The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
_____________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release February 7, 1996
Press Briefing
By Mike Mccurry
The Briefing Room
1:45 P.M. Est
Mr. Mccurry: I don't have any good excuse. I'm sorry
I'm late. But now that I'm here I'm sure we'll have a very
entertaining session here at the White House daily briefing.
Q What's your response to all these -- the 20
subpoenas? And how come we haven't gotten the statement from Jack
Quinn or Fabiani yet that you promised -- or you didn't, but it was
promised yesterday?
Mr. Mccurry: Well, I can check on Mr. Fabiani's been up
to. But, look, Mr. Clinger, I think, saw that it was a slow news day
and decided that he'd go to make a headline with some warmed over
fish wrappings from three months ago. This White House has produced
26,000 pages worth of documents. They have hashed this, rehashed
this, refried it, reboiled it, and there's nothing much new to say.
Most of the requests that they've got are for material that has,
frankly, already been provided. These mostly are duplicative
requests that go back before.
Now, Mr. Fabiani can enlighten you further on it, but
it's an attempt, I believe, by Mr. Clinger to keep alive an issue
that, frankly, is hard to keep alive.
Q Well, he says, on the other hand, Mike, that he
hasn't gotten these and that's why he's subpoenaing these individuals
as opposed to the blanket subpoena on the Office of the Executive
Office of the President. And that there are 129 on a privileged list
that he wants.
Mr. Mccurry: He saw some list and immediately ran out
and waved it around and tried to commit news when, in fact, my
understanding is, in November most of these documents had been
provided. The White House had indicated a willingness to sit down
and go through that. So what's happening here is Mr. Clinger is now
more interested in making news than in getting at any truth here that
would further the public's understanding of these matters.
Q Are you saying he actually has these documents?
Mr. Mccurry: He's had -- my understanding is most of
the material has been covered under prior requests and is available
to him. In any event, any of these documents that they want they
will make available for review to the committee, is my understanding,
talking to our legal counsel folks.
Q Mike, the committee says, however, that the
Counsel's Office has told them that they don't have all these 129,
and the reason that they did the individual search is because when
they've done personals to people like Watkins and Thomason, those
folks have turned over documents the White House claims didn't exist.
Mr. Mccurry: I know that you follow this matter much
more closely than I do, but my understanding is most of the material
they are after is available. They can have it, they can go through
individually what they need to find. There are some -- any concerns
about particular documents a long time ago White House legal counsel
indicated to the committee they would sit down and work out any
arrangements that they need for these -- review of any documents they
have in mind.
Q Did they take advantage of it in terms of seeing
the privileged --
Mr. Mccurry: No. They're out running around trying to
keep this alive as a political issue. That's what they've been doing
for a long time.
Q But Mr. Clinger is retiring, he doesn't --
Mr. Mccurry: I know. He's retiring so he can spend all
this time on this and not worry about his constituents. That's his
right. (Laughter.)
Q Oooh.
Mr. Mccurry: Okay. What else?
Q One final question. Considering the way documents
have mysteriously appeared in this White House, why is it not
legitimate for them to suspect that they may mysteriously appear
again?
Mr. Mccurry: Well, because they know that the White
House has gone to extraordinary lengths to cooperate with the
committee, turning over documents, answering questions, having people
testify voluntarily, and they're more interested in making political
hay around these issues than they are in shedding any further light
on the truth. That's the bottom line. It's politics. It's a
campaign year. That's what this is all about.
Okay, what else?
Q Have you told that to Clinger? I mean, has there
been enough time to contact --
Mr. Mccurry: Yes, in a very respectful way, our
lawyers, who are paid to be respectful, go up to him and say, listen,
let's sit down, let's work this out. We have been very cooperative,
but at some point you've got to say enough is enough. And what's the
purpose of all this at this point?
Q And what does he say in return?
Mr. Mccurry: He just figures out some other news angle
and tries to con you guys into writing news stories about it --
(laughter.)
Q The signing of the telecommunications bill -- we've
got the Aclu that's planning on filing a suit as soon as it's signed,
and you've got Pat Schroeder who's got legislation that she's going
to introduce --
Mr. Mccurry: Those are two separate concerns, is my
understanding.
Q They are, indeed, but given the problems, why is
the President signing this?
Mr. Mccurry: Well, this is an extraordinarily important
piece of legislation that will further competition in the
telecommunications industry, make a wider choice of information
sources available to the American people, cut rates for them, make it
cheaper and more efficient for them to get access to information and
entertainment programming, and it's basically a good deal for the
American people in balance.
