COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
Since its creation in 1986, the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) has
given states tax credits of $1.25 per capita to allocate to developers of
affordable housing. Even though building costs have increased 40 percent
in the last decade, the amount of the credit has not been adjusted for
inflation. Therefore, President Clinton and Vice-President Gore propose
to increase the cap on the LIHTC from $1.25 per capita to $1.75 per capita
* restoring the value of the credit to its 1986 level. Estimates suggest
that the LIHTC currently helps build 80,000-90,000 affordable housing
units each year. The President and Vice President ,S proposal to increase
the cap by 40 percent will create an additional 160,000-180,000 new rental
housing units for low-income American families over the next five years.
This proposal will cost $1.6 billion over five years.
Empowerment Zones
Building on the Administration ,S successful first round of Empowerment
Zones which has helped spur the creation of jobs and private investment in
America ,S distressed communities, the President's budget includes a
request for $1.7 billion to support flexible grants to 20 new Empowerment
Zone designations. The funding will be made available to the designated
communities over a 10 year period. The 15 urban designations will be
funded at $100 million each; and the five rural designations will be
funded at $40 million each. The Departments of Housing and Urban
Development and Agriculture will announce a competition this Spring that
will lead to the designation of the 20 new Empowerment Zones by December
1998.
&Play-by-the-Rules 8 Homeownership Proposal
The President ,S FY99 budget provides funds for the Neighborhood
Reinvestment Corporation to start a new initiative to help provide the
opportunity of homeownership to responsible families with a perfect rental
history. Under this initiative, we will help 10,000 lower-income and
often minority - families become homeowners. While the method of helping
each family buy their own home will differ, responsible families we will
be provided homeownership counseling, flexible assistance for downpayment
or closing costs, second mortgage loans for debt reduction, or
rehabilitation loans.
Homeownership Zones
The FY99 budget includes funds for Homeownership Zones to be used by
communities to reclaim abandoned and distressed neighborhoods through the
creation of large-scale developments of owner-occupied single-family
homes. Funds could be used for property acquisition, housing
construction, housing rehabilitation, demolition, site preparation,
homeownership counseling, relocation, housing marketing, activities to
ensure fair housing, and other activities essential to homeownership.
ENVIRONMENT
Climate Change Initiative
Following the historic agreement reached in Kyoto in December 1997, and as
part of the President ,S and Vice President ,S ongoing efforts to address
climate change, the President is proposing a dramatic new program of tax
cuts and R&D aimed at cutting greenhouse gas emissions. The proposed
package contains tax cuts to promote energy efficiency and additional
research and development spending covering the four major carbon-emitting
sectors of the economy (buildings, industry, transportation, and
electricity), plus carbon removal and sequestration, Federal facilities,
and cross-cutting analyses and research. This package complements the
other elements of the Administration ,S climate change plan, which include
working with industry to develop sector-by-sector initiatives to cut
emissions, incorporating energy efficiency goals into Federal procurement
and energy use, and restructuring the electricity industry. These efforts
strive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by improving efficiency and
reducing costs to the consumer. They provide a solid step on the way to
meeting the goals of the Kyoto Agreement.
Clean Water Initiative
This initiative will ease threats to the environment and public health by
helping states and communities curb polluted runoff from farms and city
streets, reducing exposure to harmful organisms and toxic contaminants in
drinking water and fish, and promoting community-based watershed
management in partnership with landowners and affected industries. The
initiative targets the 40 percent of the nation ,S waterways still unsafe
for fishing and swimming. It provides substantial new resources to assist
states in implementing these programs and to create incentives for farmers
to adopt practices that protect water quality.
Food Safety Initiative
The Clinton Administration launched a new food safety initiative last year
to put in place new science-based preventive systems to improve the safety
of seafood, meat, and poultry and begin work on a new early warning system
to help detect and respond to outbreaks of food borne illness. Our budget
will seek an even more substantial increase in funding to further enhance
food safety. The resources will go to a variety of initiatives,
including: giving FDA authority to prevent the importation of produce from
countries without safety precautions equivalent to our own; hiring FDA
inspectors to improve the safety of fruits and vegetables, both domestic
and imported; developing new ways for federal inspectors to detect
foodborne illnesses in meat and poultry and determine the source of
contamination; improving educational outreach on proper food handling; and
further expanding our early warning system and strengthening state
surveillance activities for foodborne illnesses.
CIVIL RIGHTS
Reforming and Strengthening the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
This initiative expands the EEOC ,S ADR program over three years to allow
as many as 70 percent of all complainants to choose mediation, rather than
the lengthy process of investigation and litigation. In the first year,
the EEOC will provide ADR in a projected 16,000 cases -- 20 percent of all
incoming cases and double the number currently sent to mediation. In
addition, through a combination of increased use of mediation, improved
information technology, and an expanded investigative staff, the EEOC will
reduce the average time it takes to resolve a private sector complaint
from over 9 months to 6 months, and reduce the backlog of cases from
64,000 to 28,000 by the year 2000. The proposal provides $279 million for
the EEOC for FY99 --- $37 million or 15 percent more than the enacted 1998
budget.
THE MILLENIUM PROJECT
TECHNOLOGY
A Family-Friendly Internet
President Clinton and Vice President Gore support a strategy to protect
children and create a safe, educational environment on the Internet that
is consistent with our First Amendment values. This strategy includes
cracking down on obscenity, child pornography, and online stalking, and
encouraging the private sector to develop filtering and blocking
technology for parents and teachers that is widely available and
effective. This fall, the Administration will join the private sector and
non-profit groups to support &Internet Teach-Ins 8 at schools and
libraries, which are designed to increase awareness of safe on-line
behavior for children and access to good content.
Making the Internet a Global Free-Trade Zone
The Administration is committed to creating an environment in which global
electronic commerce can flourish, so that every computer will be a window
open to every business, large and small. Over the next several years,
Internet commerce could increase to hundreds of billions of dollars per
year, boosting U.S. exports and creating new opportunities for small
start-up companies. President Clinton has directed the U.S. Trade
Representative to work with foreign governments to secure agreement that
all products and services delivered across the Internet and all equipment
from which the Internet is built - be free from tariffs.
Cloning
President Clinton has proposed legislation banning the cloning of human
beings. The President ,S legislative proposal prohibits for five years
the use of somatic cell nuclear technology to create a human being. The
legislation directs the National Bioethics Advisory Commission to report
to the President in four and half years on whether to continue the ban.
The proposal is carefully worded to ensure that it will not interfere with
beneficial biomedical and agricultural activities. In March 1997, the Pre
sident imposed a ban on the use of federal money for cloning human beings.
Save America ,S Treasures
Many of our most important cultural treasures -- such as the Star Spangled
Banner, the Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights -- are
seriously at risk. &Save America ,S Treasures 8 is a three year, $150
million initiative that will help stimulate support for the Nation ,S most
important preservation priorities. The funds will be administered by the
Department of Interior under the authority of the National Historic
Preservation Act. Half of the money will support preservation projects
identified at the national level the other half will go to support
state and local priorities.
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Jon P. Jennings (CN=Jon P. Jennings/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO D
CREATION DATE/TIME: 5-MAR-1998 19:36:30.00
SUBJECT: Hot Issues for Westport, Cincy, San Jose, Boston, NYC
TO: Brian Murphy (CN=Brian Murphy/OU=who/O=gov @ who [ UNKNOWN])
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Forwarded by Jon P. Jennings/WHO/EOP on 03/05/98
07:40 PM
JDorskind @ doc.gov
03/05/98 07:20:11 PM
Record Type: Record
To: Jon P. Jennings/WHO/EOP
cc: hubbard_K @ al.eop.gov, AMcNameel @ doc.gov, UnknownName @ doc.gov,
UnknownName @ doc.gov
Subject: Hot Issues for Westport, Cincy, San Jose, Boston, NYC
March 5, 1998
MEMORANDUM FOR THURGOOD MARSHALL, JR.
FROM:
Jim Dorskind
Director, Executive Secretariat
SUBJECT:
Hot Issues for Westport, CT, Cincinnati, OH, San
Jose, CA,
Boston, MA, and New York, NY
Westport, CT
The Economy: The local economy in Connecticut from Bridgeport to the New
York State line (Fairfield County) is very positive, finally emerging from
a long recession. Housing starts are way up, unemployment is way down. In
fact, many Fairfield County firms are reporting difficulties in finding
enough employees to hire. Construction of office space in Fairfield County
is expanding once again. This economic upsurge is underlined by the fact
that the State of Connecticut will experience a large budget surplus this
year. For the first time ever, more people work in Fairfield County than
commute from that area into New York City. In fact, firms from Manhattan
are relocating into Fairfield County. For example, Swiss Bank is currently
building it's North American headquarters in Stamford and will move some 1,
000 jobs from New York City.
Cincinnati, OH
None identified.
San Jose, CA
None identified.
Boston, MA
Labor Shortage: Massachusetts unemployment in December 1997 was 3.8
percent, (3.0 percent in the Greater Boston area). The labor shortage now
influences virtually every sector; high technology to services to
manufacturing. The paucity of employable workers has made training and
retraining programs a necessity. Further, it has given rise to concerns
that companies may begin to abandon Massachusetts in favor of locations
with more available workers. One private forecasting group is already
predicting a drop in the state's GDP growth to 3.4 percent from 1997's 4.4
percent.
Fast Track: Fast track authority and expanding free trade continue to be
topics of discussion. Larry Liebenow, CEO of Quaker Fabrics, Fall River,
MA, was recently quoted in the press saying that if the company "had
similar access to the rest of Latin America as we do to Mexico, we would
increase sales 15 percent, adding close to 300 people."
New York, New York
Currently, no issues.
Jim Dorskind
Director, Executive Secretariat
Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Commerce
Ph: 202-482-3934 Fax: 202-482-4576 [email protected]
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (ALL-IN-1 MAIL)
CREATOR: Nelson W. Cunningham (CUNNINGHAM_N) (WHO)
CREATION DATE/TIME:23-MAR-1998 19:08:18.76
SUBJECT: FAST TRACK PROSPECTS GROW DIM FOR 1998
TO: Thomas F. McLarty
(MCLARTY_T) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Eric Farnsworth
(FARNSWORTH_E) Autoforward to: Remote Addressee
( Eric
Farnsworth@eop@lngtwy@eopmrx) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Steve Ronnel
(RONNEL_S) Autoforward to: Remote Addressee
( Steven J.
Ronnel@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX ) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Ana Maria Salazar
(SALAZAR_A) Autoforward to: Remote Addressee
( Ana M.
Salazar@eop@Ingtwy@eopmrx) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Daniel Lesmez
(LESMEZ_D) Autoforward to: Remote Addressee
(Daniel
Lesmez@eop@lngtwy@eopmrx) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Carl Lingenfelter
(LINGENFELT_C) Autoforward to: Remote Addressee
(Carl
Lingenfelter@eop@lngtwy@eopmrx) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TO: Nelson W. Cunningham
(CUNNINGHAM_N) Autoforward to: Remote Addressee
(Nelson
W. Cunningham@eop@LNGTWY@EOPMRX (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
CC: Patricia A. McHugh
(MCHUGH_P) Autoforward to: Remote Addressee
(Patricia A.
McHugh@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
CC: Ana M. Duque
( Ana M. Duque@eop@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
TEXT:
Date: 03/23/98 Time: 18:25
CFast track prospects grow dim for 1998
WASHINGTON (AP) The Clinton administration is voicing
increasing doubt about its ability to win congressional passage
this year of what had been one of the president's top economic
priorities renewed authority to negotiate trade agreements.
U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky told reporters
Monday that the "painfully short" number of days that Congress is
scheduled to be in session this year were clouding the prospects
for winning approval of so-called fast track legislation. It would
grant the president authority to negotiate new trade agreements
that Congress must approve or reject without amendments.
An all-out administration effort to win fast-track authority
last November failed to overcome stiff opposition in the House. At
the time, the administration insisted it would try again in 1998
even though the chances for success looked even less likely in a
congressional election year.
On Monday, Barshefsky blamed the curtailed congressional
calendar for delays in pushing fast track.
``It is a painfully short legislative calendar," Barshefsky
said when asked about the chances of getting fast track approved
this year. Congress, anxious to get out on the campaign trail,
hopes to adjourn by Oct. 10 and is scheduled to meet no more than
70 days before then.
Barshefsky insisted the administration was "exploring every
possibility" but other administration officials have been even
more pessimistic.
Commerce Secretary William Daley told reporters last week that
fast track passage this year was ``unlikely," especially in light
of last year's extensive opposition.
Labor and environmental groups opposed the legislation unless it
contained more safeguards for worker rights and the environment.
They want to ensure that any new free trade agreements don't expose
American workers to unfair competition from developing countries
with lax labor or environmental standards.
Clinton needs fast track to achieve creation of a Western
Hemisphere free trade area by the year 2005. He is scheduled to
launch those negotiations at a summit with 33 other hemisphere
leaders in Santiago, Chile, April 17-19.
The administration can launch negotiations without fast track
authority. However, it is unlikely deal-making would progress very
far if Clinton lacks that authority since other countries don't
want to enter into hard bargaining unless they know Congress won't
renegotiate whatever agreements are reached.
Barshefsky and other trade ministers met last week in San Jose,
Costa Rica, to develop a blueprint for how the negotiations will
proceed. Clinton and the others leaders are expected to endorse it
next month.
The proposal calls for nine negotiating groups covering such
areas as market access, investment, services and agriculture to
begin meeting later this year.
In a compromise among cities seeking to serve as the negotiation
site, the trade ministers recommended that the talks begin in Miami
this year and move after two years to Panama City, Panama, with the
final two years in Mexico City.
APNP-03-23-98 1838EST
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Jeffrey A. Weinberg (CN=Jeffrey A. Weinberg/OU=OMB/O=EOP [OMB])
CREATION DATE/TIME: 3-APR-1998 11:31:20.00
SUBJECT: Title I of S.1404 Federal Commission on Statistical Policy
TO: William P. Marshall (CN=William P. Marshall/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Robert G. Damus (CN=Robert G. Damus/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP [ OMB
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Robert N. Weiner (CN=Robert N. Weiner/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: James C. Murr (CN=James C. Murr/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP [ OMB
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: James J. Jukes CN=James J. Jukes/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP [ OMB
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Katherine K. Wallman (CN=Katherine K. Wallman/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP [ OMB 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
This is a follow up of my e-mail to you last Friday with draft comments on
Title I of S. 1404.
Justice OLC (Eric Greenberg and Todd Peterson) have reviewed Title I of S.
1404 and the OMB staff draft comments. OLC believes that the Commission
is just advisory. Therefore, the method of appointing its members does
not raise constitutional concerns about the President's appointment
authority. Justice OLC defers on the argument about infringement on the
prerogatives of the President and is okay with our making it. Justice
OLC was okay with the other arguments opposing the provisons of Title I,
including the discussion of fast track consideration of the legislation
proposed by the Commission.
Accordingly, we will be circualting a draft Statement for the Record on S.
1404 that objects to Title I based on the prerogatives of the President
and the fast track authority.
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Jon P. Jennings (CN=Jon P. Jennings/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ])
CREATION DATE/TIME: 6-APR-1998 09:56:51.00
SUBJECT: Hot Issues for Chicago and Kansas City
TO: Brian Murphy (CN=Brian Murphy/OU=who/O=gov @ who [ UNKNOWN
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Forwarded by Jon P. Jennings/WHO/EOP on 04/06/98
10:02 AM
JDorskind @ doc.gov
04/03/98 03:12:05 PM
Record Type: Record
To: Jon P. Jennings/WHO/EOP
cc: JDoyle @ doc.gov
Subject: Hot Issues for Chicago and Kansas City
Jon -- This is almost not worth sending, but it's all we've been able to
get. Use it as you like. I'll see you at Bibb's going-away soiree.
jd
MEMORANDUM FOR THURGOOD MARSHALL, JR.
FROM:
James A. Dorskind
Director, Executive Secretariat
SUBJECT:
Hot Issues for Chicago, IL and Kansas City,
MO
Chicago, IL
Helms-Burton Act: The Chicago Chamber of Commerce, and most businesses in
Chicago, are against the trade restrictions imposed by the Helms-Burton Act
and support Administrative initiatives that lead to freer and fairer trade
practices in Cuba and worldwide.
Fast Track Authority: The Chicago Chamber of Commerce, Governor Edgar and
businesses throughout the State of Illinois support the restoration of Fast
Track negotiating authority.
Kansas City, MO
None identified.
