    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1998, Book I)]
    [April 9, 1998]
    [Pages 535-542]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    Remarks in a Roundtable Discussion on Tobacco in Carrollton, Kentucky
    April 9, 1998

        The President. Well, good morning, everybody. The first thing I'd
    like to do is thank Mr. Lyons for hosting us, and thank all of you for
    being here. I thank the members of the panel, and also I'd also like to
    thank Governor Patton and Senator Ford and Congressman Baesler
    for being here and riding down with me from the airport. And I thank
    Lieutenant Governor Henry, your State
    Auditor Edward Hatchett, Senate
    President Saunders, Senator Blevins, Speaker Richards. And I want
    to thank County Judge McMurry and Mayor
    Welty, who came to meet me as well. And again,
    I'd like to thank Melvin and Brett Lyons for hosting us here. And I thank all of you for being
    here on the panel.
        I know Secretary Glickman has already been
    down this way and been doing some work, but I'd like to make a few
    comments about where we are now in the evolution of this tobacco
    legislation. The first thing I'd like to do is to say a special word of
    appreciation to Wendell Ford. His work on
    the tobacco bill that's now moving through the Senate I think has been
    very valuable in trying to provide clear and certain protection to
    tobacco farmers, to warehouses, to communities without compromising our
    long-term goal of reducing teen smoking. And I really want to say that
    he's been talking to me about this for years. He and Congressman
    Baesler have done a very good job of pushing
    your interests there in a way that is consistent with what we're trying
    to do in reducing teen smoking.
        I also ought to say that while I'm here, Governor, I think it's only fitting that I begin these remarks by
    congratulating the University of Kentucky for winning the basketball
    tournament. As you know, Hillary and I were in Africa and I was getting
    up at amazing hours in the morning to watch these games. I had to watch
    the championship game on a tape, but that was really good.
        Let me also say to those of you who are here and to the many
    thousands of people outside this warehouse that are listening to us or
    will be watching this, I am well aware that the people who farm tobacco
    and who work in this whole area have difficult jobs. I know that it's
    family work, small farms, hand work, that there was a flood in '97 and,
    the year before, blue mold which made the work more difficult, and that
    there is a lot of uncertainty now among people in this community, as I
    saw up and down the road all the way in here.
        Last year, a settlement was announced between the tobacco companies
    and the State attorneys general to try to settle all their lawsuits with
    a set of agreements which would dramatically reduce teen smoking and
    provide some reimbursement to the State governments and to the Federal
    Government for the public health. But when that settlement was
    announced, there was absolutely nothing in there that would protect
    farmers in the event the overall volume of tobacco sales went down. And
    so, when I announced my reaction to their proposed settlement and what
    kind of legislation

    [[Page 536]]

    I would support in the Congress, I said that we had forgotten that and
    that tobacco farmers deserve protection and that I would not sign
    legislation that didn't have it in there. And I want to reaffirm that to
    you today.
        Yesterday, some tobacco executives indicated that they were going to
    withdraw from the discussions with the Congress about legislation, but,
    despite that, I want to tell you that I believe there's still a good
    chance we can get comprehensive legislation this year that will not
    leave the farmers behind. And again I want to say to them, we have no
    interest, whatever, in putting the tobacco companies out of business. I
    just want to get them out of the business of selling tobacco to
    children.
        And I think it's important--I think every American recognizes that
    the tobacco farmers have not done anything wrong. You grow a legal crop,
    you're not doing the marketing of the tobacco to children, and you're
    doing your part as citizens. So what I want to hear from you today is
    about what you have to say to me that you want me and every member of
    our administration, every Member of Congress, and the country to know
    about this issue and where we go.
        But let me just clearly state again what my concern is. We know that
    even though it's against the law in every State, 3,000 children a day
    start smoking and 1,000 of them will have their lives shortened because
    of it. That's my concern, overwhelmingly. But I do not want to do
    anything in dealing with that concern which will not honestly take
    account of the communities and the people and the families that are
    involved in tobacco farming.
        It seems to me that you have a big interest in actually seeing
    legislation enacted as soon as possible if it provides adequate
    protection for the farmers because then we'll be helping the children,
    which I know you all want to do anyway, and we'll be doing it under
    terms where you'll actually have some certainty there, where you'll
    actually know what is going to happen, and you'll feel some level of
    security. And if the structure of Senator Ford's proposal prevails, then it would, as I understand it,
    would be consistent with the wishes of over 97 percent of the farmers in
    this area which voted in the referendum that's required every 3 years to
    keep the tobacco program intact.
        So I've tried to get prepared, and I got an earful on the way down
    here, as I always do, from Wendell and
    Scotty and Paul,
    and I thank them for that. So I'd rather spend the rest of the time just
    listening to you. And I'd like to ask our host to open and maybe
    explain--keep in mind, you've got several members of the national press
    here, too, and they will be reporting this to the country as a whole.
    And maybe, Mr. Lyons, it would be helpful if
    you could just very briefly explain what goes on in this warehouse, as
    if none of us knew anything about it, and how that fits with the tobacco
    farmers and what your concerns are with the legislation now pending in
    Congress.
        There's a microphone. I think we can turn it up so you can speak
    into it. If you want to sit, you can; if you want to stand, you can. Do
    whatever makes you feel most comfortable.

