    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1995, Book I)]
    [February 24, 1995]
    [Pages 261-267]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    The President's News Conference With Prime Minister Jean Chretien of
    Canada in Ottawa
    February 24, 1995

        Prime Minister Chretien. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes a
    great meeting between the President of the United States and myself,
    members of his Cabinet, and members of my Cabinet. As I had the occasion
    to say many times, the relations between our two countries is an example
    to the world. We have some problems, but we are able to work on them and
    find solutions.
        I'm delighted, Mr. President, that the Canadians appreciate very
    much the relations between Canada and the United States at this moment.
    It was some years ago only 25 percent were happy with the quality of our
    relations. Now 53 percent are happy. So it's probably more because of
    you than of me, but--[laughter]--I just want to say to you that it's
    been, for my wife and I, a great occasion to receive your wife and you.
    And the bond between our two nations, I'm sure, are better because you
    came here.

    [At this point, the Prime Minister spoke in French, and his remarks were
    translated by an interpreter.]

        It is always for us a great pleasure to welcome our neighbors to the
    south. We share a continent. We share history. If there have been
    difficulties between the United States and Canada a century and a half
    ago, today we are able to sit down together and to find solutions that
    bring about a better understanding between two neighbors where mutual
    respect resides and neighbors who understand that it is in working
    together that we can go forward.

    [[Page 262]]

    [The Prime Minister resumed speaking in English.]

        The last 15 months that I have been the Prime Minister I have had
    many occasions to meet with the President. It's probably the ninth time
    that we are together, and we speak on the phone. But I can see the
    influence that the Americans have on the world scene at this moment. And
    it's extremely important to keep the leadership in the world. In my
    traveling in Latin America, in my traveling in Asia the last few months,
    I realize that we've made some fantastic progress.
        For me to see that all these countries in Asia want to be part of
    APEC and now of a free trade arrangement by the year 2010, and they want
    to work in a market economy and break down barriers and specialize and
    take share of the market in the best way, the way that we have developed
    in America and Canada over the last century is fantastic. But probably,
    the most significant thing that I've lived was when I was in Latin
    America and I saw this democracy, as I said this morning, getting better
    now and all these leaders very anxious to develop our values in the era
    of dictatorships in these areas and talk and be open about trade, but
    mostly about democracy and about human rights was a great satisfaction.
        And they all were telling me to tell you that they need America to
    be involved. And it's why I'm happy to say that publicly at this moment,
    because, Mr. President, you are respected by the leaders of the world,
    and they want the United States of America to remain the champion of
    democracy and human rights and economic and social progress.
        Thank you.
        The President. This morning the Prime Minister and I had a fine and
    wide-ranging discussion with many members of his Cabinet and members of
    our administration. I want to begin by thanking again Prime Minister
    Chretien and Mrs. Chretien and all the Canadian people for making
    Hillary and me and all of our group feel so welcome here in Canada. We
    have had a wonderful trip. Everything we've done has been immensely
    enjoyable and productive. And I'm very grateful for the chance that we
    all had to come here and have this meeting.
        I thank the Prime Minister for the statement he made about the role
    of the United States in the world. There are many debates now going on
    in our country about what we should be doing. It is clear to me that my
    ability as President to work with our people to open up economic
    opportunity and to give all Americans the chance to be rewarded for
    their labors and to solve their own problems and to have a good life for
    themselves and their children as we move into this next century requires
    an aggressive leadership on our part--prudent, to be sure; restrained,
    to be sure--but still American leadership involved in the world and
    working with real partners like the Canadians on a whole range of
    issues. And I thank him for that.
        I'd like to say a special word of appreciation, too, about the
    agreement we have just signed to open the skies between our two
    countries. It will strengthen our partnership. It will create thousands
    of new jobs and billions of dollars of economic activity. As I said this
    morning, the only losers in this will be the people who have been piling
    up frequent flier miles; they'll be a little short because now it will
    be a lot easier to get back and forth between Canada and the United
    States. Nearly as I can figure, everybody else involved in this
    agreement comes out way ahead. And nonstop flights from many major
    cities in the United States to places like Montreal and Toronto and
    Vancouver are now going to be more available. And I am very encouraged
    because today we've agreed to throw out the 30-year-old rules that have
    suffocated business and wasted time and money for millions of travelers.
    The travel time on many major routes will now be cut in half because of
    this agreement. Passengers on both sides of the borders can look towards
    dramatically expanded services at more competitive prices. Canadian and
    American airlines will now be able to actually advertise and be telling
    the truth when they say you can get there from here. [Laughter]
        Letting market demand, not Government regulation, determine the
    number and destination of flights between our two nations is a big step
    forward. It's consistent with what we've being doing in NAFTA, which has
    led to a big increase in bilateral trade in just the last year alone.
    And I believe it's consistent with the larger vision that Prime Minister
    Chretien and I have shared and worked for with NAFTA, with the GATT
    agreement, with the agreement with the Asian-Pacific nations, with the
    agreement at the Summit of the Americas to open those markets.