Jim Dorskind
Director, Executive Secretariat
Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Commerce
Ph: 202-482-3934 Fax: 202-482-4576 [email protected]
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (ALL-IN-1 MAIL)
CREATOR: Nelson W. Cunningham (CUNNINGHAM_N) (WHO)
CREATION DATE/TIME: 9-APR-1998 17:41:17.86
SUBJECT: MCLARTY SEES TRADE PROGRESS EVEN WITHOUT FAST TRACK
TO: Thomas F. McLarty
(MCLARTY_T) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
CC: David C. Leavy
(LEAVY_D) (NSC)
READ: 9-APR-1998 20:00:19.95
CC: Steve Ronnel
(RONNEL_S) Autoforward to: Remote Addressee
( Steven J.
Ronnel@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)(WHO)
READ:NOT READ
CC: Eric Farnsworth
(FARNSWORTH_E) Autoforward to: Remote Addressee
(Eric
Farnsworth@eop@Ingtwy@eopmrx ) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
CC: Carl Lingenfelter
(LINGENFELT_C) Autoforward to: Remote Addressee
(Carl
Lingenfelter@eop@lngtwy@eopmrx) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
CC: Ana Maria Salazar
(SALAZAR_A) Autoforward to: Remote Addressee
( Ana M.
Salazar@eop@Ingtwy@eopmrx) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
CC: Daniel Lesmez
(LESMEZ_D) Autoforward to: Remote Addressee
(Daniel
Lesmez@eop@Ingtwy@eopmrx ) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
CC: Patricia A. McHugh
(MCHUGH_P) Autoforward to: Remote Addressee
Patricia A.
McHugh@EOP@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)(WHO)
READ:NOT READ
CC: Ana M. Duque
( Ana M. Duque@eop@LNGTWY@EOPMRX)
READ:NOT READ
CC: Dorothy Drengler
(DRENGLER_D) Autoforward to: Remote Addressee
( Dorothy
Drengler@eop@Ingtvy@eopmrx ) (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
CC: Jacqueline V. Voorhees
(VOORHEES_J) Autoforward to: Remote Addressee
(Jacqueline V.
Voorhees@eop@lngtwy@eopmr (WHO)
READ:NOT READ
TEXT:
Date: 04/09/98 Time: 16:07
AMcLarty sees trade progress even without fast track
WASHINGTON (AP) Congress' refusal to give President Clinton
expanded trade negotiating authority won't hamper next week's
formal launching of free-trade talks among Western Hemisphere
nations, a top White House official said Thursday.
But Mack McLarty, Clinton's envoy to the 34-nation conference,
suggested that "`fast-track" authority will eventually be needed
to shape the pacts.
"We are confident Congress will give the president the tools he
needs to finish the job," McLarty said in a speech to the National
Press Club previewing next week's Summit of the Americas in
Santiago, Chile.
At the last meeting of the hemisphere's 34 democratically
elected leaders, in Miami in December 1994, a goal was set for
establishment of a free-trade zone throughout the Americas by 2005.
McLarty said that goal remains, despite Clinton's setback in
Congress.
Although all presidents since Gerald Ford have had the special
trade negotiating authority, Clinton's lapsed and Congress so far
has refused to renew it.
After Clinton listed fast-track authority a key economic
priority of his second term, the administration had the renewal
bill withdrawn last November in the face of heavy Democratic
opposition much of it fueled by organized labor and environmental
groups. They are still unhappy with the North American Free Trade
Agreement that earlier linked markets in Canada and Mexico with the
United States.
Clinton vowed to fight for it again this year and administration
officials had hoped to have the authority in time for next week's
meeting. But the administration has yet to make the move, and
officials have recently suggested that the battle would not be
renewed until 1999.
``Certainly in a better world, we would like to have fast-track
authority. But I think we can make significant progress in the near
term without it," said McLarty, who was White House chief of staff
in Clinton's first term.
In particular, fast-track authority would allow the United
States to begin specific negotiations with Chile, one of the
fastest-growing of Latin American economies and the first country
in South America expected to join NAFTA.
McLarty also defended the decision not to invite Cuba's Fidel
Castro to next week's gathering.
He said that even as some U.S. trading partners in Europe are
seeking expanded economic ties with Cuba, ``regrettably there have
not been changes in Cuba" of note since it was excluded from the
1994 Summit of the Americas.
``It is the one country that is being left behind as Latin
America has found its voice of confidence and its seat on the world
stage," McLarty said.
McLarty said that at the April 16-19 gathering, Western
Hemisphere leaders are expected to renew a commitment to providing
every child in the Americas "with a basic education by year
2010."
He also said he expected agreements on environmental awareness
and combatting narcotics and that the United States would seek
establishment of justice study centers throughout the region "to
strengthen the rule of law."
The administration will also speak out strongly in favor of
freedom of expression and a free press throughout the hemisphere,
McLarty said.
On moving toward free trade, McLarty said, "We should not
underestimate the importance or the difficulty in achieving a true
consensus on these issues. Now we are negotiating with order and
determination over the pace of negotiations and other specific
issues, but not on the overall goals. We are agreed on that."
"The president is committed to the free-trade area, he is
committed to these negotiations. And to complete them, he is
committed to obtaining fast-track negotiating authority," McLarty
said.
APNP-04-09-98 1606EDT
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: CUNNINGHAM_N@A1@CD@LNGTWY (CUNNINGHAM_N@A1@CD@LNGTWY UNKNOWN
1) (WHO)
CREATION DATE/TIME:13-APR-1998 20:08:15.00
SUBJECT: ADMINISTRATION: CONGRESS BACKING NOT NEEDED FOR
TO: Nelson W. Cunningham@eop ( Nelson W. Cunningham@eop [ WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Steven J. Ronnel@EOP ( Steven J. Ronnel@EOP [ WHO]
READ:UNKNOWN
TO:MCLARTY_T@A1@CD@LNGTWY(MCLARTY_T@A1@CD@LNGTWYJUNKNOWN] (WHO)
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Carl Lingenfelter@eop (Carl Lingenfelter@eop [ WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Eric Farnsworth@eop ( Eric Farnsworth@eop [ WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Patricia A. McHugh@EOP (Patricia A. McHugh@EOP [ WHO
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Date: 04/13/98 Time: 18:40
AAdministration: Congress backing not needed for successful summit
WASHINGTON (AP) Top administration officials asserted Monday
that congressional failure to pass trade legislation sought by
President Clinton would not tarnish the upcoming Summit of the
Americas in Chile.
"The United States is a 7 trillion-pound gorilla," said U.S.
Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky, referring to the
economy's dollar size. That alone assured that Clinton's views on
the economy and trade would be heeded, she said.
At a White House briefing, Barshefsky and other top officials
sought to downplay Clinton's inability to win from Congress the
enhanced trade-negotiating authority he needs to forge free-trade
alliances with Latin American countries.
At the same time, the officials agreed that Clinton at some
point would need the authority if free-trade were to go forward.
"Obviously, as we come to the conclusion, or before we get to
the conclusion of these negotiations, that is something that we
will need to have, and it's something the president is deeply
committed to obtain and we will continue to work towards that
objective," said National Secrity Adviser Sandy Berger.
Clinton flies to Santiago, Chile, later this week for a meeting
of all 34 democratically elected leaders of North, South and
Central America.
At the first Summit of the Americas in Miami in 1994, the
leaders pledged to establish a free-trade zone throughout the
hemisphere by 2005, with ``concrete progress" by 2000.
However, in an embarrassing setback to Clinton, he had to
withdraw his proposal for `fast track" trade authority last
November rather that suffer a defeat in the House. While the
legislation had a fair amount of Republican support, it has scant
Democratic backing, largely because of the opposition of labor and
environmental groups.
Administration officials said negotiations are still on track
for a free-trade zone by 2005.
Fast-track authority enables presidents to negotiate trade deals
without having to gain congressional approval for every step. Once
the agreement is done, it is put on a "fast track" toward
congressional approval, with Congress having only the right to
approve or reject the pact but not amend it.
Presidents since Gerald Ford have had the authority and Clinton
had it in his first term, using it to bring Mexico into the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). But the power has since
lapsed and not been renewed.
Barshefsky noted that in the absence of fast-track trade
authority in the United States, many Latin American countries have
formed free-trade alliances among themselves.
"That acceleration has occurred, I believe, because countries
see a potential window of opportunity that they might not have
envisioned had the U.S. had fast track right now. That's not from
our point of view an overly positive development, she said.
"But we do want to ensure that the United States remains at the
center, as the center of a constellation of trading
relationships," she added.
APNP-04-13-98 1839EDT
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Estela Mendoza (CN=Estela Mendoza/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO
CREATION DATE/TIME:13-APR-1998 20:03:15.00
SUBJECT: 1998-04-13 Trip Briefing by Berger, McLarty, and Barshefsky
TO: Courtney A. Monie (CN=Courtney A. Monie/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Please forward to Hispanic Lists. On cover sheet add: Briefing on the
President's Upcoming Trip to Chile
Forwarded by Estela Mendoza/WHO/EOP on 04/13/98
06:47 PM
SUNTUM_M @ A1
04/13/98 05:35:00 PM
Record Type: Record
To: See the distribution list at the bottom of this message
cc:
Subject: 1998-04-13 Trip Briefing by Berger, McLarty, and Barshefsky
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
April 13, 1998
PRESS BRIEFING BY
NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER SANDY BERGER,
SPECIAL ENVOY FOR THE AMERICAS MACK MCLARTY,
UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE CHARLENE BARSHEFSKY
The Briefing Room
3:43 P.M. EDT
MR. RUBIN: Okay. It's a briefing on the President's
trip to Santiago by the National Security Adviser, Samuel Berger; the
United States Trade Representative, Charlene Barshefsky; and the
Counselor to the President and Special Envoy for the Americas, Mack
McLarty. Thank you.
MR. BERGER: Thank you, Eric. I'm pleased to be joined
by Charlene Barshefsky and Mack McLarty. Together we want to preview
for you the President's to Chile this week, both for a state visit
and for the Santiago Summit of the Americas.
I'd like to spend a few minutes describing what we hope
to accomplish during this trip and how it fits into the President's
focus on the Western Hemisphere. I'll also run through the schedule
of key events. Mack will speak about the summit in more detail, the
road traveled from Miami, and what we'll be focusing on in Santiago.
And then Charlene will talk about our vital trade agenda in the
Americas and update you on where we are with respect to the free
trade area of the Americas.
Let me start, first of all, on the focus that the
President has placed on our hemisphere over the past year. The state
visit to Chile and the Santiago Summit are the culmination of a
yearlong engagement with the Americas, arising from -- originating
back, actually, three and a half years ago with the first Summit of
the Americas, which the President convened in Miami in 1994. As you
know, the President then last year went to Mexico, Central America,
and the Caribbean in May, and in October went to Venezuela, Brazil,
and Argentina.
The objective of these trips, of these visits is to
build upon an extraordinary convergence of our hemisphere around
values and interests we share - in democracy, open market economies,
and cooperation against common threats. There has been a quiet
revolution in this hemisphere, and the President is determined to
build upon it.
As the chart that is not behind me illustrates, but the
one that's behind the one that's behind me -- 34 of the 35 nations
today in the hemisphere embrace democracy and free markets, as you
can see, compared to the time of the '67 and '56 summits. Now, lest
you add up the numbers and say that our crack graphics squad cannot
add, there obviously have been an additional number of countries in
the hemisphere during this period.
Decades of civil war and coups have given way generally
in the hemisphere to peace and stability. Despite the peso crisis in
Mexico and the effects of the Asian financial problems, economic
reforms in the hemisphere have resulted in the lowest inflation and
highest growth in two decades. Forty-two percent of all US exports
-- Ross Perot does this somehow easier, I don't know quite how he
does it forty-two percent of all U.S. exports, $286 billion go to
hemispheric countries in 1997. That represents a 17 percent increase
in exports in 1997.
From when?
MR. BERGER: From the year before. Versus a 5.6 rise
worldwide. And if you look at this chart, you see the extent of our
overall exports that go to the western hemisphere. And quite a bit
of that is to Latin America, but when you take out Latin America,
Canada, and the Caribbean, it's $308 billion. The result is -- in a
sense these two charts capture the two important trends of
democratization and economic growth and economic market opening which
resulted in the hemisphere being united as never before as we enter
the 21st century.
Now, Mack will talk more about the road from Miami to
Santiago, but it certainly has been a road that has been marked by a
number of concrete realizations of commitments that were made in
Miami. In Miami we agreed to expedite ratification of a protocol
providing that any state that ceased to become a democracy would be
expelled from the OAS. That was done in October '97. We agreed to
initiate a process of regional confidence building. Since then we
have established an OAS committee on hemispheric security. On the
economic integration side, you can see from these charts, what is
happening is not only economic growth but economic integration
between us as and the hemisphere and within the hemisphere, within
regional groups within the hemisphere.
We talked at the summit about eradicating poverty and
trying to combat disease. In 1995, for example, the First Lady
launched a measles elimination program. Those cases today have been
reduced from 23,000 in 1994 to roughly 2,000 in the hemisphere today.
In Miami we agreed to recommend that multilateral development
emphasize microenterprises, microlending. The Inter-American
Development Bank has adopted a five-year $500 million strategy to
promote microenterprises.
In the area of the environment, there were a number of
commitments made in Miami, national action plans to take the lead out
of gasoline. In 1996 12 countries had eliminated leaded gas, and by
2001 there will be 20.
Those are simply illustrative of a series of the roughly
100 commitments that were made in Miami and the progress that has
been made on most of them.
Now, the people in Latin America have chosen democracy
and open markets, but for democracy and markets to endure they must
deliver for their people. That is, their people need to understand
that democracy delivers, that democracy works. They need to move
beyond the basic building blocks of elections and market economics to
the second generation of issues faced by all democracies, but
particularly new democracies: education, rule of law, health care,
worker rights, press freedom, anti-corruption. And this is precisely
what the agenda and the focus of the summit in Santiago will be --
the second-generation issues that these countries face together, and
where cooperation can help give democracy deeper roots. And Mack
will have more to say about this in a few minutes.
On the economic integration side, the Miami Summit set
forth a vision of bringing the Americas together around open markets
through a Free Trade of the Americas Agreement by the year 2005. In
Santiago the leaders will launch negotiations with timetables and a
work plan. They will direct their trade ministers to begin
negotiations with the objective of concrete progress by the year
2000. Charlene will talk more about that.
They will establish a mechanism to allow labor, the
environment, and other civil groups to contribute to this FTAA
process. And they will also pursue commitments to strengthen bank
regulation and market oversight to promote stability in financial
markets, something that since Miami we have come to learn is far more
important.
Now, let me talk a bit about Chile itself, because the
first two days of the trip is a state visit to Chile, and it will
really give the President an opportunity to spotlight Chile's quite
impressive achievements. Chile is a country that has succeeded in
achieving both an increase in economic growth and a decrease in its
poverty rate. Its annual growth since 1990 has averaged 6.9 percent,
while its poverty rate has dropped from 40 percent in 1990 to 23
percent in 1997.
President Frei is committed to providing access to
computer networks, for example, for all 1,500 secondary schools and
50 percent of primary schools by the year 2000.
The Chile of today has emerged from the turbulent and
dark past that we are all too familiar with to become a vibrant
democracy working to ensure that all of its citizens share in the
fruits of an open market economy.
Now let me briefly just run through the schedule so you
can know where you're going to be at various points. We will leave
Wednesday at about 8:30 p.m. and arrive in Santiago at 6:30 a.m. in
the morning -- a delightful red-eye, all-night flight.
On Thursday the President will meet with President Frei.
They will finalize and then sign a U.S.-Chile communique on which
we've been working. They will tour a neighborhood of Santiago and
have a roundtable conversation with community leaders, which will
provide an opportunity to discuss Chile's record of economic growth
and poverty reduction. And then finally not finally, next to
finally the President will address business leaders, which
together with the event in a poor neighborhood, will provide I think
the two sides of the coin that we've talked about so much; that is,
economic growth to provide opportunity, a social safety net in order
to make sure that that opportunity is spread widely. And then that
evening there will be a state dinner.
On Friday we will helicopter to Valparaiso, where the
President will address a joint session of the Congress, in which he
undoubtedly will highlight Chile's success in reclaiming its
democracy and spreading the benefits of its prosperity to more of its
people. We'll tour a rural area near Valparaiso, and return to
Santiago.
Saturday begins the summit. In the morning most of the
events will take place in the Sheraton Hotel. In the opening session
the President and President Frei will make opening remarks which will
be open to the press. Then they will have sessions during the day
from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., three discussions: one on democracy,
one on education, one on poverty alleviation. And then that evening
there will be a summit gala for leaders and spouses.
And then on Sunday the summit resumes at 9:00 a.m. at
the Sheraton. There will be two leader discussion sessions, one on
trade, and the final one, which really has no specific agenda will be
essentially an open-ended discussion. At about 12:30 the summit will
conclude at the former Congress building with statements from several
leaders, including President Clinton, President Frei, Prime Minister
Chretien, since Canada is likely to be the host of the next Summit of
the Americas.