    [Melvin Lyons, owner of the warehouse, thanked
    the President and gave a brief description of the warehouse and the
    process for moving tobacco from farms to manufacturers.]

        The President. I want to ask Mr. Kuegel to
    talk next, but I want to point out, and we'll get into it because this
    is one of the things that's important for the American people to
    understand why we need the kind of approach that Senator Ford has recommended, that Mr. Baesler has a bill on in the House of Representatives.
        You say that this will bring the farmers approximately $5,000 an
    acre.
        Mr. Lyons. Approximately.
        The President. And what will be the net income to the farmer out of
    that $5,000?
        Mr. Lyons. It would vary. Some people are
    more efficient than others--probably $2,000, $2,500.
        The President. Now, Mr. Kuegel, you're the
    president of the Burley Tobacco Growers Cooperative, and yet you've also
    been involved with the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. So why don't you
    just comment--and bring that microphone over closer to you--why don't
    you tell us a little bit about the economics of tobacco, what you're
    trying to do, and how you believe that we can vigorously pursue this
    Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids and protect the interests of people whom
    you are elected to represent.

    [Rod Kuegel described efforts to work with health
    groups to find common ground and described how Senator Ford's ``Leaf
    Act'' would advance agricultural and economic development

    [[Page 537]]

    in Carrollton and protect the farmers from the tobacco companies.]

        The President. And basically, it protects you by preserving the
    structure of the program you now have, so that when the co-op buys the
    tobacco, the farmers get the income immediately. The co-op holds the
    tobacco in storage until market conditions support the release of
    tobacco, its sale at an acceptable market price. Isn't that right?

    [Mr. Kuegel concurred with the President's
    summary and expressed concern about some of the other proposals in
    Congress.]

        The President. Well, based on what I understand--and I agree with
    you about that--I want to just make sure everyone understands this--the
    way the Ford bill works--and Wendell, if I
    make a mistake, pipe in here----
        Senator Ford. You can bet on it.
    [Laughter]
        The President. Poor, shy man. [Laughter]
        The bill offers an up-front, generous buy-out proposal to people who
    want to get out, and the assumption is that there will be some older
    people or others who want to get out, and that would, therefore, reduce
    the total number of producers. Then it keeps the program in place. Then,
    if at some future date the demand goes even below that, there are
    substantial transition payments and assistance payments offered to
    communities, warehouses, and farmers.
        And along the way, there are the kind of education and training
    benefits offered that we provide, for example, to people that are
    displaced when there are trade changes, changes in the American economy
    caused by trading flows that may benefit the overall economy but
    disadvantage people, so we owe them an extra bit of help to get started.
        And I think there are two points to make here to those who would be
    skeptical about the approach that is being advocated. The first and the
    most important one is the one you've already said: At least to date, no
    one has figured out how to tell a tobacco farmer with a straight face
    that you should produce another crop and we will facilitate you getting
    into alternative crop production. The average farm in Kentucky is how
    big? Four acres, five acres?
        Mr. Kuegel. Average tobacco production.
        The President. Tobacco production; not farm, but tobacco production.
    There is no known crop with the same income per acre. So if you were
    going to pay somebody to transition, one of the things you'd have to do
    is buy them all a whole lot more land. And I think that's a very
    important point to make.
        The second point that needs to be made is, if you dismantle this
    program, you would not end the production of tobacco. You would end the
    ability of all these family farmers to produce tobacco, and you would
    probably create a structure more like what you see in some parts of
    California, where the ultimate processor in California, food processor--
    in this case the processor would be the cigarette companies--would
    control the farming, and everybody would be a hired hand. And the income
    would all flow up except for a salary.
        Isn't that basically your conclusion of what would happen?
        Mr. Kuegel. I don't think there is any
    question that's what would happen. And it would be inevitable with
    Senator Lugar's bill if it does away with our tobacco program.
        The President. So I think it's very important for the Members of the
    Congress, the members of the press, and people out in the country to
    understand that we don't want to be guilty of the law of unintended
    consequences here. What we're trying to do is improve the public health,
    cut teen smoking, get enough money into this program to deal with some
    of the larger health consequences in our society that have already
    developed. But we need to think a long time before we break down the
    structure that you see from the Cincinnati airport--which is in
    Kentucky--all the way driving here. And I think it's very, very
    important because I think this is a not very well-understood point.
        I'd like to call on Amy Barkley next who is
    the director of the Coalition for Health and Agricultural Development
    and involves public advocates actually working with farmers to address
    both the health and the economic issues. Amy, would you like to say
    anything about what we're discussing here?

