[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George H. W. Bush (1992-1993, Book II)]
[October 23, 1992]
[Pages 1942-1955]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]



Question-and-Answer Session in Miami
October 23, 1992

    Tom Wills. The President of the United States, George Bush, faces 
Florida voters in 11 days. Tonight he is here in Miami to answer their 
questions.
    Ann Bishop. Good evening. With Tom Wills, I'm Ann Bishop. Tonight 
from across the State, President Bush will be answering the concerns on 
the issues on the minds of Floridians. We're going to get right to it, 
and our first question is from Jacksonville.

Consultation on the Economy

    Q. Good evening, Mr. President. During the first debate you 
acknowledged that while the present economy is nowhere nearly as bad as 
your opponents would like for the American people to believe, there is 
room for improvement. My question is, if

[[Page 1943]]

you're reelected President, would you be willing to offer an invitation 
to Ross Perot or to Bill Clinton to discuss their economic plans?
    The President. That's easy. I think the answer is yes. But if I'm 
elected, it will be to put in my economic plan, and I think I will be 
because I think we've got the best plan. But I meet with opposition 
leaders all the time as President of the United States, and certainly 
I'd be willing to discuss it with them.

Tax Increase

    Q. Good evening, Mr. President. Excluding your tax increase 
decision, if you could rewrite the history of the last 4 years, what one 
decision would you change?
    The President. I gave you the main one. My view is if you make a 
mistake, you admit it. It's a little unusual in politics, but I think 
it's the thing you do. I made a mistake going along with that major 
Democratic tax increase. I say a mistake. It had some good things in it, 
put the caps on the discretionary spending programs, but it raised 
taxes. It was my belief that that was something we ought to do that 
would help the economy. I don't think it did at all.
    I can't think of anything that fits into that league as something 
that I would view as a mistake of that proportion. I'm sure I make 
plenty of them, but give me some time and I might get back to you with 
it. I'm not sure this is a good time to be pointing out all your 
weaknesses, either. [Laughter]

Cuba

    Mr. Wills. Just before President Bush came to be here with us 
tonight he was in downtown Miami, and he signed into law the Cuban 
Democracy Act. Now, Mr. President, as you know, the Democrats have 
accused you of trying to make some political hay on this issue. Our 
first question, sir, tonight here in Miami, is concerning Cuban-American 
relations.
    Q. Good evening, Mr. President. Welcome to south Florida. My 
question is: Within the next 4 years, Cuba will join the nations that 
have democracies. What will you do and what will your administration do 
to help the people of Cuba?
    The President. Well, I hope you're right. And I think you're right, 
because I don't think Castro can continue to swim against the worldwide 
tide. The tide in this hemisphere is against him, but so is the 
worldwide tide. Everybody wants democracy, freedom, market economies. Of 
course, Castro's got none of that. I think the answer is then to move 
forward with investment support for him.
    You see, it's going to be private. The thing that's going to make 
Cuba move forward fast is you have so many Cuban-Americans who have done 
well and want to invest and create businesses. It's not going to be a 
drain on the American taxpayer. It is going to be investment that 
solidifies their democracy.
    I don't think we're going to need special programs. We've got 
programs in the Caribbean for those countries, Caribbean Basin 
Initiative. We've got a debt forgiveness program that has helped move 
Argentina and Brazil and other countries towards democracy. Many 
countries, 43 more countries have become democratic since I've been 
President, 43. Cuba will be the next one, I hope.
    But it's not going to require a lot of Government aid. Everybody 
hates foreign aid. It's not going to require that. It's going to require 
investment. These are industrious people. We've seen what they can do 
here in this country. With freedom down there, they can do the same 
thing.

The Economy

    Q. Good evening, President Bush. In 1980, my home mortgage was 18.5 
percent. We had a cold war, hostage problems, and global inflation, but 
my family and I had good jobs, savings with high interest, and excellent 
health insurance. Today I have inadequate health insurance, no savings. 
My children and their children are without jobs. My oldest daughter is 
losing her home with a 7.5-percent mortgage. My home in a mobile park is 
facing liquidation. There is a global recession and homelessness. 
Granted, with the cold war over my family could sleep better at night, 
but now my own party's opening speaker at our convention tells us we're 
facing a religious and cultural war. Can you tell me why I am any better

[[Page 1944]]

off today than I was 4 years ago?
    The President. Well, you're better off in the sense of interest 
rates, clearly. We've got to go back to the days when the Democrats 
controlled both the White House and the Congress, which they've 
controlled for 38 years. Interest rates were 21 percent. Clearly, it's 
better to have them at where they are now. You can refinance homes. 
Inflation is lower. That's the cruelest tax of all if you were a saver. 
I'm not sure you were a saver.
    I don't, I'm not sure I understand what you mean about a cultural 
war. I had the mayors from the leading cities come to see me. They were 
the board of directors of the National League of Cities. You know what 
they told me? They told me the major cause for urban decay was the 
decline in the American family. These were not rightwing nuts or 
leftwing nuts. Mayor Tom Bradley of Los Angeles was one of them; 
smalltown mayors that were Republicans from North Carolina; Plano, 
Texas, mayor. And this discussion of family is not something that I'm 
going to be driven away from. We've got to find ways to strengthen it. 
That's talking about driving drugs out of the community.
    In some ways you're worse off, if you've got all those problems for 
your kids. But in many ways, you're better off, and I would cite some of 
the statistics that I've given you. I just hope that with this new job 
training program we've got, a program to get the burden of Government 
off of people like you, that we can do better.
    But you're right, it's a global recession. I don't know how many 
people know this: Our economy is growing twice as fast as Japan's. 
People don't believe that. Germany had a negative growth. We have grown, 
albeit anemically, for five straight quarters. So when you're going 
through a tough economic time, you're bound to have hardships. I'm sorry 
you've got those, but I believe that job retraining, education, and 
stimulation of this economy for small business is the answer. I really 
do. Very good question.