The President will then go speak to the staff and
families at the embassy, as he always does when he travels. And we
will depart for Washington about 3:45 p.m. and a mere 10 hours later
we will be back in Washington.
Let me ask Charlene and then Mack to speak and then
we'll take -- Mack, then Charlene.
MR. MCLARTY: Sandy, thank you. The President and our
administration has had a policy of sustained engagement and the
intense Presidential focus that was noted in Sandy's comments for the
past several years, in fact, beginning from the first days of the
administration.
We are well aware, the President is acutely aware, of
our history in the region from time to time, which has been marked by
intervention or neglect. I think he is also keenly aware of this
quiet revolution that Sandy noted, a profound change, in many ways as
profound as the fall of the Berlin Wall. We have both, from time to
time, used the phrase "this is not your father's Latin America,"
which is, I think, a good way of describing some of the changes --
remarkable changes of 34 out of 35 countries are now democratic. In
Central America we don't have the United States and the Soviet Union
in a Cold War battlefield or civil wars there. And in fact the
export market for U.S. goods in Central America is larger than all of
the former Soviet states put together.
The real story from an economic standpoint has been the
taming of hyperinflation, which, of course, was the cruelest burden
to those below the poverty line. Some example of that is Argentina
in 1989 had an inflation rate of 5,000 percent; today it's .3 percent
with a 7 percent annualized growth rate. As the minister of finance
told us in Brazil when we traveled there, our inflation rate, Mr.
President, is 5 percent; the difference is, that is an annual figure
not a weekly one. So a remarkable economic change.
In terms of the sustained engagement, our goal is to
create what we have phrased as a Greater Americas, based on mutual
trust, respect, and reward. And we have certainly discussed with the
American people about our views regarding Latin America. After all,
we are the fifth largest Hispanic nation in the world, the United
States, and in turn, to sharpen and improve their views of us.
Sandy has already noted the first-term record of the
convening of the summit -- restoring peace in Guatemala, as friends
of that process; restoring democracy in Haiti; the support of the
Mexico peso crisis; and the passage of the NAFTA; as well as the two
presidential trips to the region, including two summits with the
Central American leaders and the Caribbean leaders.
The Vice President has traveled to the region five
times, emphasizing economic growth and environmental stewardship.
The First Lady has traveled to the region four times, emphasizing
issues of health care, poverty, and including all aspects of women's
inclusion in society as well as indigenous people.
Now, the Miami Summit affirmed what is called the first
generation of reform, which are free and fair elections, stable and
open economies. And I think it's fair to say an architecture was put
in place to further that progress, and one of the centerpieces -- not
the only, but one of the centerpieces was the Free Trade Area of the
Americas by the year 2005.
We have made real progress on that road from Miami to
the promise of Santiago, but the key point here is that progress is
not assured and not guaranteed. It is critical in my view, as
someone from the private sector, to have a second generation of
reform in order to sustain the first generation, the macroeconomic
reform.
I think most of us would agree the bright line between
foreign policy and domestic policy has blurred. You'll see that at
this summit. From a U.S. perspective, whether it's jobs, the
economy, energy prices, gasoline prices with summer vacations coming
up, education, fighting the drug trade, alleviating poverty, or
protecting the air we breathe, the issues we will discuss at this
summit are the issues that affect our citizens and families here at
home. They are issues that our people care about and care about
deeply.
The summit agenda will very much follow the Miami
agenda: first, strengthening our respective democracies; secondly,
trade and economics, including financial coordination, which I think
should be emphasized and highlights; thirdly, addressing poverty; and
fourth, of course, emphasizing education. We'll certainly try to
marshal resources, particularly where we have leverage in the
multilateral organizations -- the Inter-American Development Bank,
the World Bank, the Pan-American Health Organization -- particularly
focusing those resources on education.
I think in terms of education the emphasis to strengthen
the resources devoted in Latin America to primary and secondary
education is particularly important to strengthen their democracies
and their economies. There are clearly dramatic changes in terms of
distance learning taking place throughout the hemisphere and indeed
the world and our own country. And some of the same issues,
including resources, teachers in the classroom, size of the
classroom, and so forth, will be very much discussed at the summit.
I think it's a fair question to ask, how is improving
education in Latin America going to help people here in the United
States? I think the answer is, good schools make good neighbors.
Education advances our economic and security interest in the region.
First, it expands the middle class that buys U.S. goods and services
that are noted on this chart. Secondly, it reduces the opportunity
to buy or sell illegal drugs to be part of that undercurrent and
undertow. It reduces illegal immigration by encouraging people to
stay at home with their families, and it makes for more stable
democracies, and with partners who are ready and willing and able, as
they have demonstrated, to stand by us not only in the hemisphere,
but in terms of our peacekeeping efforts in Bosnia and our efforts in
the Persian Gulf.
You have a number of presidents who have spent a number
of years devoting their efforts to education, including President
Clinton. President Cardoso has been a lifelong teacher and
academician, as has his wife; President Zedillo a former Minister of
Education; President Frei, President Figueres and others have talked
about and been dedicated to educational reform for at least a decade,
if not longer.
I think all of us would agree in this global economy,
which Ambassador Barshefsky will talk about, the key to inclusive
growth both here in this hemisphere and worldwide, is education. And
in many ways I think that will be the legacy of this summit.
In terms of democracy, I think we will see an emphasis
on broader democratic participation, certainly the strengthening of
the judicial system in Latin America -- a fair, open professional
judiciary is key to any modern contemporary working democracy.
Attorney General Reno, Justice Breyer have worked very diligently on
this effort.
Press freedom -- something important specifically to all
of you in this room, is an issue we have pushed, encouraged, and the
President raised it when he went to Argentina on our last trip, and
the hemisphere embraced it. And through the inter-American human
rights part of the OAS, no new bureaucracy, we will establish, I
think, at this summit a special rapporteur to advocate for freedom of
expression.
Now, that may be perhaps even more important than just
the fundamental tenant of freedom of expression, because over the
past 10 years 200 journalists have been killed in Latin America and
some in the United States in pursuit of a story, doing their job
professionally and responsibly. And I think this effort will clearly
help address these crimes of impunity.
I think, finally, corruption is certainly a very
important issue in the hemisphere. The hemisphere is leading the way
with the signing of the Corruption Convention over a year ago, and
that measure, as I think was announced here, has been sent to our
Congress for ratification.
The region clearly still has too much poverty over
150 million below the poverty line, despite the progress that Sandy
noted. And these targeted issues, while they can be viewed as rather
mundane, are critical for including everyone in an open-market
democracy in terms of microcredit to small business which I
certainly can identify with coming from a small business, a
family-owned business -- land titling; and certainly women's issues
and inclusion in the economy and the democracy.
In terms of the economic issues, Charlene will speak to
the trade issues specifically. I'd just like to note a couple of
things very briefly. First of all, we should look at not only trade,
economic integration, which is obviously occurring in a rather
dramatic way, but we should look also at investment and we should
look at financial coordination, that is. the stability of the banking
system and the financial markets. We've seen what can happen
seriously in Mexico, in this hemisphere, when that does not take
place in the right way, and certainly in Asia. And I think Latin
America in many ways has become a model to emulate there, as opposed
to avoid, and has shown a remarkable resilience in the face of Asia
contagion because they've had the capacity and the will to act in
relatively modern financial systems.
In terms of energy on the economy, three of our four top
energy suppliers are from this hemisphere. And I think all of us
understand the relation to energy prices, inflation, and our overall
economy.
In terms of the FTAA launch, there is a true consensus
we'll have a comprehensive and a credible launch, and that should not
be taken for granted and it should not be minimized. The importance
of it I think is very clear, with 40 percent of our exports going to
this hemisphere, with our exports growing twice the rate to this
hemisphere as any other region in the world.
One fact, as a business person, about half of the
population in Latin America is under 21 years of age. So if you
project that market potential out in a natural market, the numbers
obviously become very compelling and very important. We export more
to Brazil than we do to China, more to Chile where we are visiting
than we do to India.
In terms of the summit process, I think the region has
found its voice on the world stage. We have a much more mature
dialogue in the region than in any times, I think, in the past. I
think it is time to put our consultations on a more regular basis and
I think this Santiago summit will accomplish that. We'll schedule
the next time and place for the next summit meeting. I think the
agenda has been one reached by consensus and I think, in that regard,
we have a common agenda. The issues that we address in Santiago are
issues that matter to the American people and to the people
throughout the Americas.
I think the real opportunity of Santiago is to change
the very shape and nature of the character of our relationship in the
hemisphere, and to have truly a foundation for both security and
prosperity as we move toward the 21st century.
AMBASSADOR BARSHEFSKY: I'll try and be brief. We've
talked about the political declaration that the leaders made in 1994
at Miami, that there should be a free trade area of the Americas. As
important as that political declaration was in 1994, the formal
launch of these negotiations following three and a half years of
preparatory work, ensures the realization of the Miami vision. There
will be a free trade area of the Americas. A comprehensive launch
will be initiated in Santiago, along with all that that implies.
And let me tell you what has been agreed. First off,
the entire negotiating structure from here to 2005 has been agreed.
The first three years of the process will be hosted by Miami. The
final two and a half years of the process will be co-chaired by the
United States and Brazil. We in the United States were very
concerned about this launch that is in the start and the conclusion,
because there are two parts of a negotiation that matter, and only
two: the setup in the beginning, and the end.
The middle will always go as the middle goes --- up and
down, sometimes fast, sometimes slow, the trajectory is usually
positive. But the setup is very, very important, and that's Miami.
And the conclusion, by co-chairing with our other major hemispheric
partner, ensures that we will indeed conclude the agreement on time.
We have also agreed on concrete progress by 2000. I
think this will largely be reflected in the negotiation and adoption
of a series of business facilitation measures. Let me give you some
illustrative examples of what that might encompass: customs, meaning
customs coordination, meaning paperless entry with respect to
customs; a series of provisions related to government procurement and
transparency in government procurement - there is very little
transparency of the process in our hemisphere now; services trade, I
think we'll see some progress there of a very concrete nature. I
also think we'll see some progress with respect to telecommunications
trade and some other areas.
We have also for the first time established a committee
within the FTAA itself to receive the views of labor, environmental
NGOs, and other groups who obviously have a stake in the outcome of
the process. The setting up of this committee is really rather a
milestone in the history of the FTAA thus far. Our hemisphere has
been reluctant to establish a committee within the FTAA to listen to
the views of civil society broadly and to take those views into
account in the course of the negotiation.
This year there has been rather -- I should say over the
last several years -- there has been rather a change of attitude, and
I think a growing recognition in our hemisphere that people -- all
segments of society -- need to feel empowered by this process of
hemispheric integration, not disempowered by it. And so we have for
the first time now established a committee within the FTAA to be
chaired by the ministers themselves, that is to say, by those most
responsible directly to their political constituencies, to take into
account these views and to translate these views, where appropriate,
into negotiating objectives.
In addition to, as Mack said, a credible launch, the
launch will be very comprehensive, covering all areas of trade and
covering areas of trade we can project into the future -- so global
electronic commerce now figures prominently on the agenda, as it
should, since Internet usage in our hemisphere has the highest rate
of usage, the highest growth rate in the world, including in Asia,
interesting.
Economically, as you know, the markets of Latin America
are the most dynamic, and the most dynamic export markets for us.
And let me just add for your use a couple of extra numbers. As Sandy
Berger said, in 1997, our exports for Latin America and the Caribbean
grew more than three times as fast as our exports to the rest of the
world. During the second half of 1997, we exported more to our
hemisphere than to the entirety of the European Union.
In 1997, Mexico surpassed Japan as our second largest
trading partner. Think about that a minute. Mexico has an economy
one-twelfth the size of Japan. We sell more to Mexico than we do to
Japan, and they have now surpassed Japan as our second largest
trading partner.
And last, our export increases to the Western Hemisphere
accounted for 63 percent of our export growth worldwide in 1997.
That is to say, 63 percent of the growth in our exports globally
stayed in our hemisphere, went to our hemisphere. And much of that
is accounted for indeed by Canada and Mexico.
Let me just say in closing that because of the economic
transformation in Latin America, including, as Mack pointed out,
reigning in hyperinflation, you have 500 million consumers, a
burgeoning middle class, and extraordinary opportunity for American
exports. And this is exports in all of the categories that we see,
and in all of these categories we've experienced substantial growth
already -- and that is in goods, in services, in agriculture as well.
You also have a wave of privatization in our hemisphere,
and as we look at areas like power generation, energy,
telecommunications, the United States is well poised to capture those
opportunities as well. And this range of opportunity will be
enhanced substantially as Latin American barriers come down. Their
tariff barriers alone average four times what ours are to their
products, and non-tariff barriers in Latin America remain a
persistent problem. So we see a substantial expansion of opportunity
for the United States as we pursue the FTAA.
And by opportunity, of course, I mean U.S. jobs, because
that's what the bottom line is here from our point of view. We
already have an economy in which, of new jobs created, one in five
depend on exports. One in five new jobs are in manufacturing and
dependent on exports. And we know that exports pay on average 15
percent more than non-export related jobs.
Our future in terms of increasing U.S. economic growth
is in exports; it is in opening markets abroad where the other 96
percent of the world's population lives, and most particularly, in
our hemisphere, which we ought to view as our neighborhood. We need
to remain well-positioned to capture that opportunity, and that is
what the FTAA will do.
MR. BERGER: Questions. Have we worn you down?
Q -- have you been able to convince the labor unions
that this is such a good thing for them?
MR. BERGER: We will obviously be consulting as we go
along in these negotiations with labor and business, with Congress
and all other affected segments of society, to convey what I think is
clear, and that is that the future of America's economic growth and a
greater production of jobs is going to come in greater trade.
Q
How far can you negotiate until you need fast
track? How many months or years until you absolutely --
MR. BERGER: Let me answer and then I'll ask Charlene to
answer. We launched the Uruguay Round of the GATT negotiations -- in
Uruguay, by the way -- (laughter) -- without fast track authority,
and did not have fast track authority for over two years in those
negotiations. Obviously, as we come to the conclusion -- or before
we get to the conclusion of these negotiations, that is something
that we will need to have, and it's something the President is deeply
committed to obtain, and we will continue to work towards that
objective. But I don't think it is necessary for the launch of these
negotiations.
Charlene.
AMBASSADOR BARSHEFSKY: Yes, if I might say, I think the
fast track question points up to a kind of split dynamic that's
occurring in our hemisphere. The launch of these negotiations is as
well positioned as it could possibly be. That's with or without fast
track. We have precisely the launch, the scope, the U.S. at the
center of it, that we want it to have, and that we would have had
whether we had fast track now or not.
But what you see in our hemisphere, on the other hand,
is an acceleration in sub-regional integration - that is, in
countries integrating with each other around the United States, not
with the United States. And so you see an acceleration of ties
between Mercosur -- that is, Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay
-- and the Central American countries. An acceleration of the ties
between Mercosur and the Andeans; an acceleration between Canada and
Chile; between Chile and certain of the Central Americans; or between
Chile and Mexico; Mexico and Mercosur; the EU and Mercosur; Asia and
Mexico.
That acceleration has occurred, I believe, because
countries see a potential window of opportunity that they might not
have envisioned had the U.S. had fast track right now. That's not
from our point of view an overly positive development. We don't
object to these sub-regional arrangements, obviously, where they
expand trade, as most tend to do. But we do want to ensure that the
United States remains at the center, as the center of a constellation
of trading relationships. The FTAA launch helps us reassert that
central role, but the acceleration of sub-regional integration is
something I think we have to look at very carefully.
Q
When do you need to have fast track, though? The
launch is next week, but obviously, you're going to need - and it
looks now like the administration is not going to even push again
until next year.
AMBASSADOR BARSHEFSKY: We have said all along that the
timing of fast track depends on two things - one is the substance,
and the second is the chemistry, both of which we continue to consult
with Congress on. And, as Sandy has said, fast track remains a
priority for this administration.
Q -- going to be embarrassing, really, because this
was the goal, wasn't it to have Chile on board for a NAFTA thing?
It sounds like everything you've said is a rationale of trying to get
around the fact that you failed in --
MR. BERGER: I'll say a couple of things, Helen. First
of all, what we set out to do in Miami in 1994 was to launch a free
trade area for the Americas, a negotiation at this summit; we're
going to do that. And those negotiations will proceed vigorously.
There is, in addition to that, obviously more to this
summit, as there was more to Miami, than trade. And I think one of
the things that I've talked about, Mack has talked about, are the
other issues that increasingly are important to the quality of
democracy and the quality of society in these countries. Obviously,
to take full advantage of the growth in this hemisphere and to reach
fruition in a free trade agreement we will need to have fast track
authority. But I believe we will have it.