    [Ms. Barkley thanked the President and stated
    that health advocates had supported the tobacco program because they did
    not want tobacco farmers to become employees of tobacco companies. She
    said that while she was a firm supporter of stopping teen smoking, she
    believed both goals should be reconciled to protect both the health of
    our youth and the future of the tobacco farmer.]

    [[Page 538]]

        The President. Let me ask you a question that I didn't ask
    Rod, and maybe anybody can feel free to comment.
    One of the things that occurs to me is, if we allow this program to
    lapse--let's suppose we have some version of the McCain bill. Now, the
    fight is going on now in Washington with tobacco companies as they say
    that it raises a lot more money from them than we had estimated. They
    say it will raise the price of cigarettes even more than we had
    estimated. They say it will cut consumption more than we had estimated.
    Therefore, they say they will be at great risk, and it's inconsistent
    with the original agreement.
        And so we've got to work through all that. But one of the things
    that--the provisions for the tobacco farmers get almost no notice, but
    it occurs to me that if we were to abolish the program altogether, give
    everybody some sort of a cash payment for their allocation, and then
    just abolish the program, then what you think would happen I think would
    happen--first of all, that there would be no restrictions on production.
    And what I think would likely happen is there would be more tobacco
    grown at a lower price, which would make it uneconomical for you so the
    companies would take it over directly.
        But from the point of view of our public health objective, if more
    tobacco is grown at a lower price, that undermines our desire to make a
    pack of cigarettes high enough in price that it will be part of what
    discourages children from smoking.
        It seems to me that that's the public health angle here that someone
    like you, Amy--we need this highlighted from a public health point of
    view so that people in the vast, vast majority of our country that don't
    know anything about tobacco farming, don't have a dog in this hunt, and
    don't understand it, and don't want to make sure we're not doing
    something funny here, they need to understand that, ironically, if we
    dismantle this program, we might undermine the goals of reducing teen
    smoking.
        I'd like to call on Mattie Mack now to talk
    a little bit about this from the point of view of an individual farmer.
    She's had an interesting family history on her farm, and I think I'll
    let her tell it to you, especially since we've apparently gotten her a
    local reporter in here. I hope we have. [Laughter]

    [Ms. Mack stated that tobacco farmers should not
    be penalized because children smoke and suggested that parents must play
    a greater role in preventing their children from smoking. She described
    her life as a tobacco farmer, the economic struggles and benefits, and
    how she had raised her own 4 children and 38 foster children on the
    farm, concluding that tobacco had made some good things possible.]

        The President. You guys didn't oversell her. [Laughter] It was just
    like you said it would be.
        Let me call next on Karen Armstrong Cummings, because she's the managing director of the
    Commodity Growers Cooperative, which develops markets for family farm
    products. And they're interested in preserving the future of small
    farms.
        So how are we going to preserve the small farms and do something
    about teen smoking? What options are there?
        Could you give the microphone back, Rod?

    [Ms. Cummings described her
    participation in the Agriculture Department's National Commission on
    Small Farms, which developed over 140 recommendations to get USDA's
    policies focused on the family farm, and said that the tobacco program
    was essential to the continued existence of family farms in the
    Southeast.]

