    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1994, Book II)]
    [August 19, 1994]
    [Pages 1477-1484]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    The President's News Conference
    August 19, 1994

    Cuban Refugees

        The President. Good afternoon. In recent weeks the Castro regime has
    encouraged Cubans to take to the sea in unsafe vessels to escape their
    nation's internal problems. In so doing, it has risked the lives of
    thousands of Cubans, and several have already died in their efforts to
    leave.
        This action is a cold-blooded attempt to maintain the Castro grip on
    Cuba and to divert attention from his failed Communist policies. He is
    trying to export to the United States the political and economic crises
    he has created in Cuba, in defiance of the democratic tide flowing
    throughout this region.
        Let me be clear: The Cuban Government will not succeed in any
    attempt to dictate American immigration policy. The United States will
    do everything within its power to ensure that Cuban lives are saved and
    that the current outflow of refugees is stopped.
        Today, I have ordered that illegal refugees from Cuba will not be
    allowed to enter the United States. Refugees rescued at sea will be
    taken to our naval base at Guantanamo, while we explore the possibility
    of other safe havens within the region. To enforce this policy, I have
    directed the Coast Guard to continue its expanded effort to stop any
    boat illegally attempting to bring Cubans to the United States. The
    United States will detain, investigate, and, if necessary, prosecute
    Americans who take to the sea to pick up Cubans. Vessels used in such
    activities will be seized.
        I want to compliment the Coast Guard and the Immigration and
    Naturalization Service for their efforts. And I want to thank Florida's
    officials, including Governor Chiles and the Florida congressional
    delegation, for their help in protecting and saving the lives of Cubans
    who seek to escape the regime.

    Anticrime Legislation

        Now I'd like to speak just for a moment about the crime bill. In the
    last week I have fought hard to put this crime bill back on track. After
    extensive talks with members of both parties, I have indicated my
    support for strengthening the provisions that require sexual predators
    to report to the police and make sure their communities are notified of
    their presence. And I support cutting overall spending in the bill by 10
    percent.
        These cuts will ensure that every dollar authorized in the bill will
    actually be paid for, not with new taxes and not by diverting dollars
    from other needed programs but, as I have always insisted, with the
    savings we will gain from reducing the size of the Federal Government by
    over a quarter of a million people over the next 6 years, to its lowest
    size in over 30 years, since President Kennedy was here. And all of
    these historic savings will go back to the American people to make their
    streets and their homes, their schools safer.

    [[Page 1478]]

        I have insisted that we keep the most profoundly important elements
    of the crime bill, to keep it tough by putting 100,000 police officers
    on the street, building more prisons, putting violent criminals away for
    good, by making ``three strikes, you're out'' the law of the land, and
    by other stronger provisions on sentencing. And we're going to keep it
    smart, with the sensible crime prevention programs that steer our kids
    away from drugs and gangs and give them things to say yes to.
        The crime bill must ban handguns for juveniles and take deadly
    assault weapons off our streets. Even though we've come under intense
    pressure from forces that will apparently say anything to take the
    assault weapons out of the bill, I have refused to do so.
        Let's keep in mind what this crime bill is all about. It's about
    removing fear from our streets, our schools, and our home. Innocent
    Americans should not have to fear being preyed upon, as so many do
    today. Innocent children should not have to fear losing their
    childhoods, as so many do today. We owe it to the American people that
    do the work and pay the bills in this country to make sure that people
    who commit crimes get caught, that those who are guilty get convicted,
    and those who are convicted serve their time. We also owe it to them to
    do whatever we can to prevent crime in the first place. That's what the
    police and the prevention programs are all about.
        That's why it is so important and why I have worked so hard to make
    sure that we do not turn this crime issue into yet another Washington
    partisan issue. This is a grassroots, mainstream, nonpartisan issue, and
    so it should remain. It must be an American crime bill. We have worked
    hard on it, and I call upon Congress to pass it without delay.
        Helen [Helen Thomas, United Press International].