MR. MCLARTY: Sandy, let me just reenforce a couple of
points there. First of all, I think the Miami summit, it should be
restated -- if the centerpiece, as many suggested, was the
establishment of the FTAA with Chile having a comprehensive trade
agreement, the heart of the Miami summit was democracy -- the 34
countries that had moved toward democracy; indeed, established
political liberty and democracy. And they are two sides of the same
coin.
Secondly, I think we should keep agreements in
perspective. What is driving this process and these numbers are not
trade agreements. What is driving this process is the
interconnective global economy and the private sector, both
businesses large and small, and ultimately the consumers' knowledge
of and desire for lower priced, competitively priced goods and
services.
So I think Helen, had the President and the
administration and I have heard this on my some 40 or so trips to
Latin America -- not made a concerted effort to achieve fast track,
then I think you would have some concerns and problems. I think it
is well recognized in these democratically elected governments that,
as we discussed earlier, our batting average on legislation and trade
legislation is very good. They have their own Congresses, and
they're not always successful in a perfectly straight line either.
So I think what is important is to move forward with
momentum on this agenda, as Ambassador Barshefsky has noted. And
finally, I would suggest the actual summit agenda, which was reached
by consensus, was actually essentially agreed upon in large measure
over a year ago, well before the fast track vote even took place.
Q
Ambassador Barshefsky, you said that the United
States is at the center of this process. In Santiago, Brazil will be
signing a number of trade agreements, and the President won't be
signing any. I wonder, most commentators seem to think that Brazil
is now at the center of this process. How do you avoid having the
President look like he's become superfluous?
AMBASSADOR BARSHEFSKY: Well, should I start with the
fact that we're a $7 trillion economy? The United States will always
be at the center. But your question goes exactly to the point I made
before, which is you see an acceleration in the coming together of
sub-regional arrangements to the exclusion of the United States. And
this is really where fast track becomes important - not for the
launch; the Uruguay Round was launched without fast track and we're
well positioned here, excellently positioned here with respect to the
launch of the FTAA negotiations.
Where the rubber hits the road is where you see other
countries integrating around us, and for that we're going to need
fast track authority.
I do think, now that there will be this comprehensive
launch of negotiations, we will soon see countries focus their
resources on that. And I think that will begin to subsume a lot of
this other sub-regional activity, but for right now what you see, in
this last six months especially since the fast track vote was
postponed, is an acceleration with respect to the level of
sub-regional negotiation. But in terms of the United States, the
United States is a 7 trillion pound gorilla.
MR. MCLARTY: One quick thing, I think the negotiations
are not win-lose. I think the FTAA is clearly a win-win proposition,
and I think the markets are indeed very complementary of each other.
I think we see that in terms of resources -- I spoke of energy and
of investments in the region, which Charlene spoke of, infrastructure
projects -- so I want to make sure when we talk about the center of
what we do need to have is the position in the launch, which we have,
to shape the agreements, particularly on issues that are important to
us and the American people.
Q Is Pinochet going to attend the Congress, the
National Congress event on Friday? Do you know what to expect?
MR. BERGER: We don't know whether he will.
Q Have there been conversations with Chilean
officials about whether he's going to come?
MR. BERGER: I know it's been a subject of some
discussions at the advance level, but I have no idea whether he's
going to be there or not.
Q Will that affect what the President says if he's in
the audience?
MR. BERGER: No, he will say the same thing whether
he's in the audience or not. Chile is a democracy with a glorious
recent history of having reclaimed its democracy, and I can assure
you that what the President says will not be affected by whether
General Pinochet is in the audience or not.
Q And what bilaterals is he going to have on the
sidelines of this summit?
MR. BERGER: Not absolutely clear because of the nature
of this. This is a little bit more like - for those of you who were
on the Africa trip -- Entebbe in a sense than a situation where there
will be formal bilats. There will be opportunities in the breaks for
the President to sit down with President Zedillo, Prime Minister
Chretien, and a number of others. It will be somewhat more informal.
Q
What about -- will he have a special message about
Paraguay's recent turmoil over the elections there?
MR. BERGER: Our message will be the same as the
message of all of the countries that are in the region -- Argentina,
Brazil, Chile, and others -- which is that we hope and expect that
constitutional democracy will be upheld in Paraguay.
Q
Sandy, two of the subjects of the summit are
education and combatting poverty. What is the United States going to
do concretely on those issues? Are there going to be commitments of
money or --
MR. BERGER: Well, on education there will be
commitments, not only in terms of multilateral funding but also
bilateral commitments as well. I'll let Mack, perhaps, speak more
specifically about it. Go ahead, Mack.
MR. MCLARTY: John, I'll get you the precise figure. I
think your question is on point in terms of marshaling resources and
leveling and leveraging the multilateral agencies, particularly the
Inter-American Development Bank and the World Bank and both President
Iglesias and President Wolfensohn will be in attendance at
the summit. I think the AID has had an active program in the
hemisphere; as you know, they will continue that with somewhat
reduced funding over the last several years, but targeting that
funding, particularly in terms of the poverty efforts.
But I think what you will see is a continued, concerted,
focused, and effective effort on the part of the governments, both at
the federal, state, and local levels in Latin America, take full
advantage of these expanded resources. And I think you will see
their efforts in terms of poverty alleviation to be quite effective
and to be sustained efforts. We obviously want to be fully
supportive of that.
In terms of education, there will be a number of
memoranda of education agreements signed with Chile, with Brazil.
And Secretary Riley, of course, will be on the trip and can answer, I
think, in specific detail the educational aspects that will take
place at the summit and with Chile.
Q
I apologize if it's been asked before -- are there
American business leaders going with the President.
MR. BERGER: There are not American business leaders
going with the President. There of course are many American
companies that have subsidiaries in Chile. The President will be
speaking to the American Chamber of Commerce in Chile, as he does in
a number of countries. But there -- as far as I know, none going on
the trip.
So there's no delegation as there was to Africa.
MR. BERGER: There will be a Congressional delegation
that will be going with us, as there has been in all of our trips in
the second term. And we look forward to that. But I don't -- there
will be no private delegation.
Q
Many members of the Hispanic caucus in the
delegation?
MR. BERGER: Yes.
Q
Mack, you mentioned that on the economic agenda,
international financial stability will be a big point in Santiago.
Right after the peso crisis, the United States took the lead in
international fora, particularly the G-7, to address this problem
through the IMF, with greater transparency and surveillance of
international banking, et cetera. And for about a couple of years,
there was an awful lot of self-congratulations, that a lot progress
had been made -- it's even in the Halifax and Leone communiques --
and boom, we got the Asian crisis when there had been every
indication that enough prevention had taken place.
What are you going to be doing in Santiago to reassure
investors and consumers and everybody else in the world that
something is finally taking hold to prevent this kind of crisis?
MR. MCLARTY: Well, I think, increasingly, as I noted,
Latin America has been looked at as a model to emulate, not avoid, in
terms of financial institutions, central banking functions and reform
of the banking system. I saw that both at the APEC conference in
Vancouver, where you had Asian leaders and members of the private
sector from those countries attending APEC talk to President Zedillo,
discuss with President Frei, what they had done in that regard. I
saw it again at the Davos Conference World Economic Forum.
While it is not perfect, clearly the leaders in Latin
America have had the capacity and the will to act in terms of fiscal
discipline. That's why their inflation rates have stayed under
control, that's why their budget deficits are much, much smaller, I
think, overall, than even many countries in Europe. And I think we
will want to support an increasing and deepening of that kind of
transparency and openness that the financial markets clearly judge.
And I think that's why you have seen to date stable financial markets
in Latin America despite a sharp decline in oil prices, where many of
the economies are very dependent on oil prices.
I think you're correct in terms of the efforts the
President has made to provide leadership in overall financial
architectures -- Secretary Rubin and Secretary Bentsen before him and
actually started at the G-7 in Naples. I think it's clear more needs
to be done, and particularly reform, in a local basis in the
individual countries affected, which is at the very heart of the IMF
program. I think the difference is Latin America has taken those
reforms and has taken very positive steps, and in some of the areas
they have not.
MR. BERGER: And if you meant to ask by that question
whether we would welcome Congress passing the supplemental, which
would provide IMF funding and funding for the NAB, which grows
directly out of Halifax and is specifically designed to provide for
these kind of circumstances - the answer is yes.
Q
Sandy, also what I was wondering about was having
put their house in order, as you put it the Latin American
countries -- are you going to try and enlist them in Santiago to help
you globally, have them put some pressure on Asian finance ministries
and banking supervisor groups and so on.
MR. BERGER: I think this is happening informally
already. In Vancouver, when APEC met at the end of last year, I
think President Zedillo had an enormous impact there. In a sense,
he's walked through the valley of the shadow of death, and he's come
out on the other side. And he said to the leaders, there are certain
rules that you've got to follow: you've got to tell the truth, you've
got to take the hard knocks as quickly as you can, and you've got to
restore the confidence of the markets.
I think there is beginning to be, as I've said before, a
differentiation in this global financial marketplace. Not all
emerging markets are alike; not all Asian markets are alike; not all
Latin Americans are alike; some are more disciplined than others;
some are better run than others. And I think that the time that's
passed since the Asian problems began, in some ways established that
degree of differentiation on the part of international investors to
be a little bit more discriminating and a little less spontaneous in
terms of the movement of capital.
Q
While we're on international stabilization issues,
Japan a few weeks ago announced a package of stimulation measures to
revive the Japanese economy. But despite that, the IMF global world
economic outlook today forecasts zero growth for Japan for 1998.
Does that mean that they have taken insufficient steps? Are you
looking for them to do anything else?
MR. BERGER: Well, I don't know what factors they took
into account when they made that judgment. We have said that the
steps that the Japanese government undertook last week were good
steps forward but that, as we've said before, it is extremely
important that that economy be stimulated and increase at a faster
rate of growth not only for its own health but also for the
overall health of the Asian economies.
Q
Sandy, you just touched on drug trafficking briefly
-- what progress do you expect on the idea of multilateral drug
certification and on the possibility of a Latin counter-narcotics
center in Panama?
MR. BERGER: Well, let me answer and then ask Mack to
add. We will make progress at this summit in expanding the
multilateral alliance against drugs that we began to talk about when
we were in Mexico and Brazil and elsewhere. The purposes of these
efforts are to increase cooperation throughout the hemisphere, both a
demand reduction and supply reduction. And to the extent that we can
-- and they will include an element of evaluation of the performance
of individual countries. And we think this is an important step
forward.
Could this be a replacement of certification with
time?
MR. BERGER: Well, certification is an act of Congress;
it's the law of the land. We obviously intend to comply with it.
Both of these are directed toward the goal of enhancing cooperation
in fighting drugs in the hemisphere. If at some future point the
alliance were strong enough and viable enough that it were advancing
that goal, obviously one might take a look at that. But I think at
this point I would say they complement each other.
Q
Yes, but if this certification is U.S. I mean,
unilateral measure from the United States, and as you are trying to
build a partnership with Latin America, this alternative would be the
only politically correct solution on the long run, wouldn't it?
MR. BERGER: Well, we certainly want to be politically
correct. As I said, both of these - the motivation of both of these
regimes is to enhance the cooperation throughout the hemisphere on
fighting drugs, which is a deadly threat to each country in this
hemisphere. Whether it's the United States that purchases $57
billion worth of drugs, which poisons our children, or other
countries where the narco-traffickers are eating away at the very
foundations of democracy, there is no greater threat we have in
common. And so it is extremely important that we work on this
problem together through whatever means we can. We think the
alliance against drugs will be one more instrument to advance that
cooperation.
MR. MCLARTY: Well, the only I think Sandy really has
covered the subject very well. The only additional point I would
make in terms of the cooperation is that from a Latin standpoint or a
Caribbean standpoint, they view this deadly threat, as Sandy noted,
as seriously as the families of our countries do. This is not
something we are imposing are having to try to change any views. The
truth is, it is a very formidable foe. So I think it calls for
increased cooperation. I think that will be achieved at Santiago.
The goal of cooperation, the multilateral drug alliance, and
certification are the same. Certification is the law, as Sandy
noted, and we'll continue certainly to abide by and enforce that law.
In terms of the Panama multilateral drug
counter-narcotics center, it is an idea that has been well received,
but there are a lot of issues still outstanding, and I would not
anticipate that it would come to fruition at this summit. I think it
could obviously be a part of a multilateral effort.
MR. LOCKHART: I just wanted to let you all know about a
change in the schedule on the trip we're taking tomorrow. The
President will now overnight in Houston and travel Wednesday morning
to Alabama to view the tornado damage and the work that FEMA and the
local authorities are doing to help with the cleanup.
The trip presents some logistical challenges to us, not
the least of which is some of the people who are going on that trip
are also going on the Chile trip, besides some other ones we're
working through. So we will let you all know as soon as we can,
possibly by tonight, on the coverage details, but I think it's
important that people going on the trip tomorrow pack for two days.
Will he then come back here?
MR. LOCKHART: He will come back. There is a
possibility that we will bring the press plane back tomorrow night
and just take an expanded pool for the trip over to Alabama. We are
working through those things now, but for your own comfort you should
assume you're staying for an extra day.
Q
Will the press charter leave at the same time from
Andrews?
MR. LOCKHART: The press charter is still leaving at the
same time, and that's what we're trying to work through now, how we
reconcile the two things. But the press charter is still leaving
early Wednesday morning.
END
4:40 P.M. EDT
Message Sent
To:
Sharolyn A. Rosier
Lori E. Abrams
Jeannetta P. Allen
Brenda M. Anders
Eli G. Attie @ OVP@EOP
Patrick Aylward
Robin J. Bachman
Kyle M. Baker
Karen L. Barbuschak
Beverly J. Barnes
Brian A. Barreto
Mark H. Bartholomew
David S. Beaubaire
Mark J. Bernstein
Marsha E. Berry
antony j. blinken
Alexander L. Boyle
Lanny A. Breuer
Patrick E. Briggs
Katharine Button
Robin J. Bachman
Barbara D. Woolley
Bradley M. Campbell
Phillip Caplan
Laura Capps
Elizabeth A. Castellani
Joseph W. Cerrell @ OVP@EOP
David K. Chai
Andrei H. Cherny @ ovp@eop
Nanda Chitre
Steven A. Cohen
Julianne B. Corbett
Michelle Crisci
Elliot J. Diringer
Melinda L. Dupont
Daniel W. Burkhardt
Diane Ikemiyashiro
Dorian V. Weaver
Dorinda A. Salcido
Douglas Matties
Anne M. Edwards
Rahm Emanuel
Karen C. Fahle
Jennifer Ferguson
Julie Fernandes
Karen
Martha
Carmen Fowler
Ben
Grace
Jessica Gibson
Adam Goldberg
Jason Goldberg
Dario
A. A. D. S. J. A. E. W. L. Freeland Foley Goldberg B. Gomez Finney Garcia
Peter Greenberger
Donald
Richard Hayes
Russell W. Horwitz
Maureen A. Hudson
Thomas D. Janenda
david t. johnson
Leanne I. Johnson
Wayne C. Johnson
Michele Jolin
James M. Teague
Jon P. Jennings
Julie E. Mason
David E. Kalbaugh
Jonathan A. Kaplan
Allison J. King
Mark A. Kitchens
Catherine T. Kitchen
Sarah S. Freeman
Jim Kohlenberger @ OVP@EOP
Sara M. Latham
Christopher J. Lavery
Joseph P. Lockhart
Laura D. Schwartz
Laura K. Capps
Laura K. Capps
Lisa J. Levin
Christine N. Macy
Laura S. Marcus
Tanya E. Martin
Doris O. Matsui
Douglas R. Matties
Andrew J. Mayock
Anne E. McGuire
Brooke E. McManus
Estela Mendoza
R. Scott Michaud
Elisa Millsap
Cheryl D. Mills
megan moloney
Tamara Monosoff
Kevin Moran
Jonathan Murchinson
Melissa M. Murray
Reuben L. Musgrave Jr.