POW-MIA's

    Q. Good evening, President Bush. My name is Jill Hobbs. My father is 
Navy Commander Donald Richard Hobbs, and he has been missing in Vietnam 
since 1968. As you can imagine, this has been a very painful, 
heartbreaking, frustrating situation for my family for the last 24 
years. Now with all the new information that's coming out of Vietnam, I 
would like to know what you plan to do to ensure that all of the live 
prisoners are returned, that all remains are repatriated, and that 
complete and truthful accounting of all our POW's and MIA's is given. I 
want to know what hope I have that I'll find out the truth about my 
father's fate.
    The President. You have a lot more hope today than you did yesterday 
because this announcement that I made in the Rose Garden with General 
Vessey is a very significant breakthrough. Here's General Vessey, who is 
the former head of the Army, marvelous man, head of the Joint Chiefs, 
too. He went over there and came back with a lot of pictures, a lot of 
information that they had denied even existed before.
    We think that today the announcement I made in the Rose Garden is a 
significant breakthrough, and I hope it leads to evidence that will be 
comforting to your family. But we just have to keep pressing on, and 
we're going to keep pressing on, trying to follow every single lead.
    You're talking to somebody whose comrades died in combat. My 
roommate, this is ancient history, but my roommate was missing on the 
very first flight that I was in combat in the Pacific. So I hope it 
sensitizes me a little. I can't say I really know what you're going 
through.
    But I think you ought to take some heart from this breakthrough 
today because I really believe that Vietnam now is going to--we're going 
to follow up to be sure they do this, but that they've turned over a new 
leaf. They're saying, no more obfuscation; we're going to put people in 
the archives. They've come out with 5,000 pictures. John McCain is a 
former prisoner, now a Senator; he came back with--they gave him, handed 
him pictures that he didn't know existed of his being pulled out of the 
water.
    So I hope it leads to clues, and certainly we 
will follow up any leads on anybody that

[[Page 1945]]

might be alive. But we've got to get the remains back, too. It's a 
breakthrough, and I just hope it proves to be something that is 
comforting to your family.

Child Care

    Q. Good evening, Mr. President. My question, sir, is, what does your 
administration plan on doing to help the middle class as far as child 
care? It's beginning to look as though the poor and the rich are the 
only ones that can afford to have children. If reelected, what does your 
administration plan to do to help the middle class?
    The President. One of our accomplishments was passing a child care 
bill, adequately financed, that gives parents the choice. When I came 
into office there was a prohibition against all but mandated--almost all 
but mandated child care centers. In other words, the Congress would say, 
here's the kind of child care you have to have. I think it strengthens 
the family to do what we've done, get legislation through a not 
altogether friendly Congress at times, and get it through to give the 
parents the choice for child care.
    It is funded, and I hope that it's of benefit to you. There are 
limits in terms of how much a person is making. I don't remember the 
exact cutoff price, and maybe you're a little beyond that. But I believe 
that we've taken a major step forward in child care, and I hope it will 
benefit your family. There are no new bills planned for it.
    Mr. Wills. Mr. President, we have tried to bring together here in 
our four cities voters, citizens from all walks of life. And this next 
question comes to you, sir, from a man who is 17 years old.

Education

    Q. Good evening, Mr. President. Mr. President, I am planning to go 
to college within the next year. But my family may not be able to afford 
my higher education. It is a problem that many students and their 
families face in this community. As President of the United States, what 
will you specifically do if you are reelected to provide my generation 
with the educational opportunities that we need to succeed in life?
    The President. First place, we've already doubled the funding for 
what they call Pell grants; that's for university. And I hope you've 
applied for that. Maybe--I don't know, again, what your circumstances 
are. But we've doubled the funding on the Pell grants, which is the 
major way of going forward for college students. And again, as I say, I 
hope that really helps.
    Our main education program relates to getting kids ready for 
college. Frankly, we haven't done a good enough job for that. And many 
can't simply get into the college. So our program is called America 
2000. It revolutionizes, literally revolutionizes education. It bypasses 
the old educational bureaucracy. It puts choice in the hands of parents 
for public, private, or religious schools.
    Now, some say to me, ``Hey, that's going to weaken the public 
schools.'' It hasn't worked that way with a woman named Polly Williams, 
a black woman up in Milwaukee. The mayor, a Democrat, in Milwaukee 
strongly supports it. And we believe that if you get the quality of 
elementary and K through 12 education, that more people will be able to 
qualify for existing scholarships.
    Then I think the answer to your question is keep trying to do as 
much as we can in the scholarship field and the student loan field for 
kids like you that probably need some support to go through the college 
of your choice.