    Cuba

        Q. Mr. President, on behalf of all the press corps, we want to wish
    you a happy birthday.
        The President. Thank you.
        Q. And now----
        The President. Well, you could all do a lot to make it happy.
    [Laughter] That is not a guilt trip; feel no pressure. [Laughter] Thank
    you.
        Q. Mr. President, in the last 35 years we've had an embargo against
    Cuba and increased the economic burden on them. I understand that's why
    the refugees are coming in. What is the problem with taking a few small,
    albeit brave steps to negotiate a possible movement toward democracy
    with Cuba? We've dealt with many Communist countries through the last 35
    years, and we're dealing with them now.
        The President. There aren't many left.
        I support the embargo, and I support the Cuban Democracy Act, which
    was passed in 1992. And I do not believe we should change our policy
    there.
        The fundamental problem is, democracy is sweeping the world;
    democracy and freedom are sweeping our hemisphere. In the Caribbean
    alone, and in Central and South America, in all of this region, there
    are only two countries now not democratically governed with open
    societies and open economies. The real problem is the stubborn refusal
    of the Castro regime to have an open democracy and an open economy. And
    I think the policies we are following will hasten the day when that
    occurs, and we follow those policies because we believe they are the
    ones most likely to promote democracy and ultimately prosperity for the
    people of Cuba.
        Q. But that's not true of North Korea or China, and you're dealing
    with them every day.
        The President. I think the circumstances are different, and I think
    our policy is correct.
        Q. Mr. President, recognizing that you're slowing down the process,
    do people fleeing Cuba still get automatic entry to the United States as
    political refugees if they're not criminals or ill?
        The President. No.
        Q. You're ending----
        The President. The people leaving Cuba will not be permitted to come
    to the United States. They will be sent to safe havens.
        Q. The people who reach here?
        The President. The people who reach here will be apprehended and
    will be treated like others. They will be--their cases will be reviewed.
    Those who qualify can stay, and those who don't will not be permitted
    to. They will be now treated like others who come here.
        Brit [Brit Hume, ABC News].
        Q. Mr. President, under the law it has always been clear that the
    Cuban refugees had a certain priority on staying here. The policy, of
    course, has been that anybody who got here got to stay. What restraints
    are you operating

    [[Page 1479]]

    under in terms of the law in changing this policy? Or are you likely,
    sir, to be sued over this?
        The President. No--let me--I'm glad you asked that question in
    contradistinction to the one you asked right afterward. The Cuban
    Adjustment Act will continue to be the law of the land. But we are doing
    our best within that--we will detain the Cubans who come here now. They
    will not simply be released into the population at large. And we will
    review all their cases in light of the applicable law, including the
    Cuban Adjustment Act.
        Q. Do you know how long it will take, how long----
        The President. It depends on how many there are, of course. And we
    don't know.
        Andrea [Andrea Mitchell, NBC News].
        Q. Can you give us some more details? Are these people going to be
    taken to Guantanamo? What kind of strain might this place on our naval
    forces, the Coast Guard? Already we're being told that drug interdiction
    is being cut back. And can you respond to criticism already from Bob
    Dole and Newt Gingrich? In particular, Mr. Gingrich said that your new
    policy is appalling, it's an example of mixed morality, and that he
    thinks it is illegal under the act.
        The President. Well, first, let me answer the factual questions. The
    refugees, those who are fleeing, will be taken first to Guantanamo where
    we will seek safe havens for them. That is plainly not illegal under
    international law, nor do we believe it is illegal under the Cuban
    Adjustment Act.
        Secondly, as to whether it is immoral, I just would say it is my
    belief that the American people and that the Cuban-American people and
    the people of Florida, but the people of the entire United States, do
    not want to see another Mariel boatlift. They do not want to see Cuba
    dictate our immigration policy. They do not want to see Mr. Castro able
    to export his political and economic problems to the United States.
        Now, that is what is plainly being set up. We have gone through that
    once. We had 120,000 people sent to this country as a deliberate
    attempt--not because they themselves initially wanted to flee; they were
    encouraged to flee, they were pushed out; we had jails open; we had
    mental hospitals open--all in an attempt to export all the problems of
    Cuba to the United States. We tried it that way once. It was wrong then,
    and it's wrong now. And I'm not going to let it happen again.
        Q. Can you respond to the rest of the question?
        The President. Yes, that's my answer to them.
        Q. What about the naval forces, the Coast Guard? Are they up to
    this? Will it affect drug----
        The President. I think the Coast Guard is plainly up to it. We may
    have to have a little more Navy support. I met with the Secretary of
    Defense this morning; we discussed it at length. He is confident that we
    can do what we have to do without undermining our fundamental mission.