Sean P. Maloney
Michael V. Terrell
Steven J. Naplan
Mark D. Neschis
Elizabeth R. Newman
Neera Tanden
Michael A. O'Mary
Jonathan Orszag
Peter R. Orszag
Carole A. Parmelee
Sally P. Paxton
Julia M. Payne
Peter O'Keefe
Nicole R. Rabner
Nelson Reyneri
Linda Ricci
Renee C. Riley
Cecilia E. Rouse
Charles F. Ruff
Peter Rundlet
Virginia N. Rustique
Evan Ryan
Jodi R. Sakol @ OVP@EOP
G. Timothy Saunders
Jason H. Schechter
Judithanne V. Scourfield
BROOKS SCOVILLE
Ruby Shamir
Jeffrey A. Shesol
June Shih
Robert M. Shireman
Jake Siewert
Joshua Silverman
Brian D. Smith
Craig T. Smith
Richard Socarides
Douglas B. Sosnik
Maria E. Soto
Elisabeth Steele
Aviva Steinberg
Todd Stern
Diane A. Stumpf
Michael J. Sullivan
Jonathan H. Schnur
Tracy F. Sisser
Suzanne Dale
Sylvia M. Mathews
Jordan Tamagni
terri tingen
Amy W. Tobe
Barry J. Toiv
Serena C. Torrey
June G. Turner
Thurgood Marshall Jr
Dag Vega
Virginia Apuzzo
Michael Waldman
Angelina Walker @ ovp@eop
Glen M. Weiner
Robert S. Weiner
Peter A. Weissman
Lowell A. Weiss
Woyneab M. Wondwossen
Debra S. Wood
William H. White Jr.
GERHARDT_K@A1@CD@LNGTWY
meglynn @ usia.gov@INET@LNGTWY
SUNTUM_M@A1@CD@LNGTWY
SUNTUM_M@A1@CD@LNGTWY
princej @ panet.us-state.gov@INET@LNGTWY
backup @ wilson.ai.mit.edu@INET@LNGTWY
wh-outbox-distr @clinton.ai.mit.edu@INET@LNGTWY
Lori_Anderson @OA.EOP.GOV@INET@LNGTVY
CROWLEY_P@A1@CD@LNGTWY
CUTLER_L@A1@CD@LNGTWY
DICKEY_L@A1@CD@LNGTWY
GERHARDT_K@A1@CD@LNGTWY
GRAY_W@A1@CD@LNGTWY
GRIBBEN_J@A1@CD@LNGTVY
MOFFETT_J@A1@CD@LNGTWY
PR_U=TDIXON@PR_L=AVUOEOB@MRP@LNGTWY
NAPLAN_S@A1@CD@LNGTWY
SMITH_BD@A1@CD@LNGTVY
[email protected]@INET@LNGTWY
TCSmith@ dol.gov@INET@LNGTWY
WOZNIAK_N@A1@CD@LNGTWY
[email protected]@INET@LNGTWY
[email protected]@INET@LNGTWY
1=US@2=WESTERN UNION@3=@5=ATT.COM@*ELN62955104@MRX@LNGTWY
62955104@ eln.attmail.com@INET@LNGTWY
INFOMGT@A1@CD@LNGTWY
[email protected]@INET@LNGTWY
usnwire @access.digex.com@INET@LNGTWY
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Suzanne Dale (CN=Suzanne Dale/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ])
CREATION DATE/TIME:14-APR-1998 23:42:29.00
SUBJECT: 1998-04-13 Trip Briefing by Berger, McLarty, and Barshefsky
TO: Jeffrey L. Farrow (CN=Jeffrey L. Farrow/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Fred DuVal ( CN=Fred DuVal/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO D
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Emory L. Mayfield (CN=Emory L. Mayfield/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Cecily C. Williams (CN=Cecily C. Williams/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1)
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Mickey Ibarra CN=Mickey Ibarra/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO ])
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
FYI for Gov. Rossello??
We should be sure to tap Nelson Reyneri, who is skypagable in Chile, if we
need him. He has called Mickey several times to offer his assistance
w/the Gov.
Forwarded by Suzanne Dale/WHO/EOP on 04/14/98 11:37
PM
SUNTUM_M @ A1
04/13/98 05:35:00 PM
Record Type: Record
To: See the distribution list at the bottom of this message
cc:
Subject: 1998-04-13 Trip Briefing by Berger, McLarty, and Barshefsky
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
April 13, 1998
PRESS BRIEFING BY
NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER SANDY BERGER,
SPECIAL ENVOY FOR THE AMERICAS MACK MCLARTY,
UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE CHARLENE BARSHEFSKY
The Briefing Room
3:43 P.M. EDT
MR. RUBIN: Okay. It's a briefing on the President's
trip to Santiago by the National Security Adviser, Samuel Berger; the
United States Trade Representative, Charlene Barshefsky; and the
Counselor to the President and Special Envoy for the Americas, Mack
McLarty. Thank you.
MR. BERGER: Thank you, Eric. I'm pleased to be joined
by Charlene Barshefsky and Mack McLarty. Together we want to preview
for you the President's to Chile this week, both for a state visit
and for the Santiago Summit of the Americas.
I'd like to spend a few minutes describing what we hope
to accomplish during this trip and how it fits into the President's
focus on the Western Hemisphere. I'll also run through the schedule
of key events. Mack will speak about the summit in more detail, the
road traveled from Miami, and what we'll be focusing on in Santiago.
And then Charlene will talk about our vital trade agenda in the
Americas and update you on where we are with respect to the free
trade area of the Americas.
Let me start, first of all, on the focus that the
President has placed on our hemisphere over the past year. The state
visit to Chile and the Santiago Summit are the culmination of a
yearlong engagement with the Americas, arising from originating
back, actually, three and a half years ago with the first Summit of
the Americas, which the President convened in Miami in 1994. As you
know, the President then last year went to Mexico, Central America,
and the Caribbean in May, and in October went to Venezuela, Brazil,
and Argentina.
The objective of these trips, of these visits is to
build upon an extraordinary convergence of our hemisphere around
values and interests we share -- in democracy, open market economies,
and cooperation against common threats. There has been a quiet
revolution in this hemisphere, and the President is determined to
build upon it.
As the chart that is not behind me illustrates, but the
one that's behind the one that's behind me -- 34 of the 35 nations
today in the hemisphere embrace democracy and free markets, as you
can see, compared to the time of the '67 and '56 summits. Now, lest
you add up the numbers and say that our crack graphics squad cannot
add, there obviously have been an additional number of countries in
the hemisphere during this period.
Decades of civil war and coups have given way generally
in the hemisphere to peace and stability. Despite the peso crisis in
Mexico and the effects of the Asian financial problems, economic
reforms in the hemisphere have resulted in the lowest inflation and
highest growth in two decades. Forty-two percent of all US exports
-- Ross Perot does this somehow easier, I don't know quite how he
does it -- forty-two percent of all U.S. exports, $286 billion go to
hemispheric countries in 1997. That represents a 17 percent increase
in exports in 1997.
Q
From when?
MR. BERGER: From the year before. Versus a 5.6 rise
worldwide. And if you look at this chart, you see the extent of our
overall exports that go to the western hemisphere. And quite a bit
of that is to Latin America, but when you take out Latin America,
Canada, and the Caribbean, it's $308 billion. The result is -- in a
sense these two charts capture the two important trends of
democratization and economic growth and economic market opening which
resulted in the hemisphere being united as never before as we enter
the 21st century.
Now, Mack will talk more about the road from Miami to
Santiago, but it certainly has been a road that has been marked by a
number of concrete realizations of commitments that were made in
Miami. In Miami we agreed to expedite ratification of a protocol
providing that any state that ceased to become a democracy would be
expelled from the OAS. That was done in October '97. We agreed to
initiate a process of regional confidence building. Since then we
have established an OAS committee on hemispheric security. On the
economic integration side, you can see from these charts, what is
happening is not only economic growth but economic integration
between us as and the hemisphere and within the hemisphere, within
regional groups within the hemisphere.
We talked at the summit about eradicating poverty and
trying to combat disease. In 1995, for example, the First Lady
launched a measles elimination program. Those cases today have been
reduced from 23,000 in 1994 to roughly 2,000 in the hemisphere today.
In Miami we agreed to recommend that multilateral development
emphasize microenterprises, microlending. The Inter-American
Development Bank has adopted a five-year $500 million strategy to
promote microenterprises.
In the area of the environment, there were a number of
commitments made in Miami, national action plans to take the lead out
of gasoline. In 1996 12 countries had eliminated leaded gas, and by
2001 there will be 20.
Those are simply illustrative of a series of the roughly
100 commitments that were made in Miami and the progress that has
been made on most of them.
Now, the people in Latin America have chosen democracy
and open markets, but for democracy and markets to endure they must
deliver for their people. That is, their people need to understand
that democracy delivers, that democracy works. They need to move
beyond the basic building blocks of elections and market economics to
the second generation of issues faced by all democracies, but
particularly new democracies: education, rule of law, health care,
worker rights, press freedom, anti-corruption. And this is precisely
what the agenda and the focus of the summit in Santiago will be --
the second-generation issues that these countries face together, and
where cooperation can help give democracy deeper roots. And Mack
will have more to say about this in a few minutes.
On the economic integration side, the Miami Summit set
forth a vision of bringing the Americas together around open markets
through a Free Trade of the Americas Agreement by the year 2005. In
Santiago the leaders will launch negotiations with timetables and a
work plan. They will direct their trade ministers to begin
negotiations with the objective of concrete progress by the year
2000. Charlene will talk more about that.
They will establish a mechanism to allow labor, the
environment, and other civil groups to contribute to this FTAA
process. And they will also pursue commitments to strengthen bank
regulation and market oversight to promote stability in financial
markets, something that since Miami we have come to learn is far more
important.
Now, let me talk a bit about Chile itself, because the
first two days of the trip is a state visit to Chile, and it will
really give the President an opportunity to spotlight Chile's quite
impressive achievements. Chile is a country that has succeeded in
achieving both an increase in economic growth and a decrease in its
poverty rate. Its annual growth since 1990 has averaged 6.9 percent,
while its poverty rate has dropped from 40 percent in 1990 to 23
percent in 1997.
President Frei is committed to providing access to
computer networks, for example, for all 1,500 secondary schools and
50 percent of primary schools by the year 2000.
The Chile of today has emerged from the turbulent and
dark past that we are all too familiar with to become a vibrant
democracy working to ensure that all of its citizens share in the
fruits of an open market economy.
Now let me briefly just run through the schedule so you
can know where you're going to be at various points. We will leave
Wednesday at about 8:30 p.m. and arrive in Santiago at 6:30 a.m. in
the morning -- a delightful red-eye, all-night flight.
On Thursday the President will meet with President Frei.
They will finalize and then sign a U.S.-Chile communique on which
we've been working. They will tour a neighborhood of Santiago and
have a roundtable conversation with community leaders, which will
provide an opportunity to discuss Chile's record of economic growth
and poverty reduction. And then finally -- not finally, next to
finally -- the President will address business leaders, which
together with the event in a poor neighborhood, will provide I think
the two sides of the coin that we've talked about so much; that is,
economic growth to provide opportunity, a social safety net in order
to make sure that that opportunity is spread widely. And then that
evening there will be a state dinner.
On Friday we will helicopter to Valparaiso, where the
President will address a joint session of the Congress, in which he
undoubtedly will highlight Chile's success in reclaiming its
democracy and spreading the benefits of its prosperity to more of its
people. We'll tour a rural area near Valparaiso, and return to
Santiago.
Saturday begins the summit. In the morning most of the
events will take place in the Sheraton Hotel. In the opening session
the President and President Frei will make opening remarks which will
be open to the press. Then they will have sessions during the day
from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., three discussions: one on democracy,
one on education, one on poverty alleviation. And then that evening
there will be a summit gala for leaders and spouses.
And then on Sunday the summit resumes at 9:00 a.m. at
the Sheraton. There will be two leader discussion sessions, one on
trade, and the final one, which really has no specific agenda will be
essentially an open-ended discussion. At about 12:30 the summit will
conclude at the former Congress building with statements from several
leaders, including President Clinton, President Frei, Prime Minister
Chretien, since Canada is likely to be the host of the next Summit of
the Americas.
The President will then go speak to the staff and
families at the embassy, as he always does when he travels. And we
will depart for Washington about 3:45 p.m. and a mere 10 hours later
we will be back in Washington.
Let me ask Charlene and then Mack to speak and then
we'll take -- Mack, then Charlene.
MR. MCLARTY: Sandy, thank you. The President and our
administration has had a policy of sustained engagement and the
intense Presidential focus that was noted in Sandy's comments for the
past several years, in fact, beginning from the first days of the
administration.
We are well aware, the President is acutely aware, of
our history in the region from time to time, which has been marked by
intervention or neglect. I think he is also keenly aware of this
quiet revolution that Sandy noted, a profound change, in many ways as
profound as the fall of the Berlin Wall. We have both, from time to
time, used the phrase "this is not your father's Latin America,"
which is, I think, a good way of describing some of the changes --
remarkable changes of 34 out of 35 countries are now democratic. In
Central America we don't have the United States and the Soviet Union
in a Cold War battlefield or civil wars there. And in fact the
export market for U.S. goods in Central America is larger than all of
the former Soviet states put together.
The real story from an economic standpoint has been the
taming of hyperinflation, which, of course, was the cruelest burden
to those below the poverty line. Some example of that is Argentina
in 1989 had an inflation rate of 5,000 percent; today it's .3 percent
with a 7 percent annualized growth rate. As the minister of finance
told us in Brazil when we traveled there, our inflation rate, Mr.
President, is 5 percent; the difference is, that is an annual figure
not a weekly one. So a remarkable economic change.
In terms of the sustained engagement, our goal is to
create what we have phrased as a Greater Americas, based on mutual
trust, respect, and reward. And we have certainly discussed with the
American people about our views regarding Latin America. After all,
we are the fifth largest Hispanic nation in the world, the United
States, and in turn, to sharpen and improve their views of us.
Sandy has already noted the first-term record of the
convening of the summit restoring peace in Guatemala, as friends
of that process; restoring democracy in Haiti; the support of the
Mexico peso crisis; and the passage of the NAFTA; as well as the two
presidential trips to the region, including two summits with the
Central American leaders and the Caribbean leaders.
The Vice President has traveled to the region five
times, emphasizing economic growth and environmental stewardship.
The First Lady has traveled to the region four times, emphasizing
issues of health care, poverty, and including all aspects of women's
inclusion in society as well as indigenous people.
Now, the Miami Summit affirmed what is called the first
generation of reform, which are free and fair elections, stable and
open economies. And I think it's fair to say an architecture was put
in place to further that progress, and one of the centerpieces -- not
the only, but one of the centerpieces was the Free Trade Area of the
Americas by the year 2005.
We have made real progress on that road from Miami to
the promise of Santiago, but the key point here is that progress is
not assured and not guaranteed. It is critical in my view, as
someone from the private sector, to have a second generation of
reform in order to sustain the first generation, the macroeconomic
reform.
I think most of us would agree the bright line between
foreign policy and domestic policy has blurred. You'll see that at
this summit. From a U.S. perspective, whether it's jobs, the
economy, energy prices, gasoline prices with summer vacations coming
up, education, fighting the drug trade, alleviating poverty, or
protecting the air we breathe, the issues we will discuss at this
summit are the issues that affect our citizens and families here at
home. They are issues that our people care about and care about
deeply.
The summit agenda will very much follow the Miami
agenda: first, strengthening our respective democracies; secondly,
trade and economics, including financial coordination, which I think
should be emphasized and highlights; thirdly, addressing poverty; and
fourth, of course, emphasizing education. We'll certainly try to
marshal resources, particularly where we have leverage in the
multilateral organizations -- the Inter-American Development Bank,
the World Bank, the Pan-American Health Organization -- particularly
focusing those resources on education.
I think in terms of education the emphasis to strengthen
the resources devoted in Latin America to primary and secondary
education is particularly important to strengthen their democracies
and their economies. There are clearly dramatic changes in terms of
distance learning taking place throughout the hemisphere and indeed
the world and our own country. And some of the same issues,
including resources, teachers in the classroom, size of the
classroom, and so forth, will be very much discussed at the summit.
I think it's a fair question to ask, how is improving
education in Latin America going to help people here in the United
States? I think the answer is, good schools make good neighbors.
Education advances our economic and security interest in the region.
First, it expands the middle class that buys U.S. goods and services
that are noted on this chart. Secondly, it reduces the opportunity
to buy or sell illegal drugs to be part of that undercurrent and
undertow. It reduces illegal immigration by encouraging people to
stay at home with their families, and it makes for more stable
democracies, and with partners who are ready and willing and able, as
they have demonstrated, to stand by us not only in the hemisphere,
but in terms of our peacekeeping efforts in Bosnia and our efforts in
the Persian Gulf.
You have a number of presidents who have spent a number
of years devoting their efforts to education, including President
Clinton. President Cardoso has been a lifelong teacher and
academician, as has his wife; President Zedillo a former Minister of
Education; President Frei, President Figueres and others have talked
about and been dedicated to educational reform for at least a decade,
if not longer.
I think all of us would agree in this global economy,
which Ambassador Barshefsky will talk about, the key to inclusive
growth both here in this hemisphere and worldwide, is education. And
in many ways I think that will be the legacy of this summit.