Health Care

    Q. My 5-year-old had this question. One of the perks afforded you as 
President is what basically amounts to universal health care. Since you 
don't believe in universal health care for the American people, why is 
it that you utilize this benefit when you can clearly afford to pay your 
own medical bills? And why isn't this same program good enough for the 
American people?
    The President. Well, you've got a bright 5-year-old with very good 
English, ``utilizing my benefits.'' [Laughter] That kid's not going to 
have any trouble getting a scholarship.
    I'll tell you, I'm Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, and the 
Armed Forces provide this. This has traditionally been

[[Page 1946]]

provided to the President. I have no apologies for it. But the kid is 
wrong in one thing. I hate to say that about your kid; she's very bright 
if she's that interested. My plan provides insurance for all. For the 
poorest of the poor you get a voucher. For the next group, like this 
guy's family back here, you're going to get assistance. You're going to 
get tax credit.
    What I don't want to do is go to a plan that nationalizes--in some 
areas they call it socialized medicine--but say nationalizes medicine 
where you lower the quality of health care. The answer is to provide 
insurance to all, do more in terms of preventative medicine. Under Dr. 
Lou Sullivan, our HHS Secretary, we've moved out very well on that.
    We've got to do more to get the costs of all this down. One of the 
things where I differ with Governor Clinton is, I think we've got to do 
something about these malpractice suits and these awful lawsuits that 
are raising the costs to the tune of $25 to $50 billion.
    But put it this way: If your 5-year-old thinks the only way that 
you're going to get universal health care coverage is to have mandated 
Government coverage, I disagree with her. I think it's better to use 
this whole brandnew system of pooling insurance to provide insurance to 
the poorest of the poor and right on up. So we just have a philosophical 
difference. No difference about wanting to get it done, though.

Abortion

    Q. Good evening, Mr. President. Your firm stand against legalized 
abortion has been clearly stated in the past and during this campaign. 
I'd like to ask you this: If the Supreme Court reverses the Roe v. Wade 
decision during your next term in office, do you think that States that 
outlaw abortion should make it a capital crime----
    The President.No.
    Q. ----that is, equating abortion with murder? And if so, do you 
think that women that receive the abortions and the doctors that perform 
them should be subject to the death penalty and/or life imprisonment?
    The President. No, no. The answer is no to all of the above. But I 
do oppose abortion.
    You know, I think it's wrong to have 28 million abortions over the 
last few years. I don't believe you ought to have abortion for a--put it 
this way: If a 13-year-old kid can't even get her ears pierced without 
parental approval, don't you think we ought to have some restraints? 
Don't you think that that kid ought to have to get permission from the 
parents? I believe in adoption. I believe in life. I know my position 
isn't particularly popular with some, but this is something I feel in my 
heart; take your case to the American people.
    But no, on the criminal penalties you're talking about.

Deficit Reduction

    Q. Mr. President, good evening. How is your proposal on allowing 
people to designate income tax proceeds toward debt reduction and 
spending cuts supposed to work? And do you believe a citizen would be 
willing to spend his or her own money toward debt reduction?
    The President. Debt reduction--I'll get to his--there's three things 
we need: We need a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. A lot 
of the States have it. We need a line-item veto that says to the 
President, if Congress can't cut it, you can cut out the pork by drawing 
a line through whatever line you want in the veto, in the bill. Then 
they can override you if they want to.
    On this proposal he's talking about, it's a new one that I have 
made. And what it says to the taxpayer is, when you go fill out your tax 
form, if you care as much about deficit reduction as other things, you 
can then kick off 10 percent, a little box on the tax return. That will 
all be added up. Say it comes to $40 billion, all the people that fill 
out the tax return, added to $40 billion. Then you have to use that 
money to reduce the debt.
    And that's going to mean, then, that Congress is going to have to, 
working with the administration, reduce spending by that much. And that 
gets to be difficult. But it forces it; it forces the equation. And if 
they can't do it in negotiation, then you do what they call a sequester. 
The sequester goes

[[Page 1947]]

right across the board, not touching Social Security, but right across 
the board to get the spending down.
    It's rather simple. And some of the liberal economists ridicule it. 
But I believe those three things together can make a significant 
difference on getting this deficit off the back of young people like 
you. When your kids come along, if we don't we're going to be in real 
problems for the future.
    That isn't easy. I mean, I can't stand here and tell this audience 
or the audience in Orlando or Jacksonville or Tampa that it's going to 
be easy. I want to control the growth of the mandatory spending program, 
not cut them, control the growth to inflation and to allow for 
population. But that means they're not going to be able to grow as fast. 
They can grow, not be cut, but not grow as fast.
    Those things together I think are the way we're going to get this 
deficit down. And that check-off ought to be tried. If it doesn't work, 
change the law.

Hurricane Andrew Recovery Efforts

    Mr. Wills. Sir, as you know, the people here in south Florida for 
the past many weeks now have been trying to recover from the devastating 
effects of Hurricane Andrew. The next person you're going to hear from 
really tonight is in the category of a special guest.
    Q. Mr. President, Alex Muxo, city manager of the city of Homestead.
    Mr. Wills. And I should add, Mr. President, that Alex is a 
nonpartisan officeholder, neither Democrat nor Republican.
    The President. I'll tell you what I think about him in a minute. 
[Laughter]
    Mr. Wills. He wants to tell you what he thinks about you.
    The President. I know he does.
    Q. Mr. President, first of all, on behalf of all the south Dade 
community, we really thank you from the bottom of our heart for your 
support in this last few months. As a matter of fact, tomorrow will be 
the 2-month anniversary of Hurricane Andrew, which we all know the 
devastation caused in our community.
    Although your leadership was unwavering, you know the outcome of 
what happened with the Congress with Homestead Air Force Base. One of 
the biggest concerns that we have now is if the medical facility and the 
PX isn't built immediately, this community, south Dade, Dade County, 
Monroe, and West Palm Beach and Broward, have the chance of losing as 
much as 80,000 retirees because those facilities aren't there. What can 
you do to move that along so we can keep these people in our community?
    The President. Well, let me answer Alex's question. But let me tell 
you about this guy because--and this is not a slow ball--he's an 
independent. He's strong out there. He does what he thinks is right. 
Here's a man who, when his own home was devastated, was out looking 
after people in the community, and that said an awful lot to me. I think 
it said a lot to the people of Florida and the people across the 
country. And I think it stimulated a lot of support not just from us, 
from the Federal Government, but it served as an inspiration to what I 
call the Points of Light, the people here where they got this program 
Rebuild. You see a guy like this--do it.
    I hope we can push it. I hope we can get it moving. What Alex is 
talking about is, I made a decision that we were going to rebuild 
Homestead. I got hit by Congressmen and Senators from different parts of 
the country because in a shrinking defense budget they saw a chance to 
get this money to build the installations in their area or keep the 
bases in their area or transfer the facilities, you know, the 
intelligence facilities, antidrug facilities, somewhere else.
    We got beat on it. We got some money, got a little, not near as much 
as we wanted. On this one, I think we just have to push on it and get it 
done. I don't think it's to be controversial. I mean, I think it's 
something we can get through. Our bureaucracy is what I think the 
problem is.
    But we'll keep pushing. I mean, it's been an inspiration to the 
whole country. I will say this to the audience: Government can do a lot. 
When the Government's spending over its head, it can't do as much as it 
would like. But the private sector response on this is absolutely 
amazing. You go out there and you see people from North Carolina who 
were helped by you all when their