    Anticrime Legislation

        Q. President Clinton, previously you said that the crime bill was
    something that you supported, that you wanted to sign as it was. Now
    you're saying you can take 10 percent out of it. Why shouldn't the
    American people believe that there's still a lot of fat that can come
    out of it?
        The President. First of all, anytime you start a--I've never seen a
    bill that started new programs that you couldn't cut some and maintain
    its fundamental integrity. I said that crime bill was a strong and good
    bill as it was, and it was a strong and good bill.
        But one of the things that happened in conference that has, I think,
    been largely overlooked is that in an attempt to get as much money as
    possible for police officers and law enforcement and for prisons and for
    border patrol, funds were appropriated or were authorized in the crime
    bill that came out of conference in an amount greater than we could
    provide in the trust fund. Keep in mind, the great beauty of this crime
    bill is it's the first major program in American history that's being
    financed entirely by reducing the size of the Federal bureaucracy and
    taking all the savings from the Federal Government and putting it in a
    trust fund to help grassroots Americans get better control over their
    own lives.
        The practical impact of what we are doing by cutting 10 percent of
    this will be to be able to put everything that's left into the trust
    fund. So, in terms of real dollars, I believe there will be more money
    actually appropriated and spent for tough law enforcement and for police
    officers. And I believe that all the fundamental, important things in
    the prevention strategy will be maintained at a very high level and
    dramatically higher than now.

    [[Page 1480]]

        The principles of the bill are intact: It's the biggest increase in
    police in the history of the country; it's the toughest increase in
    punishment in the history of the country; it's the biggest increase in
    prevention programs in the history of the country.
        I am not a Member of the Congress. They have to work out all the
    details. If they produced this bill out of the conference, I would have
    happily supported this, as I did the other one.
        Q. Wouldn't you just be getting into politics then, by accepting the
    original bill?
        The President. Now, that's one of those questions designed to spoil
    your birthday--[laughter]--because it's something else, it's designed to
    confuse the American people about what really goes on up here.
        The President is not a Member of the Congress. The Congress made a
    decision that they had a bill that they all wanted. They accommodated
    the interest as best they could. It met all my fundamental criteria:
    assault weapons ban, ban on handgun ownership by kids, tougher
    penalties, longer imprisonment, more prevention. So does this bill. This
    bill has the added virtue of being able to be fully funded in the trust
    fund that we are creating by reducing the Federal Government to its
    lowest size in 30 years.
        And if, in fact--let me just say, Rita [Rita Braver, CBS News],
    there has been no conference. If, in fact, the conference proceeds along
    the lines that I generally believe it's going on, and it has the added
    virtue of some strengthening of the language which was put in involving
    this whole sexual predator issue--so, in that sense, I think it is a
    fine bill that meets all the criteria, and it doesn't just gut the
    prevention programs, which I was determined to see not happen.
        Yes, Wolf [Wolf Blitzer, Cable News Network].

    Cuba

        Q. Mr. President, you say that you're not going to allow Fidel
    Castro to dictate U.S. immigration policy. But hasn't he just done that
    by forcing you to reverse three decades of a policy? And secondly, what
    do you say to Cuban-Americans, especially in Florida, who feel betrayed
    by this change in policy?
        The President. Well, I believe that most Cuban-Americans want us to
    be very firm. The Cuban-Americans that I know, without regard to their
    party, supported the Cuba Democracy Act, and they remember how awful it
    was for the United States when the Mariel boatlift occurred. They
    remembered what it did in this country and the feelings it engendered in
    this country. And I do not believe they want another Mariel boatlift.
    And I do not believe we can afford to do that. And so my own view is
    that most Cuban-Americans will support what we're trying to do and wish
    us to be firm.
        I would remind you that the Attorney General, who is in charge or
    oversees the INS, who has done a lot of work on this, and who will have
    a press conference, I think, when I finish to answer some of the details
    of this policy, was the prosecuting attorney in Dade County. I talked to
    the Governor last night at some length about this--of Florida.
        I think my own feeling is--and I've talked to Cuban-Americans, of
    course, exhaustively for years now, and we've been in touch with them
    and with the Florida congressional delegation--I believe this policy
    will have broad support. I will be surprised if it does not have broad
    support.
        Yes, Cragg [Cragg Hines, Houston Chronicle].
        Q. By telling Cubans basically to stay home and at least temporarily
    to stomach conditions there, does that make it incumbent on you to be
    more active in seeking to oust Castro?
        The President. Well, what we are telling Cubans is that we have a
    provision for their coming to the United States through in-country
    processing. And at least as of this date, we have no evidence that the
    Castro government has done anything to discourage Cubans from coming to
    the in-country processing, applying for the visas if they're eligible to
    come here, and getting them. That's what we're saying to them. That is,
    we do not have any evidence that would justify believing that that
    process won't work in Cuba as it has in other places. And indeed, the
    Castro government has encouraged Cubans to go down and apply to come
    here. But we don't object to that. That's the policy we have everywhere,
    and that's the policy we should have there.
        Q. But doesn't that make it incumbent on you to unilaterally or
    multinationally press for the ouster of Castro in some way--military,
    economic, whatever?
        The President. The United States had done more than any other
    country to try to bring