Now, there will be specific concerns. I'm not going to
comment on suits that haven't been file yet or issues that others
might raise on this. But, on balance, I think most of those issues
can be addressed in the context of the President signing the bill
tomorrow.
But let's remember, this is historic legislation that
really brings more deregulation, market competition and a better deal
for consumers into the provision of telecommunication services at a
time when that is one of the most fast-evolving portions of the
America economy, or sectors in the American economy, and so, in that
sense, an extraordinary piece of legislation that the President, the
Vice President, others here in the administration take great pride in
having produced working in cooperation with Congress, proving that
when the Congress and the White House work together they can do
things that help the American people.
Q Is the President aware of Congresswoman Schroeder's
legislation?
Mr. Mccurry: I haven't asked -- this is the issue of
what would be available on the Internet related to the choice that
women might want to have for their own reproductive health. I'm not
-- I don't know what level of conversations there have been within
the White House on that particular issue. I can check on that and
we'll get into that tomorrow, I'm sure.
Q In light of Dick Morris's financial disclosure
statements, would it be correct to say that the President is still
behind him 1,000 percent?
Mr. Mccurry: He's got a financial disclosure that
presents information about his private clients and some of his work
for Republican candidates. I don't know that the President has
studied that in any great detail, but I know that the President
obviously was aware that he's worked with Republicans and he's had
representation in the private sector in the past. That was not news
to the President.
Q What about the question, though; does he still have
confidence in him, or not?
Mr. Mccurry: Oh, absolutely. He provides very keen
insights, and like most of us around here, he has his good days and
his bad days and he has his good ideas and his bad ideas, and the
President is smart enough to figure out how to take the right kind of
advice and act accordingly.
Q He was here at the White House today. Could you
tell us what he was doing here?
Mr. Mccurry: He was here today?
Q Yes.
Mr. Mccurry: I talked to him a little while earlier and
he was not here at the White House.
Q He was here this morning.
Mr. Mccurry: Well, he's here from time to time for
meetings with people at the White House.
Q Is he going to get fired?
Mr. Mccurry: -- meeting with him yesterday about some
planning so we can make life easier for all of you and know what's
coming down the pike and what kind of news we're going to make.
Q But you don't think he's working for any
Republicans now?
Mr. Mccurry: He has indicated to us -- my understanding
is that he is not planning to take on an additional client load in
this election year with, I think, one or two exceptions that relate
more to friendships he has in New York.
Q Republicans or Democrats?
Mr. Mccurry: Democrats is my understanding.
Q Has he given up his relationship with Huckabee in
Arkansas?
Mr. Mccurry: I believe so. I did not ask him that
question.
Q Were you aware that he was actually being paid at
the same time -- that money was coming in from Republican clients at
the same time he was working for Clinton?
Mr. Mccurry: Well, he had -- sure, because he was a
consultant during the 1994 campaign cycle and some of the payments
for his services came in during 1995. We knew who he worked for in
1994, and that those payments were reflected.
Q Mike, what's the White House's strategy in getting
the Kassebaum-Kennedy bill voted on before the 15th of April?
Mr. Mccurry: Well, our strategy is to continue to press
the case for a very important piece of legislation. It will make it
easier for Americans to retain access to health insurance when they
change jobs, especially because of the portability provisions and the
dealing with preexisting conditions; making sure that we don't change
the structure of employer-provided health insurance in America at a
time when we need to think about how to expand coverage rather than
diminish coverage.
The President pressed this very forcefully in the State
of the Union address. That clearly had an impact because, for
whatever reason, the mysterious holds that were placed on this
legislation in the Senate seemed to evaporate. And it's now quite
clear that there's more than a majority of senators in support of the
legislation. We certainly hope the legislation will be taken up as
soon as possible. If it's April, it's April, but passage of that
would represent a very important step forward in the effort to reform
the health insurance sector, consistent with what the President told
the Speaker and the Majority Leader back in December of 1994, that we
needed to move ahead on an incremental reform of the health care
sector.
Q Will he be making any phone calls here at the White
House to try and speed up the schedule?
Mr. Mccurry: We've really been in consultation with
staff on the Hill and others on the Hill. We'll see how that
develops. There will no doubt be some vigorous opposition raised
against the legislation by the same special interests that have
fought health care reform in the past, and we're prepared for that,
and we will work with the majority of senators who want to see this
kind of legislation passed.
Q Has the President decided how he will deliver his
testimony in the --
Mr. Mccurry: No, I don't have anything more on that.
Q How do you feel about Mr. Spring's suggestion about
a Dayton-like approach to the Northern Ireland peace process?