    [[Page 263]]

        I want to say a special word of thanks to the Transportation
    Minister of Canada, Doug Young, and our Transportation Secretary,
    Federico Pena, for what they have done here.
        Finally, let me say, Mr. Prime Minister, I'm looking forward to
    coming back to Halifax this summer. We have a lot of work to do to
    examine the questions that you and I put forcefully on the table in
    Italy last year. Are the institutions which were established at the end
    of the Second World War to promote growth and developing trade, are they
    adequate to meet the challenges of this new age? When so many people in
    the world are struggling for democracy and are struggling to support
    enterprise, are they going to be rewarded for those efforts? And if
    they're going to be rewarded for those efforts, what do we have to do to
    make sure that the movement to democracy and the movement to enterprise,
    that that is not derailed with the inevitable kinds of crises that will
    arise from time to time, such as the recent one in Mexico?
        I am confident that we can meet that challenge, and I'm glad we're
    coming back to Halifax because you've been such a leader in that regard.
    And I thank you, sir.
        Thank you all very much, and we'd be glad to answer questions. Thank
    you.
        Q. Mr. President, you've said some admirable things about Canada,
    Mr. President. Can I ask you----
        Prime Minister Chretien. No, no. You don't ask--[inaudible]--in
    Canada, French and English. So I will use my privilege to--[laughter]

    [The Prime Minister concluded his remarks in French, and a translation
    was not provided. The next question was then asked in French, and a
    translation was provided by an interpreter.]

    Canadian Unity

        Q. Mr. Chretien, I would like to ask you if you're satisfied with
    the winks in favor of Canadian unity from the President?
        Prime Minister Chretien. Is it to me or to him?
        Q. To both.
        Q. First, Mr. Clinton, you said yesterday that Canada's future was
    for Canadians to decide. After having met with Lucien Bouchard, can you
    tell us if you consider, if the Quebecers were to vote yes in the
    upcoming referendum, in favor of pulling out from Canada, would you
    consider this from an American perspective as a minor or a major
    disturbance or no disturbance at all?
        The President. You already said I winked yesterday. I was never
    consciously aware of having winked at Prime Minister Chretien. That
    will, doubtless, be a story at home. [Laughter] Look, I came here to
    celebrate, not to speculate. I'm celebrating the relationship we now
    have. I said everything I had to say yesterday, and I think that most
    reasonable people reading or hearing my words knew what I said and
    processed it accordingly. And I don't think that I have anything to add
    to what I said yesterday about this.
        Q. Can you just help us with this interpretation? Since you said so
    many admirable things about Canada, can one assume that you would like
    to see it stay united, that would be your preference?
        The President. You can assume that I meant what I said yesterday.
    [Laughter]