    [[Page 1481]]

    an end to the Castro government. We have done it through the Cuban
    Democracy Act. We have done it through the embargo. We have worked hard,
    often laboring almost alone to that end. And we will continue to do that
    by whatever reasonable means are available to us.

    Health Care Reform

        Q. Mr. President, one of your fellow Democrats in the Senate, Sam
    Nunn of Georgia, said yesterday that it would be months if not years
    before a health care reform bill is produced. And the Congressional
    Budget Office said that a possible moderate compromise didn't cost out.
    There's a growing feeling in Washington that this health care crusade is
    hopelessly bogged down in Congress at this point. What is your view of
    the situation?
        The President. That they should keep working at it; that if we don't
    move now there's a chance that it won't happen at all. You know, the
    congressional timetable is often different from the American timetable.
    I mean it took 7 years to pass the Brady bill and 7 years to pass family
    leave.
        But for 60 years people have acknowledged that not covering all
    Americans and having no system for dealing with the explosive costs and
    the inequalities in the health care system were a problem. They have
    reached a significant crisis stage here, with 5 million more Americans
    losing their health insurance in the last 5 years alone, with the costs
    exploding in the last 12 years. And I believe that the time has come to
    deal with this.
        Now, Senator Nunn simply observed what I think is clearly a fact,
    which is that in the Senate there is unlimited debate and you can have
    unlimited amendments. But a lot of these issues do need to be worked
    through.
        I think the comments Senator Kennedy and Senator Mitchell made today
    about the fact that this bipartisan group was at least attempting to
    work with them, and in the process of so attempting, finding out how
    hard it is. It's easy to stand on the sideline and lob brickbats at
    these efforts and quite another thing to produce your own effort. But
    their comment made me believe that there is still a chance that people
    will work together and resolve this. So I would say to them, keep
    working, keep working at it, because if you delay, you may lose it
    altogether.
        Q. Well, at this point, would you take something less than what
    Mitchell or Gephardt has proposed just to keep the process moving, since
    as you say if we don't get it now, we probably won't get it.
        The President. I think that, for one thing, that's not so easy to
    do, because as we've also seen from the studies of the Catholic Health
    Association and others, the so-called ``something less'' approach often
    does more harm than good; that when you just try to patchwork this,
    often you lead to more people without insurance and higher insurance
    rates.
        What I would say to you is, give the process time to unfold. I know
    for you it's been going on a long time, since we first began to debate
    this a year and a half ago. I think for the American people, it's almost
    like the baseball season, the pennant's just begun. I hope we can have
    the pennant in the other one, too, and the series. But I think we need
    to let this thing unfold a little more. I wouldn't prejudge it yet.
        Ron [Ron Brownstein, Los Angeles Times].

    Anticrime Legislation

        Q. Mr. President, back to the crime bill. If the approach you're
    offering now, the changes you're offering now, does not produce enough
    votes to pass the bill, will you under any circumstances agree to sever
    the assault weapon ban for a separate vote in the House and the Senate?
        The President. I won't agree to that because I think it's a mistake.
    And let me say--I don't want to overly comment on it, but let me try to
    describe what the problem is. The bill has already passed the House. But
    in the Senate, as you know, we could have 55, 56, 57, 59 votes for that
    bill in the Senate and it could still be filibustered. And we should not
    permit that to happen.
        I also believe that there is a chance that this whole process in the
    last few days--we may look back on this in a year or so and think that
    this was the beginning of an effort, again, in other areas to work in
    good faith across the party lines. I have shown my good faith. I have
    taken the risk that all people take when they talk to people who are
    opposed to them of, well, being asked the questions like Rita asked me.
    But in this town it won't work if we have American problems unless we
    try to reach out across party lines. A lot of these issues don't work
    like that.

    [[Page 1482]]

        So if we can work through this in good faith, my view is that we'll
    maybe be setting the stage to have more things like NAFTA and the Brady
    bill and the education bills and then this one where we can work
    together. So I don't believe we will have to do that, and I am against
    doing it. I think it would be a real error.