Mr. Mccurry: Let's see. Let me go -- I have to review
because Tony has been having some meetings in connection with that,
and what's new -- he will be here, the Irish Deputy Prime Minister
will be here next week. We expect David Trimble to be here this
week. That will present an opportunity for the National Security
Advisor, who's been closely engaged in conversations with the
parties, to pursue that idea.
We credit Senator Mitchell and the international body
that dealt with the decommissioning issue of having given the parties
a pretty good road map of how to proceed in the goal of reaching
all-party talks. We believe all these conversations we're having
with the parties now can confer to that. As you know, Mr. Adams was
here not too long ago himself, met with the President.
Q Is Spring here tomorrow morning?
Mr. Mccurry: Oh, tomorrow. Okay. I'm looking at
something here that says next week. He'll be here tomorrow then.
And we do plan to have David do a little readout on that afterwards.
Q But, specifically, Mike, a venue outside of
Washington that might get the parties together -- is that something
that you would encourage?
Mr. Mccurry: Our view is that something that moves the
parties to all-party talks is something that would be encouraged
because that's where ultimately all parties would have a venue for
raising the issues that they have and concerns, that they can make
good on the Downing Street Declaration, the peace process could mean
so much to the people of Northern Ireland.
Q How does the President feel the fact that
Aristide's last act as President was to renew diplomatic relations
with Cuba?
Mr. Mccurry: Well, it is -- other governments in the
region do have their relations with Cuba. It's contrary to our view
that it's a government that has not given indication that it wants to
move in the direction of democracy and market economics. But it's
perfectly in within the right of the Haitian government to establish
diplomatic relations with Cuba.
Q Do you have a strategy yet for dealing with the
defense bill's treatment of Hiv Positive military?
Mr. Mccurry: There has been considerable work on that
issue. The President himself has instructed the White House to treat
that as a matter of very high priority, and I expect that we'll be
able to say in a very short while how we will deal with that issue.
Q Today or --
Mr. Mccurry: I can't guarantee today. I saw Walter
Dellinger from the Justice Department earlier working away furiously.
And they would all like to try to bring that to a conclusion prior to
the President's signing the bill. But I don't have any guarantee
that it will be today.
Q That's Friday, right? I mean, the signing is
Friday.
Mr. Mccurry: It has to be signed by Friday.
Q What will the President be talking about in Iowa
this weekend, and will it be further development of the themes of the
State of the Union address?
Mr. Mccurry: Do you want to do a little rundown on
Iowa? They're still doing some work on that. It will stress themes
that were raised in the State of the Union address -- certainly
education, stronger economy. It will also touch on those issues that
are very important in a state with a large rural economy. The
President's proud of the work we've been doing to promote
agricultural exports around the world and the very strong performance
of the agriculture sector in the economy. Farm prices have been
good. That's why we need to get this farm bill locked in and done,
and we hope that happens.
Q Just to follow up, Mike, the President barely --
never mentioned the Republican field on that day in New Hampshire, on
Friday at least. Is it likely that he will continue to not talk
about them in Iowa as well?
Mr. Mccurry: It's very likely the President will
continue to leave the Republicans to their own festivities in the
primary season. He's had some concerns about -- I mean, he's been
more than happy to contrast his vision of where this country needs to
go in the 21st century with that offered by the Republican majority,
but at this point the Republicans are in their own process of
selecting a candidate and the President has been very reluctant to
engage in any particular commentary on any of those seeking the job
because, frankly, the Republican party has to decide who they wish to
nominate to run against him.
Q So he would not be likely then to contrast his
position and the situation within the Democratic Party with the brawl
or race, or whatever you want to call it in the other party.
Mr. Mccurry: No. I mean, he enjoys the support of the
party. He's gratified that the Democrats have rallied to his
candidacy and that he faces no opponent. But the Democratic Party
itself has had some fairly bloody primary fights, so we know what
it's like to go through the process they're going through now. It's
agonizing.
Q Let me just ask one more question on this. Is
there some -- is there any quick way to sum up why he's going?
Mr. Mccurry: There is. First of all, Iowa is a state
that he carried in 1992, you'll recall. It's a state in which he
feels that the benefits of the economic program that he has put
forward since 1993 have been felt and have been seen and are real,
the investments. And it's a state that puts a very keen focus on
education, a high percentage of kids who go to college. That's
something the President's talking about this week. He wants to
revisit those issues when he sees the people of Iowa. And he thinks
-- he is on the ballot there, in a sense. He will be before the
caucuses -- will be before Democratic caucuses and he believes he
should go and ask for their support.
