    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1995, Book II)]
    [August 1, 1995]
    [Pages 1186-1189]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    Remarks on Congressional Action on Appropriations Legislation and an
    Exchange With Reporters
    August 1, 1995

        The President. Good morning. Looking over the last few days, it is
    clear that this Congress is on the wrong track. I began the year hoping
    to make bipartisan progress on balancing the budget, on reducing
    paperwork, reforming regulation and welfare. And therefore, I was very
    pleased last week when a bipartisan majority voted to reject the extreme
    anti-environment provisions adopted in the House committee. That was the
    right thing to do.
        But then the lobbyists for the polluters went to work. They got the
    leadership of the House of Representatives to call the bill back up. And
    last night, in a remarkable exercise of special interest power, the
    House voted to gut environmental and public health protections. It was a
    stealth attack on our environment in the guise of a budget bill.
        The bill would effectively end Federal enforcement of the Clean
    Water Act and the Clean Air Act, a bill that my Republican predecessor
    said was his proudest legislative achievement. It allows poisons in our
    drinking water, raw sewage on our beaches, oil refineries to pollute,
    and limits a community's right to know what chemicals are toxic which
    are released in their neighborhoods. It would be bad for our children,
    our health, and our environment.
        This is Washington special interest politics at its most effective
    and at its worst. Even before the 17 special interest provisions were
    added, the bill had already dramatically undercut environmental
    protection by cutting environmental enforcement in half.
        You don't need to damage the environment to balance the budget. Our
    budget demonstrates that, and the budget the American people get out of
    this session of Congress ought to demonstrate that. In the past few
    days, a battalion of lobbyists has swarmed Capitol Hill, exerting
    enormous pressure to save these loopholes. I said I would use the power
    of my office to help people, not polluters. I believe we can protect the
    environment and grow the economy.
        So on this so-called environmental bill, my message to the American
    people should be very, very clear: Don't worry. We'll make commonsense
    reforms. But the minute this polluter's protection act hits my desk, I
    will veto it.
        One of the most interesting things that has achieved not too much
    notice in the last few days is that while Congress has been taking care
    of the special interests, it's also taking care of itself. It is way
    behind schedule on virtually every budget bill, in the hope, apparently,
    of enforcing a choice at the end of this fiscal year between shutting
    the Government down and adopting extreme budget cuts which will be bad
    for our country, bad for our economy, and bad for our future.
    Apparently, they don't even plan on letting the American people see
    their planned Medicare cuts until the last possible minute. But one
    bill, wouldn't you know it, is right on schedule, the bill that funds
    the Congress, its staff, and its operations.
        I don't think Congress should take care of its own business before
    it takes care of the people's business. If the congressional leadership
    follows through on its plan to send me its own funding bill before it
    finishes work on the rest of the budget, I will be compelled to veto it.
        I want to work with Congress to pass a balanced budget that protects
    the health and the security of the American people, a balanced budget
    that strengthens our economy and raises the incomes of our people and
    the future prospects of our children. But we have to remember in order
    to do this that all the special interests have to be subordinated to the
    broader public interest. That is not happening now, but we

    [[Page 1187]]

    can still get things back on track. That's what I want to do, and I
    still ask, again, the Congress to work with me to do it.
        Helen [Helen Thomas, United Press International].

    Opposition From Congress

        Q. Mr. President, your policies and your judgment calls appear to be
    under siege on Capitol Hill, Waco, Whitewater, Bosnia, social programs,
    and so forth. How debilitating has this been on you personally, on your
    administration, on the country? And obviously, you're whistling in the
    dark if you think you're going to have common ground.
        The President. I disagree. It's not been debilitating; it's been
    invigorating. And I wouldn't be so surprised. There are two significant
    things that--I would say big issues--that have become clear in the last
    few days. One is you can see who's in control in this Congress, who's in
    control of the people that compelled this unusual revolt on the
    environmental issues. You see the story on the NRA today: No gun control
    measures will be voted out of committee or on the floor of the House.
    I'm sure glad we got the Brady bill and the assault weapons ban first,
    and I still think we ought to have a ban on the cop-killer bullets. You
    see--we're investigating--this Congress is investigating the AARP and
    letting the NRA run one of its own investigations. So you see who's in
    control. That's the first thing you see.
        The second thing you see is more hopeful. There were, after all, 50
    Republicans who broke ranks in the House and said that they would put
    the environment ahead of party. Senator Dole yesterday said that--in
    Vermont at the Governors' conference--that he wanted to pass a welfare
    reform bill free of the extremist provisions which the members of his
    caucus, some of them, had demanded that he put on a welfare reform bill.
    And so we may be moving toward finding common ground in welfare reform.
        So you see two things. You see who's in control, and it's not good.
    You see some people feeling uncomfortable about it, and we may be able
    to make some progress. And so I don't think we know what the outcome
    will be.

    Waco Hearings

        Q. There's a report today that Mack McLarty said in a memo that
    there would be no significant action on Waco without White House
    approval. When did you know of the plan to tear-gas the compound, and
    did you personally approve it?
        The President. Mr. Mikva has said in the letter exactly what my role
    in that was, and it's consistent with what I've said all along. And I
    don't have anything new to add to that.

    Bosnia

        Q. Mr. President, have you made a final decision that there will be
    no retaliation for the shoot-down of Captain O'Grady? And if so, why
    not?
        The President. I have no comment on that.