    Cuba

        Q. Mr. President, Fidel Castro has been very high on the list of
    American demonology because he was a national security threat. I think
    of the Cuban missile crisis; he would provide a base for the Soviet
    Union. That's all ended now. Do you foresee a form of government,
    democratic government, in Havana with free elections that includes Fidel
    Castro? Or is it a case that Castro must go before there's any
    normalization?
        The President. Well, in any democracy it's up to the people to make
    their own decisions. The United States does not pick leaders or delete
    leaders for other countries. We let people make their own decisions.
        I don't want to get into that. I think what we need is a movement
    toward democracy and a free economy.

    President's Legal Defense Fund

        Q. Mr. President, when the legal defense fund was set up for you to
    handle the costs of defending against the litigation, Lloyd Cutler said
    he was intervening in that as Presidential Counsel because it threatened
    the Presidency, these tremendous costs. Since then, the fund has decided
    it cannot legally solicit, leaving no explanation since then of (a) how
    will the money be raised to pay these bills? And two, in lieu of enough
    funding to do it, what other options do you have to protect the
    Presidency from the threat that he was talking about?
        The President. I don't know. I don't know the answer to that. I'll
    just have to let you ask Mr. Cutler that. I'm just trying to stay way
    from that whole issue of the fund, and I can't answer those questions.
        Yes, go ahead, Mike [Mike McKee, CONUS].

    Bipartisanship

        Q. Mr. President, I hate to ask you one of those questions that
    might spoil your birthday again, but in light of problems that you have
    been having up on Capitol Hill, many people are wondering if changing
    your communication strategy, shuffling your staff might not be really
    addressing the problem; that perhaps I was wondering if you've thought
    about this, that as a President elected with 43 percent, you may be
    trying to do too much too fast. And Democrats on Capitol Hill may be
    trying to take too much of a partisan advantage of having control of the
    entire Government and perhaps exceeding your mandate.
        The President. Well, first, I don't want the Democrats to take
    partisan advantage; I just want us to get what's necessary for the
    country done. I do not believe the country believes that we should sit
    still up here.
        And for all your talk about trouble, let me remind you that every
    objective survey says that in 1993 this administration got more support
    from Congress than any administration since World War II except
    President Eisenhower in 1953, when he had a less ambitious agenda, and
    President Johnson in 1965, when he had a bigger mandate and more support
    from the Congress. So I think we're doing quite well with the Congress
    if you look at it in any kind of historic pattern.
        Now, I realize the fights and the conflicts and the delays endure
    more than the achievements. But we reversed Reaganomics. We passed an
    economic program that was part of a strategy that has given us 3 years
    of deficit reduction for the first time since Truman, over 4 million
    jobs. We have the most advances in trade than we've had in a generation,
    in the last year and a half. This economic program is working. We broke
    7 years of gridlock with the Brady bill. We passed NAFTA, which was
    deader than a doornail when I became President; we revived it and passed
    it.
        So I believe this Congress is capable of working together, often on
    a bipartisan basis. And they still have some great opportunities here.
    They have the crime bill, the campaign finance reform bill, the lobby
    reform bill, the bill that passed the House last week that has not yet
    passed the Senate to require the Congress to live under the laws it
    imposes on the American people, which I think is a very good bill, and
    of course, the health care challenge.
        But I believe what I have to do is to keep trying to change things.
    Anytime you try to provoke as much change as I have, you're going to
    have resistance. And you will be criticized. Is it more difficult that I
    had 43 percent of the vote? Perhaps it is. But I think you can

    [[Page 1483]]

    make another argument, which was that 62 percent of the American people
    voted for fundamental change in the things that we were doing and in the
    way Government works.
        If anything, I would say that I've been most disappointed, looking
    back, not so much in my inability to get things done, because once
    people look at the list it's a very long and impressive list, but I
    haven't been as successful in changing the way it works, that is, in
    trying to get the Democrats and Republicans to reach across to each
    other in good faith and work through these things. That's why I think
    this crime bill could be an important thing. It could be a way of people
    in both parties saying, ``We're putting you first for a change, not
    ourselves.''