[[Page 1948]]

Hurricane Hugo came along, and now they've responded. I went to 
Louisiana. There was a bunch of people from North Carolina and South 
Carolina over there, so that American spirit of helping one another is 
still there. I think you all demonstrated it as vividly as anything out 
of this hurricane situation.

Correctional Facilities

    Q. With your present tax policies, what will you do to assist major 
cities and counties with their overcrowded prison populations on a State 
and local level?
    The President. We have put more money into State and local police 
than ever. Spending is up for Federal. But we can't do the whole police 
corrections facilities bit. That can't be done by the Federal 
Government. We have expanded the Federal prisons. The Federal 
prisoners--you know this, given your life to corrections--have spent 85 
percent of their time in jail. A lot of the States have a much less 
rigorous program.
    We have an assistance program to corrections institutions, but I 
just hate to stand here and try to promise you that we can increase it. 
What we have done is increase the funding considerably for Federal 
prisons, and we've increased it for local law enforcement support, but 
not as much in the prison field.
    Now the answer, I guess, is to continue to try to help as much as we 
can and then press forward with programs that are going to reduce the 
incidence of crime.
    I come back to a program we call ``Weed and Seed,'' where you weed 
out the criminals. I don't know whether you've had any--working with it 
at all. But it's a good new approach, gets across partisan lines. It 
says weed out the criminals and then seed the communities with hope. 
Then that gets to our whole urban agenda, so people have jobs in these 
cities through enterprise zones and tenant management, homeownership, as 
opposed to the hopelessness and despair that results in the crimes that 
you, fortunately, are helping on.

Women's Health Care

    Q. Women's health could be a prime area of research for the National 
Institutes of Health, especially in the areas of breast, ovarian, and 
cervical cancer. However, Dr. Healy, the Director of the NIH, has stated 
that focus on women's health was not necessary. How would you in your 
next term ensure that the NIH increased research and funding in women's 
health?
    The President. Well, again, I don't want to be under false colors. 
Every question, almost, says how much more money can you spend from the 
Federal Government, every one. And I can understand it. There is a new 
program for breast cancer, and it's pretty well financed out of HHS. 
I'll have to look at the NIH funding. I don't remember Ms. Healy saying 
that, Dr. Healy. She's a very able head of NIH.
    And I'm not trying to put you down at all, because, look, that is a 
tremendously important cause. The next question I'll get will probably 
be on AIDS. We're spending up from $4.2 billion to $4.9 billion. And 
people say, ``Well, you got to do more.'' I'm standing here telling 
these guys how we're going to get the deficit down. You can't do it 
painlessly. You can't do it by slapping more taxes on an overtaxed 
population. So we're dealing with somewhat of a restricted budget in 
doing all these things.
    But let me check on NIH. I'm not just putting you off, but I don't 
believe that NIH is opposed to any women's health care efforts. And our 
early prevention programs that Dr. Sullivan is sponsoring can help get 
the problem--you're a nurse, so you know much more about it than I do--
but can help before you have to be putting the serious treatment to 
people.

Ross Perot

    Q. My regards to you, President Bush. My question to you is, why is 
there such an integrity vacuum in today's government? The silent 
majority, like myself, can find more answers and solutions to the 
problems in America today in a book written by Ross Perot, ``United We 
Stand,'' than by any of the present elected officials. And why haven't 
you initiated a special group of highly trained individuals to address 
these problems one by one until each Department has been corrected?
    The President. That's a good question. But you see, I differ with 
Mr. Perot. I don't

[[Page 1949]]