Q Well, would it be fair to say that this is a chance
to do a little work looking ahead to November in a state which at
this time, perhaps more than it would be if it weren't for the
caucuses, is paying attention?
Mr. Mccurry: The President going throughout this year
to states where he believes he wants to make the argument about where
this country needs to go, what he needs to do, and whether it's in a
primary context or a general election context, his vision is
something he cares about deeply and he wants to put before the
voters.
Q Just about the timing is all I'm asking.
Mr. Mccurry: Well, the timing is obviously related to
the caucus Monday night.
Q He's unopposed, so --
Mr. Mccurry: He's unopposed, but Democrats will be
gathering all across Iowa, probably not in the same percentages or
numbers since it's an uncontested caucus. But that is important.
It's an important element of the party's effort in that state every
year to build up to the national convention. And the President wants
to go thank the people, the Democrats in Iowa for their support;
frankly, thank the people of Iowa for the support they've given him,
and then also ask those Democrats going to caucuses to support him.
He thinks it's his right to ask for their support.
Q Mike, I just wanted to follow up on what is the
White House reaction to the Pat Buchanan win in Louisiana over
Senator Phil Gramm?
Mr. Mccurry: We didn't have any reaction.
Q Could you make up one?
Mr. Mccurry: Could I make one up? (Laughter.)
Q Somebody's dead, you said.
Mr. Mccurry: If Inside Politics at 4:00 p.m. is so hard
up that they have to have me comment on the Buchanan race -- you must
have more than enough Republicans commenting on that list.
Q I'm interested in the White House comment.
Mr. Mccurry: I don't think we've spent a lot of time on
it. Our political director --
Q Once you say hi to Judy -- (laughter).
Mr. Mccurry: I am sure that on Inside Politics today at
4:00 p.m. on Cnn this issue will be thoroughly reviewed and you'll
see more than you want to see on the Louisiana caucus. As near as I
can tell, most people in Louisiana didn't even know they had a
caucus. Amongst a certain portion of the Republican Party, way on
the far right they had a little contest and skirmish way on the far
right, and one guy won and one guy lost and one guy finished nowhere.
Q How far right were they? (Laughter.)
Mr. Mccurry: They were way on out there -- way on out
there.
Q I want to clarify something you said earlier this
morning. You said that you didn't expect budget talks to start again
until after the primaries. Specifically, you meant New Hampshire and
Iowa, or do you mean after the primary season?
Mr. Mccurry: Well, the President has been looking for
ways to move forward on a balanced budget agreement has indicated
that his door is open. But we detect right now a certain hiatus in
the ability to have those types of negotiations while certain things
happen in places like Louisiana and Iowa and New Hampshire. Perhaps
after those events have happened, there will be a little more clarity
and that those that we have been dealing with will be in a better
position to move forward and work hard on a balanced budget
agreement; the President hopes so. He certainly would be available
sooner than that, but I imagine that's fairly unlikely.
Now, if Senator Dole would like to come and spend 50
hours here this week, next week, we welcome him here and would look
forward to that occasion. I rather suspect he'll be otherwise
occupied.
Q Did Aristide inform the U.S. before he recognized
Cuba? I mean, as a courtesy?
Mr. Mccurry: We're saying we don't believe so, but
we should really check on that. The President will be calling
President Preval later today, and maybe in the context of handling
that call later we can get the answer to that.
Q But did you get any more information on the Serbian
soldiers who have been arrested on suspicion of war crimes?
Mr. Mccurry: The information I got, which I would
direct you to is a statement that Richard Goldstone, the chief
prosecutor of the International War Crimes Tribunal has issued, and
then also the statement that the commanders of the International
Implementation Force have now put out related to that issue. Judge
Goldstone is suggesting that those two military officers should be
delivered to the War Crimes Tribunal. That's been reflected now in
the comments of the Ifor commanders have made. So there's been a
breaking development on that in the theater.
Q Mike, do you have a date for the President's next
trip to California?
Mr. Mccurry: We do.
Q Twenty-third and twenty-fourth.
Ms. Terzano: It's the end of the month. I don't know
the date.
Mr. Mccurry: We'll try to handle some schedule stuff at
the end as best as we know it.
Q It's at the end?
Mr. Mccurry: Yes.
Q To get back to Bill's question on the
telecommunications bill -- the concern among this coalition is not
just abortion, they fear they can be prosecuted if they put on the
Internet information about how to avoid Aids, if they write about the
Holocaust, if they quote in detail contemporary political prisoners
who have been tortured. Is there any concern here about the impact
--
Mr. Mccurry: As with any major rewrite of an important
piece of legislation as you accustom yourself to a new environment in
which some aspects of regulation are disappearing and a new
environment persists, there will be a transition period as these
things are implemented. We would hope that common sense prevails.