    Interest Rates

        Q. Mr. President, the Federal Reserve raised interest rates again
    this week. Some Democrats are saying that it could cause an economic
    slowdown. How many more rate increases will you take before you also
    criticize the Fed?
        The President. Well, when the Federal Reserve raised rates this
    week, the Chairman, Mr. Greenspan, said that he thought that this would
    be sufficient for a time. The truth is that our economic strategy has
    produced more rapid growth than they thought it would and that we
    thought it would. We are even doing better than we thought we would. We
    have got over 4 million jobs already in the last year and a half, and
    we've got rapid growth in the economy, dramatic new investments in the
    private sector. So they're worried about inflation. When it is apparent
    to me that the drag on the economy will be more about slowing the
    economy down than stopping inflation, I will do what I can to influence
    that policy. But I think my policy of letting them do their job and
    having me do mine has worked out rather well.
        And I would remind you that from the time we announced--let me just
    go back through a little history here--from the time we announced that
    we would have a serious assault on the deficit after the election in
    November, from that day for a very long time thereafter, we had dramatic
    drops in interest rates which fueled last year's expansion. So I think
    that we have to recognize that the Fed did respond to the efforts we
    made and what they're responding to now is a robust and growing economy.
    Of course, it could be slowed down too much, but we don't have any
    evidence at this time that that has, in fact, occurred.

    Mexico

        Q. Mr. President, happy birthday. Next Sunday, Mexico is going to
    have Presidential elections. Can you give us your assessment? What do
    you think? What do you expect, and what is going to be the impact in the
    relations of Mexico and the United States? Do you expect continuity?
        The President. I expect the elections to be free, open, and fair.
    And I expect them to produce a result which will be accepted by the
    people of Mexico. And I expect the United States to continue its
    deepening friendship with Mexico. I think that our relationships are
    growing. I think, in spite of the political changes and the economic
    difficulties of Mexico in the last 2 years, we have had great success. I
    think NAFTA clearly was a great success if you look at the economic
    benefits to the United States and what has happened. So I'm looking
    forward very optimistically to the future with Mexico.

    Middle East Peace Process

        Q. Mr. President, on the Middle East, sir, progress continues
    between Israel and the Palestinians, but there is still violence. But I
    wondered, sir, if you have an assessment on that. Is there any update on
    the Syrian front? Have you heard recently from President Asad? And also,
    has any progress been made in countering worldwide terrorism?
        The President. You've asked me a lot of questions there. Let me try
    to answer them all. I believe we are still on a path of steady progress
    in the hope of achieving an agreement that resolves the differences
    between Israel and Syria. Serious problems remain, but I would say
    significant advances are being made.
        With regard to the Palestinian agreement, I think everyone always
    knew there would be some operational difficulties because the PLO had,
    to be fair to them, never had been in charge of a country. That is, they
    had never had to operate a government and to deal with all the mundane
    and maybe sometimes even boring day-to-day problems that, unless they
    are properly managed, you can't keep a society together. I think we're
    making some headway there. I don't want to minimize the difficulties,
    but I do not expect them to be so great as to derail what we're doing.

    [[Page 1484]]

        On the terrorism front, I can tell you that every week, several
    times a week, I get an update on our efforts. And while, as you could
    appreciate, I cannot discuss many of them in great detail, I believe
    that we are making progress. But I believe this is a problem we'll all
    have to be very vigilant about for years to come.
        Trude [Trude Feldman, Trans Features].

    President's Birthday

        Q. Mr. President, can we turn the subject to your birthday today?
    What stirs within you as you celebrate another birthday? And if you
    could have three wishes fulfilled today, what would those three wishes
    be?
        The President. Well, I woke up this morning just grateful to be
    here. That's what I'm feeling--I mean, grateful to be alive, grateful to
    have my health, grateful to have my family, grateful to have the chance
    to serve. And you know, I like the tough fights, so this is an
    exhilarating period for me. I like the big challenges. I think we're all
    put on this Earth to try to make a difference.
        If I had three wishes, I would wish for the crime bill to pass--
    [laughter]--one; I would wish that I would make more progress on the way
    we do things around here as well as on the substance, because if we can
    open our minds and hearts to each other and play a little less politics,
    we can solve the health care problem, too, and other things. And I would
    wish that I won't have to give up my whole vacation because I still have
    dreams of breaking 80 on the golf course before I'm 50. [Laughter]
        Let me say, I feel that I--you know, this is not an easy job for you
    either. So since it's my birthday, if we adjourn here, let's go into the
    dining room, and we can have some cake and whatever else is in there.
        Thank you very much. Come on, let's have some cake.

    Note: The President's 69th news conference began at 1:30 p.m. in the
    East Room at the White House. In his remarks, he referred to Gov. Lawton
    Chiles of Florida and President Hafiz al-Asad of Syria.