want to touch Social Security. He has in his program doing something 
about reducing Social Security for some. I don't think we ought to do 
that. I think we ought to set Social Security aside. It's not just 
another guaranteed program. It is a rather sacrosanct program with a 
trust fund. And so I have a difference with him on that.
    I don't think we need a 50-cent--in your hand there in that plan is 
a 50-cent-a-gallon gasoline tax. Now, a lot of people have to ride to 
work, and where you have big distances, that is overwhelming. Or if 
you're a cab driver, the poor guy's trying to make ends meet, or a truck 
driver, he doesn't need to pay 50 cents more per gallon.
    So I don't want to spend a lot of time looking at things that I'm 
opposed to. Now, in terms of what Perot is suggesting in terms of really 
having to do something on the spending side, I think he's on to 
something there, but not in these specifics that I've given you. And so 
I'm not going to spend the taxpayers' money with having a whole new 
group of people coming in to study something that I'm certainly not--
going to oppose, or that people will oppose if they elect me. I mean, I 
don't think a Social Security increase or a gasoline tax is the answer 
at this time.
    So that's why I would--but don't let me try to put you down by 
saying there's no good ideas in there; there are. I think we've got 
enough study groups. What we need to do is get something done.
    I've got one difference with him. You just can't open the hood, say 
fix it. I mean, you've got to work with the Congress. And I don't mean 
to put the blame--I'll accept blame. But when you're working with 
Congress, it ain't that easy, believe me. Look at Alex's problem. Here 
we had a problem that would have helped the community just to keep 
something that was there, rebuild it. You've got all these contrasting 
interests. I go up as President, say restore Homestead, and you can't 
dictate to them. They're tough. You've got to hit them over the head 
like that mule with a two-by-four.
    But the good news, there's good news, they screwed up that two-bit 
bank up there and that post office so bad that there are going to be 100 
new Members of Congress. And maybe we can get things moving much quicker 
the next term.

AIDS

    Q. Good evening, Mr. President. I bring a question that comes from 
clients and other professionals in my agency. They'd like to know why 
over the last 4 years when the Names Project has been in Washington 
three times, you have not visited the Names Project, which now contains 
more than 26,000 panels for those who have died of AIDS?
    The President. Well, that's a good question. I have felt a little 
bit unloved by the AIDS community. We have spent, as I say, far more 
money on research, far more, I think, money on compassionate programs. 
We've got the NIH with their great researchers out there geared up. What 
happens to me when I go out--and I shouldn't judge the whole community 
by the excesses, but they've got an outfit called ACT-UP. And they come 
to my home and throw condoms around and behave in a very bad fashion. 
They break up your political appearances.
    I don't think that helps the cause any. And I don't want to be a 
lightning rod in a compassionate project like this quilt project by 
going out there. I can take it. Good God, I've seen worse characters 
than those. But they don't help the cause any. For me to go as a 
lightning rod out onto those grounds to be yelled at and screamed at and 
as a symbol, I don't think it helps the AIDS problem.
    The AIDS problem requires compassion, requires understanding. Both 
Barbara and I have been to clinics and held AIDS babies and tried to 
demonstrate the concern we feel. But to be a lightning rod for the 
excesses, I don't think that is good for the President of the United 
States. And that's my very frank feeling on it.
    Maybe we differ. Maybe you can make a case for ACT-UP. I can't. When 
they come to a guy's home, little home village, and stand there with 
outrageous behavior, I'm afraid I just have to say I don't agree with 
that. I don't agree with them going into a Catholic cathedral, when 
people are on their knees worshiping, and start throwing 
condoms around. I don't want to be the

[[Page 1950]]

symbol for that kind of behavior. I want to help that. I want to help 
with research. I want to see compassion. But I don't want to be the 
catalyst for excess. That's why I didn't do it.

Communism

    Q. As a major foreign policy accomplishment, you have consistently 
maintained in this campaign that you deserve credit for the dissolution 
of communism. How can you prove that communism is virtually dead when 
more than one billion Chinese and, importantly, more than 10 million 
Cubans in our backyard are still committed to undemocratic governments?
    The President. Well, I don't say communism is totally dead. I say 
imperial communism is, if not dead, stretched out on the slab there 
about to be buried, because you don't have the Soviet Union anymore. For 
years we had a cold war going on between the Soviet Union. That ended. 
That ended when I was President. And I think our policies had a lot to 
do with it.
    Do you remember, do you remember about 12 years ago people were 
saying, ``Nuclear freeze, the only way you're going to solve nuclear 
terror for the kids is to freeze, stop right where we are.'' If we'd 
have done that, there would have been no driving force to get the Soviet 
Union moving towards democracy and to get rid of their nuclear weapons. 
I stood out there in the East Room of the White House and made a deal 
with Yeltsin to get rid of every single SS-18. Those are the big, 
destabilizing, multiwarheaded nuclear missiles. That is a major 
accomplishment for all the kids.
    But you're right. I gave a big speech here today on Cuba. The guy's 
trying to keep his snorkel out of the water. Castro, he's not reaching 
out trying to corrupt the Dominican Republic and these other people.
    And China, we've got big differences with them. What's happening in 
China, though, is their economic side of the house is moving toward 
market forces. And that's going to lead them to political change. That's 
why I don't want to cut off relations with China.
    I'm glad you asked it because if I left the impression that I think 
there's no more communism anywhere, I should clear that up. There is, 
but it's not what I call imperial communism that's trying to take over 
its neighbors. Thanks for giving me the opportunity. I didn't realize 
I'd been that unclear on it.

Space Programs

    Q. I'm an aerospace worker. In obtaining funding for space station, 
it's been tough going through the Democrat-controlled Congress. My 
question is, specifically, how committed will your new administration be 
towards funding our space station and our future space programs at 
Kennedy Space Center?
    The President. Rick, I'm committed, and my word is on the line on 
that. It's in every budget we've sent forward. We're going to continue 
to fight for it. One of the places I might be able to do better on is to 
convince people that the research that goes into the space station and 
the space station itself will benefit not just those interested in space 
but all mankind. Now, you guys know this. The fallout in medicine and 
other fields from our space effort already has been appreciable. 
Agriculture has benefited.
    So I am committed. I will keep fighting for it. We have a big fight 
with Congress because when money is tight, as it is, you've got to set 
priorities. But research and development is going to lead this country 
to a brandnew level of prosperity for young people. And you guys are on 
the cutting edge. So we're going to fight again in the next Congress for 
it.
    Ms. Bishop. Mr. President, Diane Tass is with us, and she has a 
question not only important to the country but terribly important to 
this community.