    Affirmative Action

        Q. Mr. President, is it true that you have ordered a review of
    affirmative action programs? And does it mean that you are backing off
    from giving a leg up to disadvantaged from past eras?
        The President. No, it's not true that I'm backing off--it's not true
    that I'm backing off from giving a leg up. It is true, as I have said
    publicly now for some time, that I believe that we should not permit
    this affirmative action issue to degenerate into exactly what is
    happening, just another political wedge issue to divide the American
    people.
        I believe that every American would acknowledge that there are
    affirmative action programs which have made a great deal of difference
    to the lives of Americans who have been disadvantaged and who in turn
    have made our country stronger. The best examples of all, I believe, are
    the people who have served in the United States military, who, because
    of the efforts that have been made to deal with disadvantaged minorities
    who had not been given a change to rise as high as their abilities could
    take them. In education, training, leadership, development, the military
    today is a model; it looks like America, and it works.
        I, furthermore, think that it is time to look at all these programs
    which have developed over the last 20 to 25 years and ask ourselves: Do
    they work? Are they fair? Do they achieve the desired objectives? That
    is very different from

    [[Page 264]]

    trying to use this issue as a political wedge one way or the other. I
    think it would be a great mistake.
        So we have been talking for, oh, months now with people about this
    issue, people who have participated in these programs, people who are
    knowledgeable about them, people who have both philosophical and
    practical convictions about them. I think we need to have a national
    conversation not only about affirmative action but about what our
    obligations are to make sure every American has a chance to make it. And
    I'm going to do my dead-level best--and some of you may try to get in
    the way of it, but I'm going to try to stop this from becoming another
    cheap, political, emotional wedge issue. This country--our country has
    been divided too often by issues that, substantively, were not as
    important as the political benefit that the dividers got. And that----
        Q. You don't think that we have equality in our country, do you?
        The President. I absolutely do not, and I think we--we don't have
    equality. We may never have total equality. But we need--and we don't
    have--we don't even guarantee equality of results. What we need to
    guarantee is genuine equality of opportunity. That's what the
    affirmative action concept is designed to do. And I'm convinced that
    most Americans want us to continue to do that in the appropriate way.
    But we shouldn't be defending things that we can't defend. So it's time
    to review it, discuss it, and be straightforward about it.

    Relationship With Prime Minister Chretien

        Q. Mr. Prime Minister, during the election you talked about not
    wanting to go fishing with the President of the United States in case
    you looked like the fish and things like that. [Laughter] Can I ask
    you--your relationship has been pretty close during this visit--are you
    referring to the President by his first name, or is it still Mr.
    President? How would you describe your relationship?
        Prime Minister Chretien. You know, he is Mr. President when there is
    another person in the room. And when we're alone, I don't call him
    William J., I call him Bill. [Laughter]
        The President. Thank you.
        Q. Mr. President----
        The President. I'd be honored to put the bait on his pole if he
    wanted to go fishing. [Laughter]

    Balanced Budget Amendment

        Q. Mr. President, back home the balanced budget drive is picking up
    steam. Two more Democratic Senators came out in favor of it. Is this an
    idea whose time has come, or are you going to try to stop this or get on
    the bandwagon? What's your position on it now?
        The President. Well, my position on it is the same thing it was last
    year. I don't think it is a good idea. And I don't think it's a good
    idea in part because of the judicial review provisions which means that,
    basically, we're allowing--it's ironic to me that the Republicans, who
    have lambasted the Federal courts and lambasted the courts running our
    lives for years, are now willing to let the Federal budget be determined
    in Federal court. I find that astonishing, first of all. Secondly, we
    don't need this balanced budget amendment to reduce the deficit. And
    what it really does is give the minority the power to decide what's in
    the budget and maybe to increase the deficit. Thirdly, the Republicans
    still don't want to give us the right to know. They dance around Social
    Security; they dance around the other details. I think they have given
    us a little right to know with the rescission package they've presented,
    which is basically making war on the kids of the country. So I hope that
    it will be--that the Congress will not go along.
        And I have talked to some Senators; I intend to talk to some more.
    But this is a decision most of them will make based on their own
    convictions, I think. We do need to keep bringing this deficit down; I
    am committed to doing that. I don't think this is the right way to do
    it. That's my position.

    [The following question was asked and answered in French, and a
    translation was provided by an interpreter.]

