pd05jy99 Checklist of White House Press Releases...

	Web GovRecords.org

Public Support for President's Agenda

    Q. Mr. President, a question about polling statistics on your 
domestic issues. Recently, or quite frankly, your numbers have been 
tracked on certain issues showing that core groups, people who have 
supported you in the past, have now fallen off. Do you fear, sir, that 
perhaps you are beginning a disconnect with the American people? And how

[[Page 1199]]

can you possibly lead in Congress on the legislative agenda that you've 
outlined if you don't have the backing of your core groups?
    The President. Well, for one thing, the only polls I've seen show 
overwhelming public support for the Patients' Bill of Rights, for 
closing the gun show loophole, for the other commonsense gun 
initiatives--overwhelming support. There is public--strong public 
support for campaign finance reform. There's overwhelming public support 
for the gun legislation and some of these issues, like the Patients' 
Bill of Rights, for example, the support is almost uniform among 
Republicans, Democrats, and independents.
    So I don't know what issues we're pushing, as it happens, that the 
public agrees with the Republicans and disagrees with us on. I recognize 
that the public was ambivalent about Kosovo, but they were ambivalent 
about Bosnia and Haiti and a lot of the other things that I've done in 
foreign policy--helping Mexico when they were in trouble. But I think 
the President hires on to make the tough decisions and controversial 
decisions, too.
    You know, the Democrats stayed--when we were in much worse shape in 
'93 and '94, the Democrats stayed because they believed we were right. 
We knew that when we cut the deficit $500 billion and we were all by 
ourselves--we didn't have any Republican votes--it wasn't going to be 
popular and you could characterize it, but it was the right thing for 
America. And look at where our economy is today.
    So I think, no matter what the polls say, you just have to get up 
every day and do what you think is right. And that's what we're doing, 
and I think we'll be borne out.
    Yes, go ahead.

Public's Concern About Moral Decline

    Q. I've got a follow to that. The polls are also showing that 
although people do acknowledge that they're doing better in the economy 
and that they're doing well personally, they show a deep concern for the 
Nation's moral fabric, and actually that concern seems to be growing. 
What responsibility do you, personally, take for that, and what can you 
in the White House do to address these moral problems that seem to be 
cropping up more and more in the polls?
    The President. Well, I think people are worried about--I think the 
most important thing on that is what happened, the shattering effect 
that Littleton had. In terms of what happened to me in the impeachment 
issue, I did what I could by telling the American people what I was 
going to do, that I was going to go back to work being the best 
President I could be, and I was going to go back to work to try to 
repair my family life. I have worked very hard for a year to do that, 
and the public, at the time, had a strong response to that. That's all I 
can do, and that's what I have done. I've done that very faithfully.
    So I don't think that's what's going on. I think people are worried 
when they see the fabric of life still under great strain in spite of 
the fact that we have quite a large amount of prosperity. And I think 
what we all have to do is to ask ourselves: What can we do to reinforce 
the ability of families to raise their children, to teach them right 
from wrong, to increase the chances that they'll be able to live strong, 
whole lives? And I believe, therefore, that there is, in that sense, a 
moral component to the debate we're having over guns.
    I mean, basically, we know--let me just give you one example. We 
know from the experience of the Brady bill that if we do background 
checks, thousands of people--at gun shows--thousands of people who 
shouldn't buy guns won't get them. Now, we know that. I think that's a 
positive moral value.
    The people on the other side essentially say, ``Yeah, but we don't 
want to be inconvenienced.'' And when people see inconvenienced elevated 
over the life of a child in this context, I think that causes them 
problems.
    We know that in the case of the Patients' Bill of Rights that people 
think it's a moral issue if they need to see a specialist or they need--
if they get hurt in an accident and they can't go to the nearest 
emergency room. They know that. And when they see, in effect, someone 
else's convenience elevated over that, I think that's a problem for 
them.

[[Page 1200]]

    So I think that there are lots--this is a complicated thing. But my 
own view of that is, what we have to do is not pretend that the 
Government can solve all the moral questions, not evade what people have 
to do personally in their own lives with their own families, but neither 
can we take the dodge that the Government has no responsibility.
    That's why I tried so hard after that Littleton incident. That's why 
I'm so disappointed in what Congress did in the House on this gun issue. 
Because I tried so hard after that Littleton incident not to play 
politics, not to point the finger at anybody, not to say, ``Oh well, 
it's this, that, or the other thing.'' You know, I went to Hollywood, I 
challenged the entertainment community, even though they had done far 
more to try to move the ball forward than anybody in the gun community 
until the gun manufacturers started helping, and they've done a good 
job, too, a lot of them.
    I still believe that people think that there is too much ``everybody 
for himself,'' and if people can get away with what they do because of 
their position, they'll do it. And I think what I tried to do was to 
acknowledge it to whatever extent I had done that it was dead wrong, and 
I was going to spend the rest of my life trying to rectify that, which 
is all anybody can do. And I think most people accept that. They'd 
rather have somebody do that than go around trying to give a lot of 
speeches about how good they are, and then open the door for the gun 
lobby to run the Congress.
    So you'll just have to make up your own mind about that. But I think 
that--what I think is important is that we stop trying to figure out how 
to make points against one another by saying, ``I'm better than you 
are.'' You know, I was raised in a family that would have given me a 
whipping if I had done that as a boy. I was raised to believe that we 
were suppose to try to be humble in our personal search, but aggressive 
in trying to help our neighbors. That's the religious tradition I was 
raised in.
    Now, I get the feeling that people say, ``Well, what we should do is 
be arrogant about how good we are and the heck with our neighbors.'' I 
don't agree with that. I think we'd be better off with the former 
tradition, and I think it has deeper roots in American life and is more 
consistent with what we should be doing.
    George [George Condon, Copley News Service].