Airline Industry

    Q. I wanted to know, Mr. President, how do you plan to support some 
of these airlines that are being edged out by the big three or four, and 
especially for just the average traveler who, once we get down to three 
or four airlines, we're not going to be able to travel on vacations? 
Also I want to know how you feel about the USAir-British Airways 
alliance.
    The President. Good questions. First I've got to start off with, we 
may have a philo-

[[Page 1951]]

sophical difference. I don't believe it's the Government's role to say 
how many airlines there are going to be, which ones are going to 
survive, which ones not. The market has to do that for the most part, 
unless you want to go to state-owned airlines. And I don't want to do 
that.
    So we're just going to have to be as competitive as possible. The 
problem with my argument is, a little bit, is that there are some 
Government controls on airlines because the routes are set. But I still 
don't want to see Government saying who's going to get in, who can't get 
in, who's got to get out.
    On the USAir deal, it's a tough one right now. It boils down to 
this, that British Air wants to take over USAir. USAir workers are 
picketing me out here in the field when I land, wherever I land, 
wherever there's any USAir. Standing next to them in the field are the 
American Airline pickets, all decent, wonderful Americans, all concerned 
about their jobs. American Airlines are saying, ``Don't let British come 
in and take over USAir unless we get access to the European markets.''
    Now, here's what will seem like a hedge to you. This matter is now 
under adjudication with the Secretary of Transportation. And to prejudge 
what his decision is, I would be--I wouldn't be run out of office, but 
I'd have a lot of explaining to do in the legal community. And I'm not 
going to do it. But it is being heard. The interests are very difficult 
because you've got people whose jobs are going to be threatened one way 
or the other. It will come to me. I'm not ducking it; it will come to 
me. But I have to wait until we hear from the Department before I tell 
you what I think is going to happen on the British Air-USAir proposed 
merger.
    On balance, on general statement, please discount airlines, I think 
we need more access to foreign markets in everything, whether it's 
agriculture or whether it's textiles or whatever it is. Exports have 
saved us in an extraordinarily difficult global recession, and exports 
are going to lift us up and lead us out of it. But they aren't if we 
don't hammer away and get more access to foreign markets.
    Thank you.

Retraining Military Personnel

    Q. Good evening, Mr. President.
    The President. Hi.
    Q. Good evening, Mr. President. I'm Sergeant Oliver, stationed at 
MacDill Air Force Base. What type of program or help will you offer 
those military members who are now being forced out of the military?
    The President. Just signed a bill today, the Defense Authorization 
Act, which also included this Cuban Democracy Act, I might add, signed 
it in Miami. And that has a significant numbers of millions, up in the 
hundreds of millions, for retraining and relocation.
    The sergeant puts his finger on something. Because we were 
successful, Desert Storm, around the world, we are cutting back on 
defense. I've cut back on it significantly. My opponent Governor Clinton 
and Ross Perot want to cut it $50 billion more. I'm not going to do 
that. I'm going to wait until I get a recommendation by Colin Powell and 
Dick Cheney, in whom I have total trust and whom the Nation trusts, 
because I think, even though there are problems in this world, I mean, a 
lot of the problems have been solved, there still are wolves out there. 
And we'd better be strong.
    But back to your question. The new defense authorization bill 
authorizes significant funds for exactly what you're talking about. But 
let's not let them cut into the muscle of our defense.

Taxes

    Q. It is my understanding that capital gains tax reduction is 
actually supported by Bill Clinton. Is he not letting the public know 
this because a reduction of capital gains would actually help the middle 
class as much, if not more, than it would help the so-called wealthy? 
And isn't it true that the only time we should be happy about taxes is 
when ours are going down and not when anybody else's are going up?
    The President. Well, you're my kind of guy. That's 
what I think. [Laughter] But for years the Democrats have been beating 
up on me saying capital gains is a tax break for the rich. Let me tell 
you something. For months I've been asking the Congress to

[[Page 1952]]

pass an investment tax allowance, a tax credit for the first-time 
homebuyer, and a cut in capital gains, not to help some rich guy but to 
create new small businesses. Small businesses employ two-thirds of the 
people. Jobs in the private sector would have been enhanced. I'm going 
to keep on fighting for breaks for small business, and one of them is 
capital gains.
    I cannot get that point across. And if Governor Clinton is for it, 
he's whispering in one place and then--the first bad thing I've said 
about the guy tonight. But look, you can't be on all sides of every 
issue. And if he's for it, stand up and get his Members of Congress, who 
allegedly are--who are opposed to it, to say, ``I will support this man. 
I will get it through.'' I have big differences with him, and this may 
be one of them. But if he's for it, he's whispering it to the business 
guys but not saying anything to the rest of the people about it.

Young Voters

    Q. Mr. Bush, Bill Clinton and Al Gore have reached out to young 
voters with their recent appearances on MTV. Why have you and Vice 
President Quayle rejected such opportunities to reach out to 18- to 24-
year-old voters?
    The President. Hey, we're trying to reach out to them with programs. 
I'm not too much of a mod MTV man. But I don't think what program you 
appear on--I can't play the saxophone, but I know a good deal about 
issues. And so you can't be everywhere. I think our programs have strong 
appeal for young people, whether it's education reform or whether it's 
on the health care so their families have a much better break on that, 
whether it's on college scholarships where our record is superb in terms 
of these Pell grants.
    But look, there's something funny going on in American politics. 
I've been doing this kind of program since 1978 in forums that were 
called ``Ask George Bush.'' And I like it. I feel comfortable.
    Some of the programs to get out there and kind of outdo Oprah or 
Phil Donahue, that's not my style. Maybe MTV would be a good one, and 
I'll think about it. But you can't do them all, and you shouldn't be 
judged by whether you go on one single network or one single program. 
That's my answer.