        The President. Thank you. This is really not exactly the time or
    place for this, but if you get beyond tobacco and you look at other
    small farm issues, the reason this program has worked for small farmers
    is that you've had--first of all, you've had an allocation system which
    keeps the price within some bonds, although it varies still quite a bit
    as all of you know, depending on weather conditions and other things.
        And because you've got this co-op system that really works to give
    the farmer cash money on the front end, even if the big tobacco
    companies, cigarette companies don't pay you right away, the co-op will.
    And I think we really need to look at this again. It's off the subject
    we're here to meet about today, but before I leave office in 2001, I
    really hope that we will have been able to set up an alternative
    framework of policies that will enable family farmers who live in places
    where this is not even an optional crop, where they've got to do
    something else, and where they're doing what most tobacco farmers do,
    they have some income from off

    [[Page 539]]

    the farm and some income from on the farm to be able to continue to do
    that.
        The whole theory behind this whole going to a completely free market
    in agriculture was that you would get more efficient production. But the
    truth is the family farmers that have been put out of business, by and
    large, have not been put out of business from inefficiency of
    production; they have been put out of business because they didn't have
    enough cash to stand the bad years. At least that is my belief. That is
    what I think based on my experience in a totally different agricultural
    environment.

    [Ms. Cummings stated that the whole
    issue of access to capital and the lending system needed to be reviewed,
    and noted that her organization recommended a Presidential commission to
    look at market concentrations in the agricultural sector.]

        The President. If you look at how you sell cattle or, especially,
    how increasingly hog operations are going and you compare that to how
    the tobacco co-op works as a buyer of last resort, so that the cash is
    transferred to the farmer immediately and someone else basically is
    holding the crop until it can be sold and paying the price of holding
    the crop--I mean, it gives you some idea of what--it would be good if we
    could figure out a way to do.
        Now, it's very different with live animals you still have to feed,
    you still have to--they don't warehouse too well, and you still have to
    feed them. So I don't--none of these issues are simple. If they were
    simple, we wouldn't have to worry about them. But I do think you made a
    good point.
        And I want to get back to the subject at hand, but I promise you
    I'll spend some time on this because it's very important to me to see
    that we don't lose every small farmer in America just because of the
    structure of the money economy, the finance economy, as opposed to the
    efficiency of the operation. I'm not interested in protecting any
    inefficient operators who can't compete, but I have seen enough crops
    come in now over the course of my life in enough different areas to
    believe that it's more the way the money economy is structured and the
    way the products are brought to market than the efficiency of the farmer
    that's changed the structure of farming.
        The reason you've got all these small farmers here is you've got the
    allocation, the limited production, and the cooperative buyer. I believe
    that.
        Mr. Sprague, do you want to go next? You're
    the president of the Kentucky Farm Bureau, and I understand you're a
    fifth generation farmer. And you have 3,000 acres of crop; that makes
    you a big tobacco farmer--it makes you a small rice farmer in Arkansas
    and a big tobacco farmer in Kentucky. [Laughter]

    [Bill Sprague stated that tobacco generated $1
    billion worth of income for Kentucky farmers and 3 or 4 times that much
    as it moved through the economy. He indicated that the present situation
    regarding tobacco created uncertainty in the whole tobacco industry and
    said that the Nation needed a policy at the national level that would
    give stability to the industry.]

        The President. Let me, if I could--and I would invite--I know I've
    got two more panelists I want to call on, and I would invite any of you
    to kick in. You have stated a sort of summary of where you are and where
    you think the farmers are so well, I think it might be worthwhile to go
    back to the beginning here.
        Let's remember how this whole thing came up. There were two things
    going on. First of all, the Federal Food and Drug Administration opened
    an inquiry and found, as a factual matter, that there was an effort made
    to market tobacco products to young people, that it was not only against
    the law but it was likely to become more addictive to them if kids
    started smoking when they were young rather than if they started after
    they were adults when they might use it more in moderation and all that,
    and that the health consequences were considerable. That was the
    finding.
        Simultaneously, they had a number of States that filed suits against
    the tobacco companies, claiming that they had marketed cigarettes to
    children in violation of the law all these years, and that that had led
    to not only injury to the individuals, but vast costs to the States
    through their medical programs. And then there were the private
    lawsuits, the people that got lung cancer and all.
        And all these things came together, and the tobacco companies and
    basically the State attorneys general and the representatives of the
    private plaintiffs came up with their proposed settlement in which they
    agreed, among other things, to pay more money to defray some of the
    health care costs, to run up the price of