Those types of concerns, if people allow common sense to rule and the
1st Amendment and an environment in which Americans are going to have
greater access to information and ideas and technology, we believe
that could -- those concerns could be resolved. But we will
certainly address as necessary any particular features of the
legislation as we go into the implementation of the act itself.
Q Beyond the rhetoric, will we get something more
definitive on the response to the Clinger on the 20 subpoenas?
Mr. Mccurry: I think I just gave you a more than
satisfactory response. We will continue to cooperate and individuals
who are no longer at the White House have to speak for themselves,
but they have cooperated.
Q How many are there who have --
Mr. Mccurry: The committee has indicated that it's 128.
But it's their subpoena, so you really should as the committee.
Q I mean, how many are still at the White House? Do
you know that?
Mr. Mccurry: You should really ask the committee who
they direct subpoenas to.
Q But you're saying -- just to make sure, you're
saying all of these things that Mr. Clinger has on his list of 128,
129 documents have been turned over, or are you --
Mr. Mccurry: I said -- it is our judgment, based on
what we have learned from his request, that most of the material that
he wants is available and has been available, and there's no reason
it wouldn't be available. But he's not interested in working with us
to kind of get at the documents; he's interested in grandstanding.
That's what I'm saying.
Q And what about the remainder of the stuff beyond
"most"? You say most of the --
Mr. Mccurry: Well, there's some stuff -- there are
apparently some work product issues that they need to look at. But
they a long time ago indicated a willingness to sit down and work
through those issues, and they have not had that opportunity.
Q So what's a work product issue?
Mr. Mccurry: Questions about what is -- not final work
product, but preparation work for other documents that may have been
produced under other requires.
Look, I'm not -- I would readily admit that I'm not the
person who has gone through this file by file, but you can talk to
Mr. Fabiani and get more on that. But they're pretty clear that most
of what they've pronounced with great fanfare today is duplicative of
the requests that have already been either satisfied or have been
discussed with the committee. So they're basically rehashing things.
Q Mike, I wonder whether the President is still
concerned about the continuing tensions between Greece and Turkey,
and whether he plans any new initiative in -- Cyprus now that the
Holbrooke mission has been cancelled.
Mr. Mccurry: Well, the President, by communicating his
own concern directly to leaders in both countries, certainly
indicated it was a matter that he would follow. These are two very
important and close allies of the United States, two valued members
of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and we will do everything
we can, and continue to do everything we can to encourage them to
resolve any difficulties or disagreements they have in a peaceful
fashion. I'm sure there will be opportunities to do that through our
diplomacy. And I'm sure that even though Assistant Secretary
Holbrooke's mission has not gone forward, they'll be other
opportunities in which we can have that type of positive exchange
with two countries with whom we enjoy very close and very beneficial
relations.
Q Mike, back on Haiti, one more question. Are you
satisfied with the role that Aristide is playing -- the high profile
political role he's playing there? Would you like to see more
background behind the scenes?
Mr. Mccurry: It would be better to say that we're very
encouraged by the performance of President-elect and soon-to-be
President Preval. He has clearly moved into this very important role
and shows every indication of wanting to govern Haiti, take up the
mantle of leadership and continue the progress toward democracy and
economic restoration of Haiti, which is obviously key to the
long-term success of this very important effort that has been
launched by the international community to support democracy in
Haiti.
On the other hand, President Aristide is clearly a
beloved figure within his own political movement, indeed within the
country. There are many who are reluctant to see him go because of
what he's been able to accomplish for the people. And he will
continue to be on the scene, no doubt, as a senior statesman. I
believe Deputy National Security Advisor Berger addressed that issue
just yesterday and gave our views. He's someone who has meant an
enormous amount in the political life of that nation, and that will
not likely be eroded any time soon. At the same time, President
Preval will now assume the duties and the responsibilities and he
gives every indication he intends to govern effectively.
Q Do we have any reason to believe that President
Preval will reverse or not go ahead with establishing of relations
with Cuba?
Mr. Mccurry: I don't believe it's been an issue that's
been raised, and we will check with our delegation after they return
to see if it's an issue that arises.
Q Do you have a time for the telecommunications
signing tomorrow?
Mr. Mccurry: Do we have a time yet on telecom? No? It
won't be here, I think as many of you know. It's probably going to
be on Capitol Hill. We'll check. You can check back here.
Thank you.
End 2:12 P.M. Est
#179-02/07