National Debt

    Q. Good evening, President Bush. How do you envision American life 
and standard of living in 5 to 10 years if the national debt isn't 
controlled?
    The President. Not good. But I think we can control it. You've got 
to start by controlling the growth of mandatory spending and not do it 
by raising people's taxes. And I think that will stimulate economic 
growth.
    We're limping along. We've had five straight quarters of economic 
growth. The definition of recession is two straight quarters of negative 
growth. We haven't had negative growth for five quarters. That's over a 
year and a--maybe six now, because the end of September, I think we'll 
find we grew. So we've had very anemic growth, caught up in an economic 
global recession in some countries, slowdown in others. We're going to 
come out of that. The way we're going to come out of it, I believe, is 
by controlling the growth of our spending, by stimulating through the 
kinds of tax proposals I told him about, and getting this country 
growing. After the last recession, we grew at 5.4 percent. Now we're 
growing at 1.7 or 1.8 percent, maybe up into 2 now. And it's too anemic.
    So you've got to have economic programs that are going to stimulate 
growth. And when that happens, then the standard of living, the standard 
of living goes up. Personal income is up in this country. Agricultural 
income has reached a high under our administration. Please don't wait to 
hear about that on the top of the CBS evening news or NBC or ABC--I've 
got to be careful here--because you don't get much good economic news 
out there. The unemployment claims went down yesterday, the biggest 
since, I think, 2 years, and I didn't even hear about it on the news.
    I'm not saying everything's perfect. A lot of people are hurting. 
But don't despair about the future standard of living if we get in there 
and bring a lot of new Members of Congress and say, now let's do what 
the people want done. I don't think they want their taxes raised. I do 
think they want to

[[Page 1953]]

stimulate the economy.

Family Leave Bill

    Q. Mr. President, time and time again you have used your veto power 
to go against the wishes of the American public. You did this by vetoing 
the family leave bill, something that I feel our country really needed. 
At a time when your campaign has pushed for family values, how could you 
veto the bill? And please don't tell me that it was so it wouldn't hurt 
small businesses. From what I understand----
    The President. That's a good answer to it.
    Q. ----those with less than 50 employees would have been exempt. Is 
that true?
    The President. They would have been exempt, but we have a better 
idea. In the first place, I keep telling everybody here, and I'll tell 
them up there, the thing that's going to lead us out of this into 
recovery is small business. They do not need any more mandates from 
Washington.
    My approach was a tax credit approach. And that includes--what are 
those eyes going up? You don't agree with it. [Laughter] I saw you 
rolling your eyes. But my approach says why not the lower than 50? Why 
not the mom-and-pop store? Why not others? And my program would have 
covered them all. You want to go with having the Government dictate all 
this, and to say that that veto makes me less on family? I'm sorry. I 
reject it. It's a philosophical difference. And let's get a little more 
support out of these who think the Government can do it all for some 
ways to strengthen the American family, as those mayors urged us to do.
    I'm for family leave. I am not for needlessly burdening small 
businesses. So I am telling you what you don't want to hear. Sorry about 
that.

Enterprise Zones

    Q. I'd like to ask you, considering the financial constraints facing 
cities yet the increasing need, would you support a plan to offer low or 
interest-free loans to local or State governments for infrastructure 
improvements?
    The President. I'd rather do it through enterprise zones. I'd rather 
do it through tax breaks to bring jobs into the inner cities. That's my 
priority. And it's a program--when L.A. blew up, L.A., South Central, 
the Mayor, the Governor, and Peter Ueberroth all came back. I arranged 
for a meeting in the Cabinet Room with the Speaker and Gephardt, the 
leader of the Democrats in the House, and the Senate leaders. All three 
of those people from California said the way to help the cities is 
through enterprise zones, urban enterprise zones. So that's my preferred 
approach, rather than the one you suggest. I really think it will work. 
I believe it will work.

Aid to Russia and the Federal Budget

    Q. My question is as follows: Do you believe that the United States 
must invest a significant amount of money in the Russian economy in 
order to help Mr. Yeltsin's newfound democracy, prevent a resurgence of 
the hardliners, and perhaps initiating a new cold war? And part two of 
the question is, how do you think this would influence in balancing the 
budget?
    The President. The answer to your question is yes, I believe it. We 
have already passed on a bipartisan basis a thing called the FREEDOM 
Support Act. It's like an insurance policy. It says we spent trillions 
of dollars in the cold war, and now Boris Yeltsin, the guy that stood on 
the tank and brought democracy forward in Russia, needs support. The 
Russian people need it. And we've already done it. I don't think we need 
more of that regard.
    But you raise a good point. Anything we do of that nature makes 
balancing the budget more difficult, any spending. All these programs 
we're being asked about tonight makes getting the deficit down hard. So 
what you have to do is put together a budget, as I do every year. Four 
straight years I've had budgets that get in balance, putting to the 
Congress over 5 years. You can't do it in one. Included in the last one 
is funding for the FREEDOM Support Act.
    But the man's on to something. I mean, I happen to think that this 
is an insurance policy with Russia. I don't want to see them go back to 
totalitarianism. Let's hope that this approach keeps them from doing 
that. But it costs money. And we've got to recognize it every time. 
Whether it's a program here or a program there, the taxpayer is

[[Page 1954]]

bearing the burden.