    [[Page 540]]

    cigarettes some to make it less attractive, and to reduce--change their
    advertising practices.
        But in order to get all that done comprehensively, they had to pass
    a bill through Congress, because they also have to deal with the Federal
    Food and Drug Administration program. So now we're in a situation where,
    as you pointed out, there are lots of different agendas here and lots of
    different things going on.
        I do believe, however, that there is a bipartisan majority of people
    in the Congress in both Houses, in both parties, who honestly just want
    to do as much as they reasonably can to reduce smoking by young people
    as quickly as they reasonably can, in a way that does not put the
    tobacco companies out of business and, even more important to most of
    us, is not really unduly unfair to you.
        So what you're saying to me is that right now the uncertainty is the
    worse enemy you have and what we need is to get this thing done in
    Congress this year, do it in a way that achieves our goal of driving
    down teen smoking as much as we can, as fast as we can, and let you know
    what the rules are.
        Now, let me ask you just specifically--I mean, I assume you believe
    this, but you didn't say it explicitly--it seems to me that the greatest
    balance of certainty for the farmers in our efforts to reduce teen
    smoking is in some version of what Senator Ford has proposed. That is, if you assume that--let's just
    assume that through whatever means the American Medical Association, for
    example, says that because there are so many kids out there more or less
    on their own, that the advertising has a bigger impact on inducing kids
    to start smoking even than peer pressure does. So if you assume all
    that, then it seems to me the best proposal is something like--something
    that would offer a buy-out that is generous and fair and adequate to
    people that want to get out because there is no easy substitution, as
    all of you have said.
        Then for all those that don't get out--because you assume that if
    all the kids start--if you cut teen smoking in half, then, within some
    number of years, the aggregate demand for tobacco in America will go
    down. So some people get out, and you pay them a legitimate price to get
    out; then the other people who are still in operate under a program that
    controls production and gives the family farmers a chance to survive.
    That's basically what Wendell wants to do.
        And in addition to that, since maybe there won't be enough people
    get out for the market reduction--we don't know that--it also provides a
    structure within which you get aid to warehouses, aid to communities,
    and aid to individuals for continuing education and training, as I've
    said, just the same way we would with people that are dislocated from
    trade. If we pass something like that, is that the best thing to do? I
    mean, is that basically what you would recommend that we do?

    [Mr. Sprague said that he believed so, but that
    about half the tobacco grown was for export and that efforts to reduce
    exports would be detrimental to farmers. He indicated he would like to
    see the exports continue.]

        The President. Okay. Marissa, would you
    like to talk a little bit about how you view this issue?

    [Marissa Vaught, whose grandmother died of
    cancer, expressed her opposition to youth smoking but said raising taxes
    on cigarettes would make it harder for people from Kentucky to put food
    on the table.]

        The President. What do you think the most effective--I should say
    that Marissa is, I think, a junior at Carroll
    County High School; is that right? What do you think the most effective
    thing we could do would be to reduce teen smoking? Let me just say,
    there are lots of people who think the most effective thing you could do
    is just make cigarettes a lot more expensive. There are other people who
    think the most effective thing you can do is to stop the cigarette
    companies from doing any advertising that could be specifically or extra
    appealing to young people. Then there are people who think that there is
    nothing you can do except to try to get the parents and the religious
    leaders and the community leaders to try to teach kids not to do it in
    the first place.
        What is your sense of what the most effective thing that we could do
    to discourage your peers from beginning to smoke?

    [Ms. Vaught suggested it would be helpful to
    show the positive side of not smoking, rather than to stress
    punishment.]

        The President. Do you believe that most teenagers actually do know
    and believe that it is dangerous?
        Ms. Vaught. I do believe that they
    actually do. But sometimes people really don't care.

    [[Page 541]]

        The President. When you're 16 you think you're going to live
    forever, don't you?
        Ms. Vaught. Exactly. They don't know----
        The President. I did. [Laughter]
        Ms. Vaught. ----that it's going to hit you. Consequences are hard,
    and they do come fast and slow. They think they're going to live
    forever, and I'm going to die anyway. But it's how you die that is
    important. I think that your health and safety is important, especially
    on teens.
        The President. So you think if we could--that's what Bill said. He
    said, if his daddy gave him $1,000 if he didn't smoke by the time he was
    21----
        Ms. Vaught. Yes, that's positive incentive.
        The President. So you think a positive--some sort of positive
    incentive program would be effective?
        Ms. Vaught. Exactly. I do think that. It
    worked for you, obviously. It works for teens.
        The President. Thank you.
        Dr. William Goatley is the pastor of the
    First Baptist Church in Eminence, Kentucky. I thought we ought to give
    him a chance to say whether he thinks the religious community should
    have any role in this whole issue.
        Doctor?