Lessons From Kosovo

    Q. Mr. President, wartime Presidents, even the great ones--Lincoln, 
Wilson, or Roosevelt--all discovered that wars never went exactly the 
way they planned it. In Kosovo, what surprised you or went a way that 
you didn't expect, and what lessons did you learn in Kosovo?
    The President. The bombing went on--I had two models in my mind on 
what would happen with the bombing campaign. I thought it would either 
be over within a couple of days, because Mr. Milosevic would see we were 
united; or if he decided to sustain the damage to his country, that it 
would take quite a long while for the damage to actually reach the point 
where it was unsustainable. It took only a little longer than I thought 
it would once we got into the second model.
    But I was surprised about some of the things. I was surprised that 
it took--I was surprised, on the one hand, that we lost no pilots. I was 
surprised by that. I was surprised that we'd lost only two planes and no 
pilots.
    I know that from your point of view, there were a lot of civilian 
casualties, but that's because you got to cover them as opposed to 
covering the civilian casualties of the Gulf war. If you talked to any 
military person that was involved in both conflicts, they will tell you 
that there were far, far more civilian casualties in Iraq. I mean, many 
more by several times as many.
    I was a little surprised that we had no more problems than we did in 
maintaining our Allied unity, given the enormous pressures that were on 
some of our Allies. And I think that gives you some indication about the 
depth of conviction people had that this was right.
    Let me just say this--I think one way to understand this--I almost 
never see this, but let me just--one way to understand this about why we 
all did what we did even when a lot of folks thought we were crazy, or 
at least thought we couldn't prevail, is I don't think I can even 
begin--I am very surprised--I was surprised and heartbroken that

[[Page 1201]]

the Chinese Embassy was hit because of the mapping accidents. That did 
surprise me. I had no earthly idea that our system would permit that 
kind of mistake. That was the biggest surprise of all.
    But let me just say one other thing. I think that when you look at 
this conflict and you seek to understand, well, why did President 
Clinton do this, why did Tony Blair do this, why did Jacques Chirac go 
along, why did the Germans get in there with both feet so early given 
their history and all this--I think you have to see this through the 
lens of Bosnia. And keep in mind in Bosnia, we had the U.N. in there 
first in a peacekeeping mission. Then we tried for 4 years, 50 different 
diplomatic solutions, all those different maps, all that different 
argument. And the end of it all, from 1991 to 1995, we still had 
Srebrenica.
    We still had--and when it was all said and done, we had a quarter of 
a million people dead and 2\1/2\ million refugees. And I think what you 
have to understand is that we saw this through the lens of Bosnia. And 
we said we are not going to wait a day, not a day if we can stop it.
    Once we knew there was a military plan, they had all those soldiers 
deployed, they had all those tanks deployed, we knew what was coming, 
and we decided to move.
    So yes, there were surprises along the way. I'm terribly sorry about 
the Embassy. We made our report--I've gotten a report and the Chinese 
got--I made sure the Chinese got essentially the same report I did. We 
didn't put any varnish on it. And I'm sorry about it. But our pilots on 
the whole did a superb job, and we did the right thing. And I hope that 
the American people, as time goes on, will feel more and more strongly 
that we did.
    Yes.