In terms of democracy, I think we will see an emphasis
on broader democratic participation, certainly the strengthening of
the judicial system in Latin America -- a fair, open professional
judiciary is key to any modern contemporary working democracy.
Attorney General Reno, Justice Breyer have worked very diligently on
this effort.
Press freedom -- something important specifically to all
of you in this room, is an issue we have pushed, encouraged, and the
President raised it when he went to Argentina on our last trip, and
the hemisphere embraced it. And through the inter-American human
rights part of the OAS, no new bureaucracy, we will establish, I
think, at this summit a special rapporteur to advocate for freedom of
expression.
Now, that may be perhaps even more important than just
the fundamental tenant of freedom of expression, because over the
past 10 years 200 journalists have been killed in Latin America and
some in the United States in pursuit of a story, doing their job
professionally and responsibly. And I think this effort will clearly
help address these crimes of impunity.
I think, finally, corruption is certainly a very
important issue in the hemisphere. The hemisphere is leading the way
with the signing of the Corruption Convention over a year ago, and
that measure, as I think was announced here, has been sent to our
Congress for ratification.
The region clearly still has too much poverty -- over
150 million below the poverty line, despite the progress that Sandy
noted. And these targeted issues, while they can be viewed as rather
mundane, are critical for including everyone in an open-market
democracy in terms of microcredit to small business -- which I
certainly can identify with coming from a small business, a
family-owned business -- land titling; and certainly women's issues
and inclusion in the economy and the democracy.
In terms of the economic issues, Charlene will speak to
the trade issues specifically. I'd just like to note a couple of
things very briefly. First of all, we should look at not only trade,
economic integration, which is obviously occurring in a rather
dramatic way, but we should look also at investment and we should
look at financial coordination, that is. the stability of the banking
system and the financial markets. We've seen what can happen
seriously in Mexico, in this hemisphere, when that does not take
place in the right way, and certainly in Asia. And I think Latin
America in many ways has become a model to emulate there, as opposed
to avoid, and has shown a remarkable resilience in the face of Asia
contagion because they've had the capacity and the will to act in
relatively modern financial systems.
In terms of energy on the economy, three of our four top
energy suppliers are from this hemisphere. And I think all of us
understand the relation to energy prices, inflation, and our overall
economy.
In terms of the FTAA launch, there is a true consensus
we'll have a comprehensive and a credible launch, and that should not
be taken for granted and it should not be minimized. The importance
of it I think is very clear, with 40 percent of our exports going to
this hemisphere, with our exports growing twice the rate to this
hemisphere as any other region in the world.
One fact, as a business person, about half of the
population in Latin America is under 21 years of age. So if you
project that market potential out in a natural market, the numbers
obviously become very compelling and very important. We export more
to Brazil than we do to China, more to Chile where we are visiting
than we do to India.
In terms of the summit process, I think the region has
found its voice on the world stage. We have a much more mature
dialogue in the region than in any times, I think, in the past. I
think it is time to put our consultations on a more regular basis and
I think this Santiago summit will accomplish that. We'll schedule
the next time and place for the next summit meeting. I think the
agenda has been one reached by consensus and I think, in that regard,
we have a common agenda. The issues that we address in Santiago are
issues that matter to the American people and to the people
throughout the Americas.
I think the real opportunity of Santiago is to change
the very shape and nature of the character of our relationship in the
hemisphere, and to have truly a foundation for both security and
prosperity as we move toward the 21st century.
AMBASSADOR BARSHEFSKY: I'll try and be brief. We've
talked about the political declaration that the leaders made in 1994
at Miami, that there should be a free trade area of the Americas. As
important as that political declaration was in 1994, the formal
launch of these negotiations following three and a half years of
preparatory work, ensures the realization of the Miami vision. There
will be a free trade area of the Americas. A comprehensive launch
will be initiated in Santiago, along with all that that implies.
And let me tell you what has been agreed. First off,
the entire negotiating structure from here to 2005 has been agreed.
The first three years of the process will be hosted by Miami. The
final two and a half years of the process will be co-chaired by the
United States and Brazil. We in the United States were very
concerned about this launch that is in the start and the conclusion,
because there are two parts of a negotiation that matter, and only
two: the setup in the beginning, and the end.
The middle will always go as the middle goes -- up and
down, sometimes fast, sometimes slow, the trajectory is usually
positive. But the setup is very, very important, and that's Miami.
And the conclusion, by co-chairing with our other major hemispheric
partner, ensures that we will indeed conclude the agreement on time.
We have also agreed on concrete progress by 2000. I
think this will largely be reflected in the negotiation and adoption
of a series of business facilitation measures. Let me give you some
illustrative examples of what that might encompass: customs, meaning
customs coordination, meaning paperless entry with respect to
customs; a series of provisions related to government procurement and
transparency in government procurement - there is very little
transparency of the process in our hemisphere now; services trade, I
think we'll see some progress there of a very concrete nature. I
also think we'll see some progress with respect to telecommunications
trade and some other areas.
We have also for the first time established a committee
within the FTAA itself to receive the views of labor, environmental
NGOs, and other groups who obviously have a stake in the outcome of
the process. The setting up of this committee is really rather a
milestone in the history of the FTAA thus far. Our hemisphere has
been reluctant to establish a committee within the FTAA to listen to
the views of civil society broadly and to take those views into
account in the course of the negotiation.
This year there has been rather I should say over the
last several years -- there has been rather a change of attitude, and
I think a growing recognition in our hemisphere that people -- all
segments of society need to feel empowered by this process of
hemispheric integration, not disempowered by it. And so we have for
the first time now established a committee within the FTAA to be
chaired by the ministers themselves, that is to say, by those most
responsible directly to their political constituencies, to take into
account these views and to translate these views, where appropriate,
into negotiating objectives.
In addition to, as Mack said, a credible launch, the
launch will be very comprehensive, covering all areas of trade and
covering areas of trade we can project into the future -- so global
electronic commerce now figures prominently on the agenda, as it
should, since Internet usage in our hemisphere has the highest rate
of usage, the highest growth rate in the world, including in Asia,
interesting.
Economically, as you know, the markets of Latin America
are the most dynamic, and the most dynamic export markets for us.
And let me just add for your use a couple of extra numbers. As Sandy
Berger said, in 1997, our exports for Latin America and the Caribbean
grew more than three times as fast as our exports to the rest of the
world. During the second half of 1997, we exported more to our
hemisphere than to the entirety of the European Union.
In 1997, Mexico surpassed Japan as our second largest
trading partner. Think about that a minute. Mexico has an economy
one-twelfth the size of Japan. We sell more to Mexico than we do to
Japan, and they have now surpassed Japan as our second largest
trading partner.
And last, our export increases to the Western Hemisphere
accounted for 63 percent of our export growth worldwide in 1997.
That is to say, 63 percent of the growth in our exports globally
stayed in our hemisphere, went to our hemisphere. And much of that
is accounted for indeed by Canada and Mexico.
Let me just say in closing that because of the economic
transformation in Latin America, including, as Mack pointed out,
reigning in hyperinflation, you have 500 million consumers, a
burgeoning middle class, and extraordinary opportunity for American
exports. And this is exports in all of the categories that we see,
and in all of these categories we've experienced substantial growth
already - and that is in goods, in services, in agriculture as well.
You also have a wave of privatization in our hemisphere,
and as we look at areas like power generation, energy,
telecommunications, the United States is well poised to capture those
opportunities as well. And this range of opportunity will be
enhanced substantially as Latin American barriers come down. Their
tariff barriers alone average four times what ours are to their
products, and non-tariff barriers in Latin America remain a
persistent problem. So we see a substantial expansion of opportunity
for the United States as we pursue the FTAA.
And by opportunity, of course, I mean U.S. jobs, because
that's what the bottom line is here from our point of view. We
already have an economy in which, of new jobs created, one in five
depend on exports. One in five new jobs are in manufacturing and
dependent on exports. And we know that exports pay on average 15
percent more than non-export related jobs.
Our future in terms of increasing U.S. economic growth
is in exports; it is in opening markets abroad where the other 96
percent of the world's population lives, and most particularly, in
our hemisphere, which we ought to view as our neighborhood. We need
to remain well-positioned to capture that opportunity, and that is
what the FTAA will do.
MR. BERGER: Questions. Have we worn you down?
Q -- have you been able to convince the labor unions
that this is such a good thing for them?
MR. BERGER: We will obviously be consulting as we go
along in these negotiations with labor and business, with Congress
and all other affected segments of society, to convey what I think is
clear, and that is that the future of America's economic growth and a
greater production of jobs is going to come in greater trade.
Q
How far can you negotiate until you need fast
track? How many months or years until you absolutely --
MR. BERGER: Let me answer and then I'll ask Charlene to
answer. We launched the Uruguay Round of the GATT negotiations -- in
Uruguay, by the way -- (laughter) -- without fast track authority,
and did not have fast track authority for over two years in those
negotiations. Obviously, as we come to the conclusion -- or before
we get to the conclusion of these negotiations, that is something
that we will need to have, and it's something the President is deeply
committed to obtain, and we will continue to work towards that
objective. But I don't think it is necessary for the launch of these
negotiations.
Charlene.
AMBASSADOR BARSHEFSKY: Yes, if I might say, I think the
fast track question points up to a kind of split dynamic that's
occurring in our hemisphere. The launch of these negotiations is as
well positioned as it could possibly be. That's with or without fast
track. We have precisely the launch, the scope, the U.S. at the
center of it, that we want it to have, and that we would have had
whether we had fast track now or not.
But what you see in our hemisphere, on the other hand,
is an acceleration in sub-regional integration -- that is, in
countries integrating with each other around the United States, not
with the United States. And so you see an acceleration of ties
between Mercosur -- that is, Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay
-- and the Central American countries. An acceleration of the ties
between Mercosur and the Andeans; an acceleration between Canada and
Chile; between Chile and certain of the Central Americans; or between
Chile and Mexico; Mexico and Mercosur; the EU and Mercosur; Asia and
Mexico.
That acceleration has occurred, I believe, because
countries see a potential window of opportunity that they might not
have envisioned had the U.S. had fast track right now. That's not
from our point of view an overly positive development. We don't
object to these sub-regional arrangements, obviously, where they
expand trade, as most tend to do. But we do want to ensure that the
United States remains at the center, as the center of a constellation
of trading relationships. The FTAA launch helps us reassert that
central role, but the acceleration of sub-regional integration is
something I think we have to look at very carefully.
Q
When do you need to have fast track, though? The
launch is next week, but obviously, you're going to need -- and it
looks now like the administration is not going to even push again
until next year.
AMBASSADOR BARSHEFSKY: We have said all along that the
timing of fast track depends on two things one is the substance,
and the second is the chemistry, both of which we continue to consult
with Congress on. And, as Sandy has said, fast track remains a
priority for this administration.
Q -- going to be embarrassing, really, because this
was the goal, wasn't it -- to have Chile on board for a NAFTA thing?
It sounds like everything you've said is a rationale of trying to get
around the fact that you failed in
MR. BERGER: I'll say a couple of things, Helen. First
of all, what we set out to do in Miami in 1994 was to launch a free
trade area for the Americas, a negotiation at this summit; we're
going to do that. And those negotiations will proceed vigorously.
There is, in addition to that, obviously more to this
summit, as there was more to Miami, than trade. And I think one of
the things that I've talked about, Mack has talked about, are the
other issues that increasingly are important to the quality of
democracy and the quality of society in these countries. Obviously,
to take full advantage of the growth in this hemisphere and to reach
fruition in a free trade agreement we will need to have fast track
authority. But I believe we will have it.
MR. MCLARTY: Sandy, let me just reenforce a couple of
points there. First of all, I think the Miami summit, it should be
restated - if the centerpiece, as many suggested, was the
establishment of the FTAA with Chile having a comprehensive trade
agreement, the heart of the Miami summit was democracy the 34
countries that had moved toward democracy; indeed, established
political liberty and democracy. And they are two sides of the same
coin.
Secondly, I think we should keep agreements in
perspective. What is driving this process and these numbers are not
trade agreements. What is driving this process is the
interconnective global economy and the private sector, both
businesses large and small, and ultimately the consumers' knowledge
of and desire for lower priced, competitively priced goods and
services.
So I think Helen, had the President and the
administration - and I have heard this on my some 40 or so trips to
Latin America -- not made a concerted effort to achieve fast track,
then I think you would have some concerns and problems. I think it
is well recognized in these democratically elected governments that,
as we discussed earlier, our batting average on legislation and trade
legislation is very good. They have their own Congresses, and
they're not always successful in a perfectly straight line either.
So I think what is important is to move forward with
momentum on this agenda, as Ambassador Barshefsky has noted. And
finally, I would suggest the actual summit agenda, which was reached
by consensus, was actually essentially agreed upon in large measure
over a year ago, well before the fast track vote even took place.
Q
Ambassador Barshefsky, you said that the United
States is at the center of this process. In Santiago, Brazil will be
signing a number of trade agreements, and the President won't be
signing any. I wonder, most commentators seem to think that Brazil
is now at the center of this process. How do you avoid having the
President look like he's become superfluous?
AMBASSADOR BARSHEFSKY: Well, should I start with the
fact that we're a $7 trillion economy? The United States will always
be at the center. But your question goes exactly to the point I made
before, which is you see an acceleration in the coming together of
sub-regional arrangements to the exclusion of the United States. And
this is really where fast track becomes important not for the
launch; the Uruguay Round was launched without fast track and we're
well positioned here, excellently positioned here with respect to the
launch of the FTAA negotiations.
Where the rubber hits the road is where you see other
countries integrating around us, and for that we're going to need
fast track authority.
I do think, now that there will be this comprehensive
launch of negotiations, we will soon see countries focus their
resources on that. And I think that will begin to subsume a lot of
this other sub-regional activity, but for right now what you see, in
this last six months especially since the fast track vote was
postponed, is an acceleration with respect to the level of
sub-regional negotiation. But in terms of the United States, the
United States is a 7 trillion pound gorilla.
MR. MCLARTY: One quick thing, I think the negotiations
are not win-lose. I think the FTAA is clearly a win-win proposition,
and I think the markets are indeed very complementary of each other.
I think we see that in terms of resources I spoke of energy and
of investments in the region, which Charlene spoke of, infrastructure
projects so I want to make sure when we talk about the center of
what we do need to have is the position in the launch, which we have,
to shape the agreements, particularly on issues that are important to
us and the American people.
Q Is Pinochet going to attend the Congress, the
National Congress event on Friday? Do you know what to expect?
MR. BERGER: We don't know whether he will.
Q
Have there been conversations with Chilean
officials about whether he's going to come?
MR. BERGER: I know it's been a subject of some
discussions at the advance level, but I have no idea whether he's
going to be there or not.
Q
Will that affect what the President says if he's in
the audience?
MR. BERGER: No, he will say the same thing whether
he's in the audience or not. Chile is a democracy with a glorious
recent history of having reclaimed its democracy, and I can assure
you that what the President says will not be affected by whether
General Pinochet is in the audience or not.
Q
And what bilaterals is he going to have on the
sidelines of this summit?
MR. BERGER: Not absolutely clear because of the nature
of this. This is a little bit more like for those of you who were
on the Africa trip Entebbe in a sense than a situation where there
will be formal bilats. There will be opportunities in the breaks for
the President to sit down with President Zedillo, Prime Minister
Chretien, and a number of others. It will be somewhat more informal.
Q
What about will he have a special message about
Paraguay's recent turmoil over the elections there?
MR. BERGER: Our message will be the same as the
message of all of the countries that are in the region - Argentina,
Brazil, Chile, and others which is that we hope and expect that
constitutional democracy will be upheld in Paraguay.
Q
Sandy, two of the subjects of the summit are
education and combatting poverty. What is the United States going to
do concretely on those issues? Are there going to be commitments of
money or --
MR. BERGER: Well, on education there will be
commitments, not only in terms of multilateral funding but also
bilateral commitments as well. I'll let Mack, perhaps, speak more
specifically about it. Go ahead, Mack.
MR. MCLARTY: John, I'll get you the precise figure. I
think your question is on point in terms of marshaling resources and
leveling and leveraging the multilateral agencies, particularly the
Inter-American Development Bank and the World Bank and both President
Iglesias and President Wolfensohn will be in attendance at
the summit. I think the AID has had an active program in the
hemisphere; as you know, they will continue that with somewhat
reduced funding over the last several years, but targeting that
funding, particularly in terms of the poverty efforts.
But I think what you will see is a continued, concerted,
focused, and effective effort on the part of the governments, both at
the federal, state, and local levels in Latin America, take full
advantage of these expanded resources. And I think you will see
their efforts in terms of poverty alleviation to be quite effective
and to be sustained efforts. We obviously want to be fully
supportive of that.