    Political Reform Commission

        Q. Mr. President, speaking of special interests, do you feel that
    the Speaker is dragging his feet on the bipartisan campaign finance
    reform commission? And what else are you willing to do to make sure that
    that happens?
        The President. Dragging his feet is an apt, but inadequate,
    description of what has happened. [Laughter] I mean, we shook hands on
    that in New Hampshire. I thought it was a fairly simple deal. The man
    said--the gentleman who asked us the question, he said ``Why don't you
    guys do a base closing commission.'' We said okay. Five days later I
    wrote a letter to the Speaker. I didn't get an answer. Five weeks later,
    I wrote--I said, again, okay, here are two people that are the kind of
    people that I would put on this commission, and I'd like for them to get
    with someone you designate, and we'll set it up--Doris Kearns Goodwin
    and John Gardner. Those are pretty respectable Americans. So far, they
    have not gotten any response or had any success either.
        So we're going to keep trying. I mean, I think that it is wrong to
    say you're going to do something and not do it. So I hope we can do it.
        Q. Have you met with them--have you met with the two of them
    already, Goodwin and----
        The President. I have not, but we've obviously been in touch with
    them. And we're trying to--we're going to keep pushing until we get an
    answer one way or the other. If the Speaker does not want to do this, he
    ought to say that he has no intention of doing it. But we shouldn't just
    let it hang out here. What we ought to do is to do it.

    [[Page 1188]]

    Whitewater Hearings

        Q. Mr. President, is there anything you or the First Lady could do
    to end all of the hearings on the continuing interest in the Whitewater
    business, especially in the aftermath of the Vince Foster suicide? For
    example, there's a proposal in Newsweek magazine by Joe Klein that Mrs.
    Clinton volunteer to testify before the committees to explain her role.
        The President. I don't know what in the world we could do. I mean
    there's basically been this big--you know, I don't have anything new to
    add. We've answered all the questions. There has been a $3.6 million RTC
    investigation which basically says that what we said was there all the
    time. You know, no one questions--no serious person questions all the
    reports on whether Vince Foster committed suicide or not. I don't know
    what to do. I think these hearings will proceed and our people will
    cooperate, and we'll just see what happens.
        Yes, Bill [Bill Plante, CBS News].

    Bosnia

        Q. Mr. President, we know that you just met with the leadership to
    try and make your veto of the Bosnia arms embargo lifting stick. But in
    the event that it doesn't, and not knowing as we speak what the size of
    the margin is going to be, what's the next step? What else would you
    look to do?
        The President. Well, whatever the vote is, we still might sustain a
    veto. But I was encouraged by a few people who told me that they had
    decided on reflection that it was not the thing to do now. The Rapid
    Reaction Force, after all, is showing some strength there. And I would
    remind you that the only thing that has ever worked in the last 2\1/2\
    years is when the Bosnian Serbs thought the United Nations would permit
    NATO and the Americans who are working with NATO to use air power to
    stop the aggression so that there would have to be a negotiated
    settlement. And in the last several days, the last couple of weeks in
    Gorazde, you know, we've gotten five convoys through; there has been no
    assault on it.
        And I think that this new strategy will work if we can hammer out a
    negotiated settlement and there's a new effort there. So I believe that
    is the best strategy. I've said it all along, and I haven't changed my
    position. I'm going to try to see that position prevail.

    Whitewater and Waco Hearings

        Q.  Mr. President, on both the ongoing hearings, Waco and
    Whitewater, are you convinced and can you say for the record that
    everything that is going to come out is out, vis-a-vis where you stand
    in the White House and your policy decisions on both?
        The President. As far as I know--we have not added anything new to
    what was already known, but as far as I know we have been totally
    forthcoming and have said everything there is to be said on it.

    Telecommunications Reform

        Q.  Mr. President, can you tell us, first of all, why you want to
    veto the telecommunications bill? I understand that you're concerned
    about concentration of media power. And in regard to that, can you
    comment on the merger yesterday between ABC and Walt Disney and the
    proposed merger that may happen today between CBS and Westinghouse and
    whether you see this concentration of power happening?
        The President. Well, I think first of all, you have to take--on
    these mergers, under our law and as a matter of economics, you have to
    take them case by case and analyze them. And all I know about the
    proposed mergers is what I read this morning when I woke up. So I can't
    comment on that.
        I do think it would be an error to set up a situation in the United
    States where one person could own half the television stations in the
    country or half of the media outlets. And we don't have a fairness
    doctrine anymore, and we don't have--particularly if we took the Federal
    Government out of--all the Federal agencies out of any kind of
    maintenance of competition or maintenance of competitive environment, by
    taking the Justice Department out of it, for example.
        I would remind you that we have the most successful
    telecommunications operations in the world partly because we have had
    the proper balance between a highly competitive environment and an
    openness to new forces and new technologies and new entries in it from
    all around the world.
        I want very badly to sign a telecommunications bill. We tried to
    pass one, this administration did, during the last session of Congress.
    One of the interest groups affected by this great drama that's unfolding
    in the telecommuni-

    [[Page 1189]]

    cations area prevented, through its supporters in the Senate, prevented
    the bill from passing in the last session of Congress. I hope we can get
    it, but we want to get it right.
        The Vice President has done a lot of work on this over the years. He
    and I have talked about this at great length. And we have negotiated in
    good faith with the Congress to try to get it right. We want very much
    to sign a bill. We believe it will be good for the American economy and
    good for the American consumers if it's the right kind of bill. So we'll
    keep working on it.
        Thank you.

    Note: The President spoke at 11:17 a.m. in the Briefing Room at the
    White House.