Aid to Farmers

    Q. There's one issue that you didn't raise in your list of domestic 
priorities, and that's agriculture. As you know, the agricultural 
economy is not doing well. Some say it's in a death spiral. Senate 
Democrats have tried to add a $6 billion aid package to agricultural 
appropriations. Now the Senate Republicans have written you a letter 
asking you to acknowledge the crisis and set a dollar amount for what 
you think might be needed to keep those farmers on the land this year.
    The President. Well, we're working on that. Last year, at the end, 
we got about that much money--about $6 billion in emergency 
appropriations last year for the farmers. And it is quite bad this year, 
and we are going to have to give them more support. And I intend to do 
it.
    I just want to point out--when this Congress passed the freedom to 
farm act, I warned them that there was no safety net in there and that 
it would only work as long as farm prices stay at an acceptable level. 
And I think what we have to face now is whether or not this is another 
emergency.
    From the point of view of the farmers, it's a terrible emergency; 
it's a crisis. We have to deal with it. But from the point of view of 
the Congress, what they have to face is, is this a second year of an 
emergency, or do they have a fundamentally flawed bill? And if the 
answer is the latter, can we handle this with emergency legislation or 
do we need to change the law?
    But if you're asking me, am I going to recommend more help for 
America's farmers? The answer is, yes. There is no other alternative. 
This was--there were a lot of good things in the freedom to farm bill. 
It gave more freedom to farmers; it gave more opportunity for 
conservation reserve; it had more for rural development. But it had no 
safety net, and it was obvious to anybody that ever fooled with 
agriculture for several years that sooner or later, this was going to 
happen--and it happened. And it was as predictable as the Sun coming up 
in the morning. And I think it would be terrible to let thousands of 
more farmers go under, under these circumstances.
    Yes, go ahead.
    Q.  Which one?
    The President. You.

First Lady's Method of Travel

    Q.  Thank you. As the First Lady considers a possible Senate bid in 
New York, she's made an unusual number of campaign-style appearances in 
the Empire State using Government jets at taxpayer expense. I wanted

[[Page 1202]]

to ask you if you thought that was an appropriate expenditure of 
taxpayer money and if you think the privilege should continue once--or 
if--she finally does announce her candidacy.
    The President. Well, part of how she travels is determined by the 
Secret Service. She is willing to do--first of all, in the exploratory 
phase and if she should become a candidate, she will fully comply with 
all the Federal rules and regulations that govern her. But part of how 
she travels is determined by what the Secret Service says. And you'd be 
amazed how many times in the last few years we've wanted to take the 
train to New York, for example, and haven't been able to do it.
    So these are legitimate questions that we take quite seriously, she 
takes seriously, and we're trying to work through them as best as 
possible.
    Yes sir, in the back.

War in the Balkans and President's Legacy

    Q. Thank you, sir. How do you want to be remembered abroad, as a 
leader who wanted to shape America's face among other nations? How do 
you want to be remembered in the Balkans, in Eastern Europe, where 
people have strong feelings about America, different kinds of feelings? 
And pardon me for asking that, do you expect if someone, somewhere, 
wants to put a price tag on your head, just as the State Department 
offered $5 million to get Mr. Milosevic, given the controversy that NATO 
leaders might also have committed war crimes by bombing vital 
infrastructure in the region? Thank you.
    The President. Well, first of all, we have not put a price on Mr. 
Milosevic's head for someone to kill him. We have offered a reward for 
people who can arrest and help bring to justice war criminals, because 
of the absence of honoring the international extradition rules in 
Serbia. So let's get that clear. No one is interested in that. The 
United States policy is opposed to assassination, has been since Gerald 
Ford was President, officially, and I have rigorously maintained it. So 
we don't try to do that to heads of state. So that's the first thing.
    Secondly, NATO did not commit war crimes. NATO stopped war crimes. 
NATO stopped deliberate, systematic efforts at ethnic cleansing and 
genocide. And we did it in a way to minimize civilian casualties. Our 
pilots were up there--I'm telling you, there were days when they were 
consistently risking their lives because the Serbs were firing at them 
with shoulder-fired missiles in the midst of highly populated villages, 
and the pilots did not fire back and take them out because they knew if 
they missed, they would kill civilians.
    Yes, there were civilians killed. But I will say again, if you 
compare the civilian losses here with the losses in Desert Storm, it's 
not even close. They did a magnificent job. They were brave. We tried to 
minimize casualties. Every target we hit was relevant to the, 
essentially, the state machine of terrorism that Mr. Milosevic was 
running.
    And finally, I'm not concerned right now about how I'm being 
remembered; I'll be remembered when I'm gone. Right now, I'm not gone, 
and I've got lots to do.
    Yes, go ahead.

U.S. Presence in Okinawa

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. You're just back from the G-8 summit 
meeting in Cologne, Germany, and next year you're going to Okinawa, 
Japan, for another summit meeting. Okinawa is the home of a huge U.S. 
military presence in Japan and the Far East. And I'm wondering if you 
will try hard and resolve all the major issues pending between the U.S. 
and Japanese Governments about the U.S. bases in Okinawa, most 
importantly, the relocation of the Futenma Air Base, before you go there 
next year. Thank you.
    The President. Absolutely. I don't want to go over there and have 
all these things hanging out. I hope they'll all be resolved. Let me 
say, I think it's a very exciting thing, and I congratulate Prime 
Minister Obuchi on wanting to host this conference in Okinawa. It's very 
unusual, in a way, for a leader to do that, to take the conference so 

Other Popular 1999 Presidential Documents Documents:

Other Documents:

1999 Presidential Documents Records and Documents