    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1997, Book II)]
    [October 6, 1997]
    [Pages 1301-1303]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    Remarks on Signing Line Item Vetoes of the Military Construction
    Appropriations Act, 1998, and an Exchange With Reporters
    October 6, 1997

        The President. Good afternoon. Today we take another step on the
    long journey to bring fiscal discipline to Washington. Over the past
    4\1/2\ years, we've worked hard to cut the deficit and to ensure that
    our tax dollars are used wisely, carefully and effectively. We have
    reduced the deficit by 85 percent even before the balanced budget
    legislation passed. The balanced budget I signed into law this summer
    will extend our fiscal discipline well into the next century, keeping
    our economy strong.
        But to follow through on the balanced budget, Government must
    continue to live within its means, within the framework established in
    the agreement. The line item veto, which all Presidents of both parties
    had sought for more than a century, gives the President a vital new tool
    to ensure that our tax dollars are well spent, to stand up for the
    national interests over narrow interests.
        Six days ago, I signed into law the Military Construction
    Appropriations Act, a $9.2 billion measure that is vital to our national
    defense. Today I'm using the line item veto to cancel 38 projects
    inserted into that bill by the Congress that were not requested by the
    military, cannot make a contribution to our national defense in the
    coming year, and will not immediately benefit the quality of life and
    well-being of our men and women in uniform. The use of the line item
    veto saves the taxpayers nearly $290 million and makes clear that the
    old rules have, in fact, changed.
        I want to stress that I have retained most of the projects that were
    added by Congress to my own spending request. Congress plays a vital
    role in this process, and its judgment is entitled to respect and
    deference. Many of the projects I have chosen to cancel have merit, but
    should be considered in the future. This is simply the wrong time.
        The projects I have canceled are all over the country, in the
    districts of lawmakers of both parties. These are tough calls involving
    real money and hard choices. I canceled the projects that met three
    neutral and objective criteria:
        First, the Department of Defense concluded that these projects were
    not a priority at this time, after conducting its own rigorous, massive
    planning process. Judgments about our defense needs made by military
    professionals must continue to be the basis of our national defense
    budgeting.
        Second, the projects I am canceling do not make an immediate
    contribution to the housing, education, recreation, child care, health,
    or religious life of our men and women in uniform. Our fighting forces
    and their families make extraordinary sacrifices for us, and I have a
    longstanding commitment to improve their living conditions. I have,
    therefore, left untouched a number of extra projects not requested this
    year because they fulfill that commitment in enhancing the quality of
    life of our men and women in the service.
        Third, I am canceling projects that would not have been built in
    fiscal year 1998 in any event, projects where the Department of Defense
    has not yet even done design work. In short, whether they're meritorious
    or not, they will not be built in the coming year in any event.
        In canceling these projects, I was determined to do nothing that
    would undercut our national security. Every penny of our defense dollars
    should be used to maintain and improve the world's strongest system of
    national defense.
        Also, under the balanced budget, however, we have the added
    obligation, again I say, to ensure that taxpayer funds are expended
    wisely. The use of the line item veto here will ensure that we focus on
    those projects that will best secure our strength in the years to come.

    [[Page 1302]]

        Let me say finally that the work of protecting taxpayers in
    reforming the Government must continue. I will scrutinize the other
    appropriation bills, using appropriate criteria in each instance, and
    will exercise the line item veto when warranted. And I will continue to
    fight for bipartisan campaign finance reform.
        Tomorrow the Members of the Senate must decide: Will they move
    forward with a bipartisan campaign finance reform bill, or be derailed
    by a partisan poison pill? The American people will be watching. If they
    make the right choice, this can, indeed, be a banner week for reform in
    our Government.
        Thank you.
        Q. Mr. President----
        The President. John, [John Donvan, ABC News] let me just sign this,
    and then I'll come back to answer questions.

    [At this point, the President signed the message transmitting the line
    item vetoes.]

    Videotapes of White House Coffees

        Q. My question is about the videotapes that were released and your
    staff telling us that they really did not know about the existence of
    these tapes until this week. How could your staff not know about the
    existence of these tapes?
        The President. Oh, I think that probably they never discussed it
    with anybody in the White House Communications Agency. You'd have to ask
    them. But I can tell you, as soon as I became aware of it, I instructed
    them to be turned over to the appropriate committees as soon as
    possible.
        We have fully cooperated with these committees. We've given over
    100,000 pages of documents to the Senate committee alone, I believe. And
    we'll continue to do so. But I think you could just ask the people
    involved what happened, but my guess is that the White House
    Communications Agency just took some footage and that the rest of the
    staff was unaware of it or didn't think of it, and they didn't think
    about it either.
        So now you have it, and people can view it and draw their own
    conclusions.
        Q. Mr. President, are you disturbed by this belated discovery? Are
    you concerned? Have you asked what----
        The President. No, because I don't think there's any--I don't
    believe for a moment that any of the career military people in WHCA in
    any way deliberately didn't say anything about this. I think it was just
    an accident. And so I think that that would be my guess. And all I can
    tell you is, as soon as I found out about it late last week, I said,
    ``Get this out and let's go on.'' And you can view the tapes and draw
    your own conclusions.
        Q. The question isn't really whether the WHCA people tried to
    withhold them, but whether people like your Counsel and other officials
    involved who realized these videotapes existed didn't turn them over.
        The President. Oh, I'm sure that Mr. Ruff didn't do that. I talked
    to him--he called me as soon as he knew about it--or one of the
    assistant counsels came down----
        Q. When was that?
        The President. I think it was Thursday afternoon--came down and told
    me, and that's the first I knew about it. And I don't think they had
    known about it for very long. And I'm sure they took a little time to
    figure out exactly what was covered, how much they needed to do, and
    reviewed the materials, and then turned them over, which is what should
    have been done.

    Stand-Clark-Squillacote Espionage Case

        Q. Sir, are you concerned about the Soviet espionage arrests that
    happened in Virginia today, that date back to the cold war? And just how
    widespread is this problem, sir?
        The President. Well, let me say I have been briefed about it, and it
    appears to me that the law enforcement authorities have done their job
    in trying to uncover a problem. We'll have to wait and see. We can't
    presume people's guilt. But I think that the only responsible thing is
    for me to refer you to the Justice Department because they made those
    judgments.

    Assassination Attempt on Khaled Meshal

        Q. Mr. President, one other matter. On this apparently failed
    assassination attempt by Israeli agents in Jordan, what was your
    reaction to that? And are these not precisely the kinds of actions that
    serve to undermine confidence in the peace process?
        The President. Well, since the Government of Israel and the
    Government of Jordan have made no comment about this, I think it is
    inappropriate for me to make any comment. I will say this--you know the
    policy of the United States for our own conduct is, and has been

    [[Page 1303]]

    I believe for more than 20 years under Presidents of both parties, that
    we do not engage in assassinations. But I can make no comment on what
    others did or did not do when it has not been confirmed by either of the
    governments in question.
        Thank you.

    Note: The President spoke at 2:25 p.m. in the Oval Office at the White
    House. In his remarks, he referred to Kurt Alan Stand, James Michael
    Clark, and Theresa Marie Squillacote, who were accused of spying for
    East Germany in the 1970's and 1980's; and Hamas leader Khaled Meshal,
    who was attacked in Amman, Jordan, on September 25. The Military
    Construction Appropriations Act, 1998, H.R. 2016, approved September 30,
    was assigned Public Law No. 105-45.