    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1996, Book I)]
    [February 16, 1996]
    [Pages 272-274]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    Exchange With Reporters During a Tour of Flood Damage in
    Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania
    February 16, 1996

    Republican Debate

        Q. Mr. President, did you have a change to see the Republican debate
    last night?
        The President. No.
        Q. Have you heard about it?
        The President. No--I mean, no more than I saw in the press this
    morning.

    Federal Reserve Board

        Q. Do you think you were a little too tough on the Fed last night?
        The President. No. Well, let me clarify something about that. I
    think the Fed and Mr. Greenspan, particularly, have done a very good job
    in responding first of all to the actions that were taken by the
    Congress in adopting an economic program in '93. They brought the
    interest rates way down; we got the economic growth going. We have had
    now--this expansionary period has gone on for a long time. But under the
    conditions of the present economy, with the competition we have in the
    global economy and with all this new improvement coming from technology,
    the growth levels are enough to create a lot of jobs and get
    unemployment down but not enough to get incomes up and to bring jobs
    into a lot of the isolated areas in the country.
        The point I was making last night is that there is now a debate, a
    serious debate in the country about whether there is a maximum growth
    rate we can have over any period of years without inflation. The
    conventional wisdom is that it was about 2.5 percent--that's from 1970
    to 1995; that's what we averaged.
        There are a lot of people, including a lot of Republican executives
    in the manufacturing sector, who believe that global competition will
    keep down inflation and that higher productivity, driven by technology
    and Americans working more effectively, will permit higher growth rates
    in the next 10 years than in the last 25.
        What I was trying to do with trying to have Mr. Greenspan and Mr.
    Rohatyn on the Fed was to have that discussion in a nonpolitical
    context, that is, away from the Congress and the President and national
    politics so that we could honestly examine whether we could sustain,
    let's say, an average growth rate of 2.7 percent, 2.8 percent since
    we're all committed to bringing the deficit down and balancing the
    budget.

    [[Page 273]]

        If that could happen, our budget fight in Washington would go away,
    and we would be able to create more jobs in the inner cities and
    isolated rural areas, and we would be able to get incomes up; all these
    people that have been working for 10 years without a raise would be able
    to do that in a way that doesn't have anything to do with class warfare,
    nothing to do with redistributing the wealth. That's the point I was
    trying to make. And I think it is a mistake not to allow a distinguished
    person like that to be on the Fed and have that kind of debate.
        I do believe the Fed's done an excellent job of giving a sustained
    period of growth without inflation. This is just in the debate. No one
    knows the answer to this. It's a new era; no one knows the answer. I
    would like to see this debate carried out in the Federal Reserve and in
    the Congress and in the country so that we can find the right answer.

    Global Climate Change and Flooding

        Q. On the flooding, Mr. President, you've twice this week said that
    there's some suggestion that global warming has something--do you think
    the flooding this year is because of global warming?
        The President. I do not know. But I know this. I know there is a
    block of ice the size of the State of Rhode Island that broke off from
    Antarctica. I know that we have problems with fishing in the Pacific
    Northwest. I know that there is a pattern of more intense rainfall and
    snowfall in greater volume in shorter spurts than in past years. And I
    know that a lot of experts believe that this is tied to global warming,
    that even perversely, that the intensity this winter may have something
    to do with the upsetting of the normal patterns of the global climate.
        What I believe we need to do is, in the United States, is to
    continue making our contribution to the investigation of this, and we
    need to do everything we can to slow the phenomenon down. We need to do
    everything we can to support new technologies and new businesses, new
    endeavors that are designed to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases
    and to develop a clean car. We're working with the big three automakers
    on that, and we'll do whatever can be done to reduce the phenomenon.
        But I'm not an expert; I don't know that. But a lot of people--one
    of the major news magazines had a cover story on it, speculating that
    that was the case, and I think we need to keep looking at it.
        In the meanwhile, we need to do what we can to help protect the
    communities like this one from the adverse effects of unexpected high
    water marks. All the congressional delegation here and the mayor and the
    Governor pointed out that they have had on line a project in the Corps
    of Engineers for many, many years that we're now going to try to get
    funded and executed that would provide protection for this area in these
    sort of excessive rains. I heard the same thing out West in Oregon and
    Washington.
        So I think one of the things that we need to do back in Washington
    is take a hard look at the work schedule of the Corps of Engineers. You
    know, in the seventies and the eighties a lot of their work was slowed
    because--including in my State. I had reservations about some of the
    environmentally controversial projects that were being pushed.
        We are now dealing with repairing and strengthening existing
    networks of protection against floods in areas that Senator Specter
    pointed out have already been appropriated, and we need to really go
    back and make sure we've got the Corps on a clear schedule, and all of
    the people of the United States, like these people that are vulnerable,
    can get done what they need it to do.
        Q. Mr. President, does Rohatyn's fate affect your thinking on
    Greenspan's reappointment?

    [At this point, the President continued his tour. Later, he spoke again
    with journalists.]

        The President. You know, when it rains and floods out, when the
    water runs down the street, I can't tell whether a Democrat or a
    Republican lives in these houses. And I think we all feel that way. This
    is some support. I believe we will have to have--I told Senator Specter
    and Senator Santorum and Congressman Kanjorski today--I believe we will
    have to have some sort of supplemental appropriation in the Congress to
    deal with the damage here in Pennsylvania, in West Virginia and
    Maryland, and in the substantial losses in Washington, Oregon, and
    Idaho.
        When I get back to the White House this afternoon, we're going to
    sit down with the latest total damage estimates we have from the areas
    and then try to come up with how much

    [[Page 274]]

    we need and then go forward in the Congress with it.
        Q. Is there enough money to go around?
        The President. I believe there will be. I think, for example, every
    Member of Congress in California will vote for this because the Congress
    was good to them when they endured their earthquakes and their fires.
    And I believe every Member of Congress in the Middle West will vote for
    this because they had a 500-year flood on the Mississippi and its
    tributaries and these folks helped them. So I think it will be there.
        Thank you.

    Note: The exchange began at approximately 10:30 a.m. on Parker Street.
    In his remarks, the President referred to Federal Reserve Board Chairman
    Alan Greenspan and financial analyst Felix Rohatyn. A tape was not
    available for verification of the content of this exchange.