In terms of education, there will be a number of
memoranda of education agreements signed with Chile, with Brazil.
And Secretary Riley, of course, will be on the trip and can answer, I
think, in specific detail the educational aspects that will take
place at the summit and with Chile.
Q
I apologize if it's been asked before are there
American business leaders going with the President.
MR. BERGER: There are not American business leaders
going with the President. There of course are many American
companies that have subsidiaries in Chile. The President will be
speaking to the American Chamber of Commerce in Chile, as he does in
a number of countries. But there as far as I know, none going on
the trip.
Q
So there's no delegation as there was to Africa.
MR. BERGER: There will be a Congressional delegation
that will be going with us, as there has been in all of our trips in
the second term. And we look forward to that. But I don't- there
will be no private delegation.
Q
Many members of the Hispanic caucus in the
delegation?
MR. BERGER: Yes.
Q
Mack, you mentioned that on the economic agenda,
international financial stability will be a big point in Santiago.
Right after the peso crisis, the United States took the lead in
international fora, particularly the G-7, to address this problem
through the IMF, with greater transparency and surveillance of
international banking, et cetera. And for about a couple of years,
there was an awful lot of self-congratulations, that a lot progress
had been made -- it's even in the Halifax and Leone communiques --
and boom, we got the Asian crisis when there had been every
indication that enough prevention had taken place.
What are you going to be doing in Santiago to reassure
investors and consumers and everybody else in the world that
something is finally taking hold to prevent this kind of crisis?
MR. MCLARTY: Well, I think, increasingly, as I noted,
Latin America has been looked at as a model to emulate, not avoid, in
terms of financial institutions, central banking functions and reform
of the banking system. I saw that both at the APEC conference in
Vancouver, where you had Asian leaders and members of the private
sector from those countries attending APEC talk to President Zedillo,
discuss with President Frei, what they had done in that regard. I
saw it again at the Davos Conference World Economic Forum.
While it is not perfect, clearly the leaders in Latin
America have had the capacity and the will to act in terms of fiscal
discipline. That's why their inflation rates have stayed under
control, that's why their budget deficits are much, much smaller, I
think, overall, than even many countries in Europe. And I think we
will want to support an increasing and deepening of that kind of
transparency and openness that the financial markets clearly judge.
And I think that's why you have seen to date stable financial markets
in Latin America despite a sharp decline in oil prices, where many of
the economies are very dependent on oil prices.
I think you're correct in terms of the efforts the
President has made to provide leadership in overall financial
architectures -- Secretary Rubin and Secretary Bentsen before him and
actually started at the G-7 in Naples. I think it's clear more needs
to be done, and particularly reform, in a local basis in the
individual countries affected, which is at the very heart of the IMF
program. I think the difference is Latin America has taken those
reforms and has taken very positive steps, and in some of the areas
they have not.
MR. BERGER: And if you meant to ask by that question
whether we would welcome Congress passing the supplemental, which
would provide IMF funding and funding for the NAB, which grows
directly out of Halifax and is specifically designed to provide for
these kind of circumstances - the answer is yes.
Sandy, also what I was wondering about was having
put their house in order, as you put it -- the Latin American
countries are you going to try and enlist them in Santiago to help
you globally, have them put some pressure on Asian finance ministries
and banking supervisor groups and so on.
MR. BERGER: I think this is happening informally
already. In Vancouver, when APEC met at the end of last year, I
think President Zedillo had an enormous impact there. In a sense,
he's walked through the valley of the shadow of death, and he's come
out on the other side. And he said to the leaders, there are certain
rules that you've got to follow: you've got to tell the truth, you've
got to take the hard knocks as quickly as you can, and you've got to
restore the confidence of the markets.
I think there is beginning to be, as I've said before, a
differentiation in this global financial marketplace. Not all
emerging markets are alike; not all Asian markets are alike; not all
Latin Americans are alike; some are more disciplined than others;
some are better run than others. And I think that the time that's
passed since the Asian problems began, in some ways established that
degree of differentiation on the part of international investors to
be a little bit more discriminating and a little less spontaneous in
terms of the movement of capital.
Q
While we're on international stabilization issues,
Japan a few weeks ago announced a package of stimulation measures to
revive the Japanese economy. But despite that, the IMF global world
economic outlook today forecasts zero growth for Japan for 1998.
Does that mean that they have taken insufficient steps? Are you
looking for them to do anything else?
MR. BERGER: Well, I don't know what factors they took
into account when they made that judgment. We have said that the
steps that the Japanese government undertook last week were good
steps forward but that, as we've said before, it is extremely
important that that economy be stimulated and increase at a faster
rate of growth -- not only for its own health but also for the
overall health of the Asian economies.
Q
Sandy, you just touched on drug trafficking briefly
-- what progress do you expect on the idea of multilateral drug
certification and on the possibility of a Latin counter-narcotics
center in Panama?
MR. BERGER: Well, let me answer and then ask Mack to
add. We will make progress at this summit in expanding the
multilateral alliance against drugs that we began to talk about when
we were in Mexico and Brazil and elsewhere. The purposes of these
efforts are to increase cooperation throughout the hemisphere, both a
demand reduction and supply reduction. And to the extent that we can
-- and they will include an element of evaluation of the performance
of individual countries. And we think this is an important step
forward.
Q
Could this be a replacement of certification with
time?
MR. BERGER: Well, certification is an act of Congress;
it's the law of the land. We obviously intend to comply with it.
Both of these are directed toward the goal of enhancing cooperation
in fighting drugs in the hemisphere. If at some future point the
alliance were strong enough and viable enough that it were advancing
that goal, obviously one might take a look at that. But I think at
this point I would say they complement each other.
Q
Yes, but if this certification is U.S. -- I mean,
unilateral measure from the United States, and as you are trying to
build a partnership with Latin America, this alternative would be the
only politically correct solution on the long run, wouldn't it?
MR. BERGER: Well, we certainly want to be politically
correct. As I said, both of these the motivation of both of these
regimes is to enhance the cooperation throughout the hemisphere on
fighting drugs, which is a deadly threat to each country in this
hemisphere. Whether it's the United States that purchases $57
billion worth of drugs, which poisons our children, or other
countries where the narco-traffickers are eating away at the very
foundations of democracy, there is no greater threat we have in
common. And so it is extremely important that we work on this
problem together through whatever means we can. We think the
alliance against drugs will be one more instrument to advance that
cooperation.
MR. MCLARTY: Well, the only -- I think Sandy really has
covered the subject very well. The only additional point I would
make in terms of the cooperation is that from a Latin standpoint or a
Caribbean standpoint, they view this deadly threat, as Sandy noted,
as seriously as the families of our countries do. This is not
something we are imposing are having to try to change any views. The
truth is, it is a very formidable foe. So I think it calls for
increased cooperation. I think that will be achieved at Santiago.
The goal of cooperation, the multilateral drug alliance, and
certification are the same. Certification is the law, as Sandy
noted, and we'll continue certainly to abide by and enforce that law.
In terms of the Panama multilateral drug
counter-narcotics center, it is an idea that has been well received,
but there are a lot of issues still outstanding, and I would not
anticipate that it would come to fruition at this summit. I think it
could obviously be a part of a multilateral effort.
MR. LOCKHART: I just wanted to let you all know about a
change in the schedule on the trip we're taking tomorrow. The
President will now overnight in Houston and travel Wednesday morning
to Alabama to view the tornado damage and the work that FEMA and the
local authorities are doing to help with the cleanup.
The trip presents some logistical challenges to us, not
the least of which is some of the people who are going on that trip
are also going on the Chile trip, besides some other ones we're
working through. So we will let you all know as soon as we can,
possibly by tonight, on the coverage details, but I think it's
important that people going on the trip tomorrow pack for two days.
Will he then come back here?
MR. LOCKHART: He will come back. There is a
possibility that we will bring the press plane back tomorrow night
and just take an expanded pool for the trip over to Alabama. We are
working through those things now, but for your own comfort you should
assume you're staying for an extra day.
Q
Will the press charter leave at the same time from
Andrews?
MR. LOCKHART: The press charter is still leaving at the
same time, and that's what we're trying to work through now, how we
reconcile the two things. But the press charter is still leaving
early Wednesday morning.
END
4:40 P.M. EDT
Message Sent
To:
Sharolyn A. Rosier
Lori E. Abrams
Jeannetta P. Allen
Brenda M. Anders
Eli G. Attie @ OVP@EOP
Patrick Aylward
Robin J. Bachman
Kyle M. Baker
Karen L. Barbuschak
Beverly J. Barnes
Brian A. Barreto
Mark H. Bartholomew
David S. Beaubaire
Mark J. Bernstein
Marsha E. Berry
antony j. blinken
Alexander L. Boyle
Lanny A. Breuer
Patrick E. Briggs
Katharine Button
Robin J. Bachman
Barbara D. Woolley
Bradley M. Campbell
Phillip Caplan
Laura Capps
Elizabeth A. Castellani
Joseph W. Cerrell @ OVP@EOP
David K. Chai
Andrei H. Cherny @ ovp@eop
Nanda Chitre
Steven A. Cohen
Julianne B. Corbett
Michelle Crisci
Elliot J. Diringer
Melinda L. Dupont
Daniel W. Burkhardt
Diane Ikemiyashiro
Dorian V. Weaver
Dorinda A. Salcido
Douglas Matties
Anne M. Edwards
Rahm Emanuel
Karen C. Fahle
Jennifer Ferguson
Julie A. Fernandes
Karen E. Finney
Martha Foley
Carmen B. Fowler
Ben A. Freeland
Grace A. Garcia
Jessica L. Gibson
Adam W. Goldberg
Jason S. Goldberg
Dario J. Gomez
Peter D. Greenberger
Donald Goldberg
Richard Hayes
Russell W. Horwitz
Maureen A. Hudson
Thomas D. Janenda
david t. johnson
Leanne I. Johnson
Wayne C. Johnson
Michele Jolin
James M. Teague
Jon P. Jennings
Julie E. Mason
David E. Kalbaugh
Jonathan A. Kaplan
Allison J. King
Mark A. Kitchens
Catherine T. Kitchen
Sarah S. Freeman
Jim Kohlenberger @ OVP@EOP
Sara M. Latham
Christopher J. Lavery
Joseph P. Lockhart
Laura D. Schwartz
Laura K. Capps
Laura K. Capps
Lisa J. Levin
Christine N. Macy
Laura S. Marcus
Tanya E. Martin
Doris O. Matsui
Douglas R. Matties
Andrew J. Mayock
Anne E. McGuire
Brooke E. McManus
Cheryl megan Estela R. Elisa Scott Millsap Mendoza moloney D. Michaud Mills
Tamara Monosoff
Kevin Moran
Jonathan Murchinson
Melissa M. Murray
Reuben L. Musgrave Jr.
Sean P. Maloney
Michael V. Terrell
Steven J. Naplan
Mark D. Neschis
Elizabeth R. Newman
Neera Tanden
Michael A. O'Mary
Jonathan Orszag
Peter R. Orszag
Carole A. Parmelee
Sally P. Paxton
Julia M. Payne
Peter O'Keefe
Nicole R. Rabner
Nelson Reyneri
Linda Ricci
Renee C. Riley
Cecilia E. Rouse
Charles F. Ruff
Peter Rundlet
Virginia N. Rustique
Evan Ryan
Jodi R. Sakol @ OVP@EOP
G. Timothy Saunders
Jason H. Schechter
Judithanne V. Scourfield
BROOKS SCOVILLE
Ruby Shamir
Jeffrey A. Shesol
June Shih
Robert M. Shireman
Jake Siewert
Joshua Silverman
Brian D. Smith
Craig T. Smith
Richard Socarides
Douglas B. Sosnik
Maria E. Soto
Elisabeth Steele
Aviva Steinberg
Todd Stern
Diane A. Stumpf
Michael J. Sullivan
Jonathan H. Schnur
Tracy F. Sisser
Suzanne Dale
Mathews
terri Jordan Barry Amy Sylvia tingen W. J. M. Tamagni Toiv Tobe
Serena C. Torrey
June G. Turner
Thurgood Marshall Jr
Dag Vega
Virginia Apuzzo
Michael Waldman
Angelina Walker @ ovp@eop
Glen M. Weiner
Robert S. Weiner
Peter A. Weissman
Lowell A. Weiss
Woyneab M. Wondwossen
Debra S. Wood
William H. White Jr.
GERHARDT_K@A1@CD@LNGTWY
meglynn @ usia.gov@INET@LNGTWY
SUNTUM_M@A1@CD@LNGTWY
SUNTUM_M@A1@CD@LNGTWY
princej @panet.us-state.gov@INET@LNGTWY
backup @wilson.ai.mit.edu@INET@LNGTWY
wh-outbox-distr @clinton.ai.mit.edu@INET@LNGTWY
[email protected]@INET@LNGTWY
CROWLEY_P@A1@CD@LNGTWY
CUTLER_L@A1@CD@LNGTVY
DICKEY_L@A1@CD@LNGTWY
GERHARDT_K@A1@CD@LNGTWY
GRAY_W@A1@CD@LNGTWY
GRIBBEN_J@A1@CD@LNGTVY
MALONE_M@A1@CD@LNGTWY
MOFFETT_J@A1@CD@LNGTWY
PR_U=TDIXON@PR_L=AVUOEOB@MRP@LNGTWY
NAPLAN_S@A1@CD@LNGTWY
SMITH_BD@A1@CD@LNGTWY
darby_E._stott @oa.eop.gov@INET@LNGTWY
[email protected]@INET@LNGTWY
WOZNIAK_N@A1@CD@LNGTWY
julie_green @ed.gov@INET@LNGTWY
[email protected]@INET@LNGTWY
1=US@2=WESTERNUNION@3=@5=ATT.COM@ELN62955104@MRX@LNGTWY
[email protected]@INET@LNGTWY
INFOMGT@A1@CD@LNGTWY
@ usnewswire.com@INET@LNGTWY
usnwire @access.digex.com@INET@LNGTWY
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001. email
From Ana Duque to [email protected] Re: May be of interest
[personal]
04/14/1998
b(6)
[partial] (1 page)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management System [Email]
WHO ([fast track...])
OA/Box Number: 500000
FOLDER TITLE:
[12/17/1997 - 04/14/1998]
2019-0155-F
jn653
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - 15 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Ana M. Duque (CN=Ana M. Duque/OU=WHO/O=EOP WHO
CREATION DATE/TIME:14-APR-1998 20:13:49.00
SUBJECT: May be of interest
TO: Ken (Ken @ ols.net @ INET @ LNGTWY UNKNOWN
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Hi! Still at work and it's 8:15- I'm dying. No really, I finally got
these and thought you might like to see. These are the Q and A's
following Mack's speech at the National Press Club last week. The speech
is way too long to send you, but I thought he had some pretty good answers
to their questions.
(b)(6)
buh
bye
[001]
MR. HARBRECHT: Mr. McLarty, first question: the United States, Brazil
and Mexico all want to go slow on free trade negotiations, yet the United
States has been saying it is committed to achieving concrete results by
the year 2000 with a free trade agreement by the year 2005. What do you
mean by "concrete results," and how will we know whether we've got them?
MR. MCLARTY: I think in any type of discussion or negotiation,
particularly involving a large number of countries, there is a natural
dynamic of give and take and of different points of view. And as I
suggested in my remarks, I think we are now firmly agreed on the goal of a
free trade area with the time line of 2005.
There are clearly issues of order, pace, and other specific issues that we
are not fully agreed upon. Although the structure that came out of the
San Jose ministerial I think gives us a very workable mechanism to achieve
concrete results, and particularly, I think, to expand and use what is
called "business facilitation" which, frankly, means making trade and
investment flows easier, more orderly, and more meaningful in terms of
building businesses and building jobs.
I think, Doug, sometimes specific measurement, particularly in trade
agreements or public endeavors, are not easy to define. I think what is
easy to see is the dramatic increase of trade and investment flows within
this hemisphere. And I think I can say with considerable confidence, in
my judgment, those will continue to grow rather dramatically, and I think
you will see continued progress in terms of harmonizing customs,
regulatory regimes, matters that are not particularly breath-taking or
exciting, but mean a great deal to businesses large and small who are
participating in trade in the region.
So I think you will see continued results in a very defined structure as
we move toward that goal of a Free Trade Area of 800 million people by the
year 2005.
MR. HARBRECHT: In your speech you used the cliche "a rising tide lifts
all boats." But as Latin American economies boom, the gap between rich
and poor nations grows wider, especially in countries like Brazil, the gap
between the rich and the poor widens. What is your answer to the
increasing millions of poor in Latin America who have no boat?