Haiti

    Q. Mr. President, your own immigration officials interviewed Haitian 
refugees and found 40 percent were not economic migrants but had 
credible fears of political persecution in Haiti. We correctly give 
asylum to Cuban refugees. Why since May have you ordered the Coast Guard 
to repatriate all of the Haitian boat people to a dictatorship we don't 
even recognize and which the State Department says executes and tortures 
its own people and which actually fingerprints the arrivals in Port-au-
Prince and photographs them? And lastly, if you're really serious about 
restoring Haiti's ousted democratically elected government, why do you 
let oil and other essential supplies reach Haiti's dictators from 
Europe?
    The President. Let me answer the last part first. We're not trying 
to starve the people of Haiti, and we're not trying to freeze them or 
cook them or do anything of that nature.
    On the first part of your question, this information that 40 percent 
are considered political refugees, I'd like to see the documentation of 
that because our program says the law will apply. Political refugees 
have access to asylum.
    What I don't want to do is to see these merchants of death, these 
guys that rent these leaky boats or build them, then sell passage to 
poor people, who offer them the hope of coming to America, and then have 
a rescue operation--some of them not rescued--at sea. We had a program 
to screen these people in Haiti. I must have different information than 
you, but I've got pretty good information as President of the United 
States that these people are not being persecuted when they go to file 
their claims for asylum. So we've got a factual difference there.
    Q. In the Embassy, a case has come to our attention--it's not the 
first one--of a man who applied in June at the Embassy; 3 months later 
they invited him for an interview, but he'd been dead 9 days. Earlier a 
man's toenails had been ripped out. There are 11,000 people that your 
own asylum officers in Guantanamo, for 6 months before June, said had 
credible fears of persecution in Haiti, and they'd been allowed to come 
here and ask for asylum. But now you send everybody back.
    The President. That's exactly my point. If they find cases like 
that, they're allowed to apply.
    Q. But now you're sending them back with no asylum interviews 
whatsoever, right to the docks to get fingerprinted by the Haitian 
military.
    The President. But I am told that when they go back there, there is 
not this persecution. You've raised it; let me take a look at it.
    Aristide going back, we support that. I've got to be a little 
careful as President on what I say about him and how it works and what 
he's doing here. Our policy has been to support the OAS, the 
Organization of American States, to get this man back, not because of a 
great love for any individual but because of a commitment to democracy. 
I don't like to see democracy aborted by a coup. It isn't working too 
well because you don't have the public support that he once had. But 
we're going to stay with that for a while. But shutting down the oil is 
not that easy either. You ask the naval people about that.
    Mr. Wills. Mr. President, I hate to stop this discussion----
    The President. Kind of interesting debate, though.
    Mr. Wills. ----but I've got to move on to Tampa-St. Petersburg for 
our next question, sir.

The Character Issue

    Q. Good evening, Mr. President. I wanted to find out from you what 
is the goals of your administration for the next 5 years? And also, I am 
a person who served in the military, and my father served before me, and 
I want to find out your thoughts on the integrity of the person who will 
serve in the White House?
    The President. The goals are restore economic prosperity to this 
country. That is the single overriding goal. As Commander in Chief of 
the Armed Forces, as custodian of the national security, I've got to 
guarantee against threats to the United States or threats to the free 
world, really, and I take

[[Page 1955]]

that responsibility very, very seriously.
    In terms of the next person to serve there, I have had differences 
with Governor Clinton. And some say to me, ``You're old-fashioned. I 
find it difficult to understand how the Commander in Chief reacts,'' 
taking the position that he did, that it's okay to organize 
demonstrations against your country when your country is at war in a 
foreign land. People say, ``What's the difference in a foreign land?'' I 
don't know. I make a distinction. If you want to protest, come to the 
White House and do it. That's the American way. Everybody else does. Why 
don't you come along and do that? But I have big differences.
    But my differences with Governor Clinton in terms of the 
custodianship of the--or the being Commander in Chief is the problem 
that he has with kind of coming down on one position. On the war he 
said, ``I agree with the minority, but I guess I would have voted for 
the majority.'' You can't do that in the Oval Office. You have to make a 
decision. And sometimes it's painful, and you'll make a mistake and you 
say, ``Look, I fouled that up. I made a mistake.''
    But on the war, we did the right thing, and I thought his position 
was waffling around out there. So I can't pass judgment on how anybody 
else would behave. But I've tried to uphold the honor. Honor, duty and 
country: I believe in that. I believe in service to country. And I think 
I'm a better Commander in Chief because I fought for my country. I don't 
think it's a mandatory requirement, but I just think it's made me more 
sensitive when you have to commit somebody else's son or someone's 
daughter to combat, having been there.
    Mr. Wills. Mr. President, we've run out of time. Thank you so much 
for being here with us tonight.
    That was our last question. We know there are so many others. We'd 
like to get them all in, but we have used up all of our time. We hope 
that the Florida News Network, through their town meetings, has helped 
you make an informed choice on November 3d.
    Ms. Bishop. I'm sure last month you saw Governor Clinton on our town 
meeting, and the Florida News Network has issued an invitation to Ross 
Perot. We are waiting for his response. We thank all of you for joining 
us on television. Thank you here in our studio and our other studios 
around the State.
    And of course, thank you, Mr. President, for being with us.
    The President. Thank you all very, very much.

                    Note: The question-and-answer session began at 8 
                        p.m. at the WPLG-TV studios. News anchors Ann 
                        Bishop, WPLG-TV, and Tom Wills, WJXT-TV, 
                        Jacksonville, FL, served as moderators for the 
                        session. In his remarks, the President referred 
                        to Gen. John W. Vessey, USA, ret., Special 
                        Emissary to Hanoi for POW-MIA Affairs.