        Q. Prime Minister, are you sensitive to President Clinton's
    budgetary intent, that is, to give the middle class a break? I'd also
    like to hear the President. Has he tried to convince you that a fiscal
    break for the middle class of Canada is a good thing?
        Prime Minister Chretien. Obviously, everyone wants a taxation system
    that is beneficial to the middle class. But we haven't really discussed
    this problem between us. We had other questions to deal with, the
    President and I. So we did not deal with our respective budgets. But

    [[Page 265]]

    both of us, no doubt, want to provide very good administration to our
    respective countries and balance the books at some point.

    Spending Cuts

        Q. Yesterday, a number of House subcommittees proposed cuts in
    housing and rental assistance and EPA water projects and your own
    national service program. With all of this coming at once, what's your
    strategy to oppose these cuts? And isn't there something to what was
    said by one of the local newspapers, that, in a way, because of what's
    going on in Congress, you come here almost more as a titular head of
    government than as a real chief of state?
        The President. Well, near as I can tell, ma'am, we've been here 50
    days under this new regime, and they've only sent me one bill and I was
    proud to sign it. I mean, congressional committees can vote whatever
    they want; the House can pass whatever it wants. Unless I missed my
    guess, a bill doesn't become law unless I sign it or it passes over my
    veto. [Laughter] Now, last time I checked the Constitution, that was the
    rule.
        What they're doing is showing what I tried to tell the American
    people last October and in September. What they should--look at their
    rescission package. What they want to do is to make war on the kids of
    this country to pay for a capital gains tax cut. That's what's going on.
    And the people will figure that out, and I think the Senate will figure
    it out. And I still believe we can make some real progress here. And
    meanwhile, I'm going to pursue my agenda and get done as much as I can.
        I still believe we can make some real progress. But I do not think
    the American people expect nor support these radical right-wing measures
    that are coming out of these House committees. And we'll just see
    whether they do or not. We've got a constitutional system, and we've got
    a chance to see it work. I hope they can send me some more bills that in
    good conscience I can sign. I'm still waiting for the unfunded mandates,
    the line-item veto, all these things that will help us control
    unnecessary spending. But their definition of unnecessary spending
    apparently is the Women, Infant and Children program and Head Start and
    all these programs. I disagree with that, but we knew that to start
    with.
        We've got to go through the Senate and go through conference. So I
    don't consider myself a titular head of state, and until there is some
    evidence to the contrary, you shouldn't either. [Laughter]

    Currency Fluctuations

        Q. Thank you, Prime Minister. President Clinton, in terms of North
    American free trade--and as usual on visits like this, a lot was said
    about trade--are you concerned about the value of the Canadian dollar
    being about 71 cents, the decline of the peso--who knows what it is
    today--and at what point does your administration lose patience with
    this and at what point do you have concerns that your many friends in
    Congress will say, we're at the losing end of this because of the value
    of the dollar?
        The President. You mean because when the value of your currency goes
    down it changes the trade relationship? Well, the truth is that all of
    us have not--something less than 100 percent control over the value of
    our currency. And the Prime Minister and I are dealing in part with the
    accumulated problems that we found when we took office. That is, I was
    stunned last year when the value of the American dollar went down. When
    we were having 4 percent growth, the best economic year in 10 years, we
    had the lowest combined inflation and unemployment rate in almost 30
    years, the value of the dollar is dropping. Why? Because we had to
    borrow a lot of money to finance the accumulated debt of the years
    before I took office.
        So these are problems that we have to work through. But I am not
    concerned about it. I did what I thought was right in Mexico. I knew it
    wasn't popular, but I thought it was right because I think, long term,
    Mexico's on the right path. They are committed to democracy and
    enterprise. And I don't see how anybody could look at Canada today and
    believe that it was not--that this country is not a country of massive
    potential, moving in the right direction, one of the most successful
    countries in the world by any measure.
        And you're going to have these fluctuations in the currency. They're
    going to happen, and often they're happening because of market forces
    that were rooted in developments before we showed up. So I'm not
    impatient. We're just going to work together and work through these
    things and make the best of the situation and seize the opportunities
    that are out there.