MR. MCLARTY: I think in any working democracy there has to be openness
and inclusion, and there has to be an ownership stake in it. And when I
talk about the second generation of reforms and the deepening of
democracies, that goes in large measure to make sure everyone is included
and is participating in the democracy. I think we already see political
liberty in the region with open, fair, contested elections. We, in some
cases do not have fully developed democracies.
In terms of the poverty issue, I think it is important to note that the
Latin leadership and the Caribbean leadership have emphasized this as one
of the major priorities for the summit agenda. And I think in Brazil,
where you specifically mentioned those in poverty, if you think about what
has been the cruelest burden to those below the poverty line, it has been
the hyperinflation. And you have seen a dramatic reduction in inflation
in Brazil, and other parts of the region, and that has lifted a large numb
er of people above the poverty line.
But I think specific targeted programs such as microenterprise, which is
particularly effective through the Inter-American Development Bank; land
titling, giving people a basic ownership interest in their property and an
ability to borrow against it, including both women and indigenous people
-- all sectors, which President Cardozo, again to go back to Brazil, is
absolutely committed to. And we have seen remarkable progress, for
example, in Chile, where there has been a dramatic reduction in poverty.
So I think we are on the right track. I think what is critical is to
support the efforts to sustain this deepening democracy and open-market
reforms.
MR. HARBRECHT: The Clinton administration sought the creation of a
committee to recommend environmental and labor protections as part of the
negotiations in Santiago, but other nations refused. Will the United
States drop environmental protections and labor rights from these
negotiations?
MR. MCLARTY: I think we should not confuse the issue of commitment and
the importance that our respective countries place on environmental
issues, on labor issues, worker rights, and frankly, on basic human
rights, and the worth and dignity of each individual, which is at the core
of any democracy. I think we saw in Kyoto, for example, a number of the
developing countries in Latin America Argentina, Brazil, Costa Rica,
others take a leadership role in the global climate-change
discussions. Where there are, I think, differences of view, not only
among the 34 countries in the hemisphere, but in our Congress as well, is
how environmental and labor issues would be dealt with in terms of a trade
agreement.
We believe that, as we deepen our trading relationships in this hemisphere
with the shared values and common interests we have, that this will give
rise to increased environmental stewardship and more worker rights and
participation. And we will continue to advocate that in a very strong,
and hopefully effective, manner. That is one reason we need the ability
to shape these agreements.
But I think that is one of the major issues that ultimately has to be
resolved in our Congress, for negotiating authority, and I think over
time, must be dealt with in the FTAA, the free-trade process. I am
hopeful on both counts. And I think we will reach our goal on both
counts, to reach a free-trade area, and the president will have the
negotiating authority to consummate the agreement.
MR. HARBRECHT: Any second thoughts about the way NAFTA has been
implemented?
MR. MCLARTY: I think you always in any agreement, whether it be a trade
agreement or an agreement in the private sector, there are always items
that you review and try to improve and build upon. But I think if you
look at the basic results, to go back to the measurements that you alluded
to earlier; the exports from the United States to Mexico and Canada, under
the North American Free Trade Agreement, are up dramatically. In the
United States, if you go to almost any state in our country, whether it's
in the heartland of our agricultural or manufacturing belt to the west
coast, the east coast, to my home state of Arkansas, you will see a
double-digit increase in exports to both Mexico and Canada providing jobs,
and good paying jobs, for the hard-working men and women of this country.
On the other hand, I think you've seen a dramatic increase in exports from
both Canada and Mexico to the United States. So I think it has been good
for their economies, their workers and their businesses. Do I think we
can make some improvements, particularly in the side agreements of the
environment and labor? Yes, I do. Do I think we need to do more on the
border area, particularly where we have mechanisms such as the Border
Environmental Commission and the North American Development Bank? Yes, I
think we can do better there, and we are. And the president has
underscored that as a priority. But I think on balance if you look at the
NAFTA it has dramatically strengthened our economy as well as our
neighbors', and that is shown by the fact that they are one and two in our
trading relationships.
But in Mexico particularly, that faced a severe financial crisis with the
peso crisis -- caused by an overheating of the economy and the current
deficit account, not the NAFTA -- the NAFTA locked in those reforms from
the United States standpoint. We maintained market share, protected our
jobs here. Now Mexico's economy is recovering. But as importantly, we saw
Mexico return to conventional financial markets with our financial support
package multilaterally in seven months, where in the 1980s in the debt
crisis it took Mexico seven years to return to conventional financial
markets, and the United States lost market share and jobs in that period.
So I would argue that the NAFTA has not only been good for trade and
economics, but is has also been a very stabilizing factor in our
relationship with Mexico.
MR. HARBRECHT: Mr. McLarty, last year the Congress refused to renew the
president's authority to negotiate trade deals on a fast track: that is,
an expedited process where there's an up-or-down vote without any
amendment. Has this caused any lasting damage to trade relations with
Latin America? Will it hurt the chances of creating a free trade zone?
And with the lack of fast track, is there any concern that Japan and the
European Union will overtake the United States in Latin American market?
MR. MCLARTY: Well, that's really two questions. Let me take the second
one first.
I have said, and I said today, reiterated today that Latin America and
this hemisphere is a natural market for the United States. Main Street is
literally extending. And you can see that in the numbers and the jobs,
and you can see it in the airline flights between the United States and
Latin America as well. But it is not a market that we can or should take
for granted. This is a highly competitive global economy, as all of you
know. And there is real competition, not only from the Europeans and the
Asia-Pacific region, but from an intra-regional standpoint as well, and
we've got to work diligently to make sure that we are positioned to be
competitive to maximize our market share, not in a win-lose situation. I
don't think those agreements as I was speaking earlier to Paul -- stay
together very long, whether it be in the public sector or the private
sector. I think this is a true win-win situation with a natural
marketplace. But we have to be in the position to maximize that, and
without negotiatin
g authority, we, in the long run, in the long run, will not be. I am
confident that we will get that negotiating authority to complete the free
trade area.
In terms of the actual negotiations, let me be very -- try to be very
succinct, but I think it's an important point. The Clinton
administration, I think, had a very good record, a very strong record of
success during the first term in terms of trade measures. We were able to
pass, on a bipartisan basis, the NAFTA, the GATT. The president convened
both the summit and the APEC conference, as I noted. I think we signed
over 200 trade agreements totally -- some bilaterally, of course, smaller
measures, during the first four years.
So I think we need to remember that when the Uruguay Round was launched in
1986, President Reagan did not have fast-track negotiating authority.
When President Bush moved forward on the NAFTA, he did not have fast-track
negotiating authority. And yet once those negotiations got underway, it
gave an impetus and a momentum to get the authority and complete the
agreement.
So I think San Jose the trade ministerial there demonstrated that we
will be able to move forward with a comprehensive launch that is genuinely
agreed upon to move forward in the overall trade process. So I don't
think it will be a setback in that regard. Certainly, in a better world,
we would like to have fast-track authority. But I think we can make
significant progress in the near term without it, and I am confident the
president will be given the tools to complete the job.
MR. HARBRECHT: Specifically, in the absence of fast track, is the U.S.
ceding leadership to Brazil in the matter of free trade within the
hemisphere?
MR. MCLARTY: Well, my good friend, Ambassador Paulo-Tarso de Lima, is
here to my right. So, Paulo-Tarso, you can challenge this, if you wish,
after my answer.
I don't see reaching an agreement with 34 countries, even a major economy
such as Brazil, the 10th largest in the world, as I noted; a very
successful, skilled player on the international scene, and Ambassador
Biehl's home country of Chile.
I think this has got to be a consensus agreement that is worked through in
the spirit of partnership. Will it be a hard negotiation? Yes, it will
be. Are there going to be some disagreements? Yes, there will be. There
will be different points of view. But in my 30 years in the private
sector and my six years here in the public sector, I have participated in
very few discussions that were successful without some measure of mutual
trust and mutual respect. So I don't think this is a case where one party
wins and one party loses. I think you have a nature complementary market
where you have vast resources - three of our four energy suppliers are in
this hemisphere supplying the United States. Tremendous opportunities for
U.S. firms in technology, particularly in environmental technology which
is certainly needed in Sao Paulo, in Santiago, other regions of Latin
America, as well as our own country.
So, I think this is truly a win-win situation. I do think that we need to
be in a position to advocate strongly and effectively United States'
points of view and interest, and ultimately that's why we will need
negotiating authority.
MR. HARBRECHT: Many stories continue to be written about corruption in
Latin America. Despite the anti-corruption treaty, which lacks
enforcement, will corruption as an issue be discussed in Chile? Will the
United States raise it?
MR. MCLARTY: Let me answer the second question first, because I think it
is a fundamentally key point that is often misunderstood and a
misimpression can easily be gained. Perhaps in the past, certainly, there
was a feeling and perhaps even a reality that we were trying to impose,
from the United States' standpoint, certain measures on -- in certain
discussions in Latin America. In terms of corruption, or the effort
against drugs, or better educational systems, or more trade, let me assure
you there is a vigorous agreement between the countries of Latin America
and the Caribbean and the United States.
They understand that corruption is a very punitive tax on those who can
least afford it. They fully understand where you have seen dramatic
investment to the region, I believe $71 billion over the past several
years -- direct investment to the region -- will not continue without a
strengthened judiciary and without corruption being taken seriously and
progress being made.
What we can do in the establishment, for example, of the Justice Study
Center, which Justice Breyer, General Reno and others have worked so
assiduously on, we can certainly provide information and ideas and
support. But there is a great deal of cooperation on this particular
matter. And I would remind you, on the Corruption Convention, I believe
we are the first hemisphere to adopt an overall convention against
corruption.
So it is a very high priority not only for the leaders in Latin America,
but if you look at the political structure and the elections themselves,
it is a very high priority for the people of Latin America and the
Caribbean.
So I am very committed and very confident we'll make progress. We
certainly will advocate our very strong position and feelings about the
basic principles of the rule of law, human rights, and an open,
transparent, professional judiciary.
MR. HARBRECHT: It seems hard to hear you talk about Latin America and the
Caribbean without even mentioning Cuba. Isn't the United States being
left out as European nations rush to invest in Cuba? And does the Clinton
administration have any policy which would treat Cuba as a potential
marketplace for U.S. goods, as it once was?
MR. MCLARTY: I very much wish I could have shown a map that reflected
35-democratically elected heads of state in the hemisphere. If you take a
map of the hemisphere -- visualize it for a moment, if you will -- 10
years ago, if you would have had democracies in green and non-democracies
in red, about half the region would have been in red. Today, it will all
be in green, where you have political liberty, fair elections, democratic
structures in place -- except Cuba. It is the one country that is being le
ft behind as Latin America has now found its voice of confidence and its
seat on the world stage.
Regrettably, there have not been changes in Cuba. We certainly don't want
to miss any opportunity there, particularly in light of the pope's
historic visit, that did give some space. And the administration, as you
know, has taken certain action in a number of key areas, particularly
remittances and travel, as well as reaching out directly to the people of
Cuba to hopefully strengthen the church and other measures of civil
society.
As far as the economic side is concerned, our policy has been a policy
that has been followed by Democrat and Republican presidents alike under
the Cuban Democracy Act. And that is we very much hope for and support a
peaceful transition to democracy in Cuba. To date that has not occurred.
MR. HARBRECHT: Mr. McLarty, there's been a lot of speculation about you
leaving the administration after this summit is concluded. Do you have any
plans to rejoin the private sector, number one? And here's a follow-up
question: without a special envoy such as yourself will the White House
return the U.S. to benign neglect on Latin America?
MR. MCLARTY: My wonderful father always suggested to me I concentrate on
the task at hand and to do what was clearly before me rather than what was
dimly in the future. And I think that was very sound and sage advice. We
have a major and important meeting of 34 elected heads of state next week
in Santiago, Chile. And that is where all of my energy and attention is
going as opposed to some future stop down the road.
Having said that, I hope at some point, despite your dramatic
overstatement of my net worth -- (laughter) -- that I will return from
whence I came in the private sector. But I am very much concentrated on
the summit, and I think that's where my concentration and thoughts and
efforts should be.
In terms of the administration policy, I think it should be very clear
that the real impetus for our policy and our priority in the region,
despite my strong commitment and advocacy for the region, has come from
the president. He very much sees this moment in time, if you will, to use
a bit of a cliche -- but I think it's descriptive -- to strengthen our
partnership in the region and to seize these opportunities and to make
real progress on some of the problems we've talked about. That's why he's
traveled to the region three times, as he travels to Chile next week,
inside of a year. And that's why during the first term, as I -- listed
several major initiatives, including the NAFTA, including the Mexico
support package, including the restoration of democracy in Haiti.
So it is very much, I think, a priority of this administration, of this
president, of this secretary of state. And I think certainly with very
able and capable people such as Assistant Secretary Davidow, Ambassador
Brown (sp) and others that we will continue to see a policy importantly of
sustained engagement to cement these relationships and strengthen
democratic institutions.
MR. HARBRECHT: I have several questions here taking issue with the notion
that in Latin America all the nations are democracies, especially on the
point of press freedom. There have been a lot of problems in Latin
America with press freedom.
Would the administration champion this issue? And another question; do
you think America(n) media cover Latin American adequately, and how can
that be improved?
MR. MCLARTY: Well, I think there is -- the basic element of freedom of
expression, a free press, is essential as I noted, in any working
democracy. And that may vary from country to country. As I have said,
there is certainly political liberty throughout the hemisphere. You have
consistently seen free and fair elections. In some cases, you have not
yet seen, although I think the countries are clearly on the road to it,
fully developed democratic institutions. In terms of that, we have been
working at it for 200 years, and we have, from time to time, not perfected
it as much as we would like.
My experience in the region has been there is an active press and
growingly so. I think there are some issues, as I noted, of instances of
some intimidation of the press. And certainly, the loss of life by
journalists, primarily covering narcotics issues but not exclusively, is
obviously the most serious of issues. We have taken a strong role, and I
would say a leadership role, but we are not alone in that regard.
And the president spoke about this when he traveled to the Southern Cone
last year. The Latin leadership, both heads of state and others,
particularly at the Organization of American States, picked right up on it
and supported it. And I do think raising this freedom of expression,
freedom of the press, with a mechanism in an existing institution, the
Inter-American Human Rights -- we are not creating another institution or
bureaucracy here, a very independent respected institution -- is the right
place to have a very respected, objective person as a special rapporteur
for press freedoms; not to monitor content, but to advocate and monitor
strong freedom of expression and freedom of the press.
It is essential not only in the democratic and governmental process; it
is essential in a free market, where consumers have the right and need to
know the information about their products and services as well.
MR. HARBRECHT: Mr. McLarty, before we ask our last question, I'd like to
present you with a certificate of appreciation for coming today. Thank
you so very much.
MR. MCLARTY: Thank you.
MR. HARBRECHT: And here is your second National Press Club mug.
(Laughter.)
MR. MCLARTY: (Laughs.)
MR. HARBRECHT: Now you can have your coffee in the morning with that mug,
and then you can have warm milk with cinnamon at night to go to sleep.
(Laughter.) That's what I do. Works for me.
MR. MCLARTY: (Laughs.) Doug, thank you.
MR. HARBRECHT: Thank you. Thank you very much.
MR. MCLARTY: Thank you very much. Thank you.
MR. HARBRECHT: For our last question today, I'd just like to ask a
serious one, since you are one of the few people in Washington who is very
close to the president. How -- could you share with us, please, how you
have handled the pressure of the Monica Lewinsky incident? And do you
think House Republicans will seriously attempt to move impeachment
proceedings?
MR. MCLARTY: Well, first let me use my cups like I'm in the Olympics here
as part of a medal presentation. And Doug, thank you for that.
On the question of the current environment, I think a couple of points are
worth noting.
I think it's very clear, including our efforts in the hemisphere, in this
meeting that we have next week in Chile, as well as the president's
historic trip to Africa, and certainly domestic issues concerning the
tobacco controversy that was discussed here yesterday -- and the president
obviously voiced very strong feelings about the industry being part of the
solution, particularly with our young people's exposure in that area --
that the president is focused on what he was elected to do and what he
believes in. And these are issues -- including the fiscal responsibility,
balancing the budget, improving our education and health care systems --
that he has worked on for 25 and 30 years of his life. I have seen that
firsthand and, in some cases, worked with him from the private sector, in
a public- private partnership. And I think it's clear that's what the
American people want him to be doing. And I think that is reflected in
our relationships around the world.
So I think over the past several years, we have had some training of
dealing with these issues and very much concentrating on the business at
hand.
What I would say is I very much hope -- coming, again, from a private
sector background, being very much of the persuasion believing in
bipartisanship, having the privilege to serve on two commissions under
President Bush when I was in the private sector -- that the current
environment does not get unnecessarily and bitingly and acidicly partisan.
I don't think that's what the American people want, and I don't think it
would be good for our country and the issues that are important to all of
us in this room. (Applause.)