    [[Page 266]]

    Administration Accomplishments

        Q. Speaker Gingrich gave a speech in Washington this morning. He
    said on ethics, he's a victim of a systematic smear campaign. He said,
    Democrats are the guys who smear mud, Republicans are the guys who pass
    legislation. [Laughter] Your reaction, please.

        The President. I think the laughs in the audience are a better
    reaction than anything I can say about that. I don't have any comment
    about that. We had--the record was largely lost, I think, on the public,
    but the fact is that in the previous 2 years, more constructive bills
    were passed in more areas to get more done than in any time in the
    previous 30 years.

        After 2 years of talking about what wasn't happening, I noticed in
    one of the news magazines a tiny chart after the elections were over
    that said, ``Oh, by the way, we neglected to say this before, but this
    was the third Congress since World War II that passed more than 80
    percent of a President's proposals in both years.'' So I think our
    record for passing laws is pretty good.

        And secondly--I mean, on the other deal, I hardly know what to say.
    I think that it would be better, since I hope we can work together to
    pass some laws that are good for the American people, it would be better
    if I didn't say too much about that.

    Canadian Unity

        Q. Prime Minister, could you tell us, please, if you think that
    anything that President Clinton has said during this trip has helped
    your cause of promoting national unity in Canada? And if I might also
    ask the President, when Lucien Bouchard said that he wanted to meet with
    you, he said that one of the things he hoped to achieve was to let you
    meet a separatist in flesh and blood. So what were your impressions of
    him, and do you feel he was a good ambassador of separatism?

        Prime Minister Chretien. I will reply first. You know, the President
    has stated the obvious, that Canada is a great example to the world. So
    there it is--it was a statement of fact. And I was very disappointed
    when you talk about the values of moderation and sharing and compassion
    and the ability to live together with our differences, that it could not
    be applied to the Bloc Quebecois because I know that the Quebecers share
    these values and they want--that it's very dear to them. That is my
    comment about what the President said. I was not present at the meeting
    between Mr. Bouchard and the President; that was another Chretien there.
    [Laughter]

        The President. My answer to you, sir, is that, as you know, I'm
    sure, whenever I go abroad as President, I meet with opposition leaders.
    I do that quite frequently in democratic parliamentary countries. I have
    very often done that.

        I met with Mr. Bouchard because he was the leader of the opposition.
    He happens to be a separatist, and he stated his case clearly and
    articulately. I think the people who agree with him would have been
    pleased with the clarity with which he expressed his position.

    Spending Cuts

        Q. Some of the Republicans on Capitol Hill who are involved in
    legislation about which you spoke say that, contrary to being cut, the
    child nutrition programs, about which you and members of your
    administration have spoken so strongly in recent days, that funding for
    those programs will actually be increased, though not at as great a rate
    as had previously been anticipated. In light of that, sir, I wonder if
    you might think that ``war on children,'' and some of the other phrases
    have been perhaps a bit extreme?

        The President. Well, it's my understanding, Brit [Brit Hume, ABC
    News], that they wanted to block-grant the School Lunch Program and
    therefore flat-fund it for 5 years. If that's not what they want to do
    then I'll--then I need to know what the facts are. My understanding is
    that they wanted to flat-fund it. And my understanding is that in their
    rescission package, they have proposed to reduce funding already
    approved for WIC. They proposed, it's my understanding, to eliminate the
    summer jobs for children, which will make our streets a little steamier
    in the summer for the next 2 years, and to do a number of other things
    that are cuts from the budget that is already approved. If I'm wrong
    about that, then I'm wrong. But I don't believe I am wrong; I believe
    that's what they want to do.

        Prime Minister Chretien. Merci beaucoup. Thank you very much.

    [[Page 267]]

    Note: The President's 86th news conference began at 12 p.m. in the
    Reading Room at the Parliament. In his remarks, he referred to Lucien
    Bouchard, leader of the separatist Bloc Quebecois in the Canadian
    Parliament.