    [Dr. Goatley said that tobacco was a way of
    life, providing a livelihood for people in Kentucky, and that part of
    the solution had to be an alternative livelihood. He said the President
    should continue his crusade against youth smoking.]

        The President. Thank you very much. That was a very moving statement
    to me. No one knows exactly why, but, for whatever reason, we know that
    teen smoking has, in fact, been on the rise. And the overwhelming--I say
    again, we can't lose sight of the big issue; the overwhelming evidence
    is that 3,000 children begin to smoke every day, and 1,000 of them will
    have their life shortened because of it, and that the rest of us as
    taxpayers will pay enormously for them. But the most important cost is
    human, not economic.
        And the question is whether we can pursue a reasonable course to
    deal with that and deal with the human reality of the livelihood and the
    life and the structure of life that all these fine people have been
    talking around the table and have described today.
        I think the answer is yes. And as I said, I think, ironically,
    trying to preserve the structure will actually--since no one suggested
    tobacco is not a legal crop and that adults should not be free to buy
    it, that that is not a position advocated by anybody--nobody's
    advocating prohibition here--ironically, it seems to me, that our
    objectives in reducing teen smoking by making it both more expensive and
    less attractive in other ways, and dealing with the advertising is
    actually furthered by preserving this program because it will reduce
    production and keep the price up.
        If you abolish the program, you put a lot of these folks out of
    business, but you will not reduce production. You'll probably increase
    production, lower the price of tobacco and, therefore, make cigarettes
    cheaper, notwithstanding whatever we do with the tax or a voluntary
    payment or whatever we wind up calling it when Congress acts.
        So anyway, I thank you for that. Secretary Glickman, would you like to say anything?

    [Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman described
    his visits to Kentucky and efforts underway to deal with the situation,
    saying that he was considering economic development options rather than
    alternative crop programs as a significant part of the solution.]

        The President. Let me just make one other request of all of you. I
    will certainly try to do what you've asked me to do; that is, I'm going
    to do my dead-level best to get the legislation passed this year that
    will not only dramatically reduce teen smoking, but will provide some
    certainty to you and some legitimate protection for the tobacco farmers
    and the warehouses and their communities. So I will try to do that.
        But let me ask you to do something, because you've really piqued my
    interest here, both what our pastor said and what Marissa said, what you
    said, Bill, what you said, Mattie, about parents' responsibility. I have
    spent quite a bit of time with young people's groups, the youth
    organizations all over the country, from New York City to small towns in
    California, of young people who are organized to try to get their peers
    not to smoke and who also often go from store to store to store to test
    whether the sellers of cigarettes are actually even making modest
    efforts to do anything about it.

    [[Page 542]]

        And I respect that because I think it's wrong to put all the
    responsibility here on the manufacturers. It's not like these children
    and their parents and their families and their schools and their
    churches are just ciphers that have no will, have no knowledge, have no
    nothing. I mean, they get up every day and go through life, too. And I
    wish you would give some thought to--as a practical matter, I don't know
    that the Government could offer every 18-year-old $1,000 on their 18th
    birthday if they could prove they never smoked a cigarette, but there
    may be some other things we could do in the area of getting young people
    to assume more responsibility and providing some rewards and doing some
    things that we haven't thought.
        And Marissa, the other thing, we may not have been as creative about
    that whole element of this as we can be, and I'd be willing to think
    about that.
        Ms. Vaught. There is a teacher who talked
    to me about this, and he said maybe college scholarships for nonsmokers,
    maybe a non-smoking scholarship for students who happen to do well in
    school and are non-smokers.
        The President. We'll look at that. We'll figure out what the cost of
    that would be. You may be right; it may be cheaper than some of the
    other stuff we're doing. [Laughter] I'll do that, I'll look into that.
        You were great all of you. Thank you very much. Let's give them a
    hand. Weren't they great? [Applause] Very impressive. Thanks.

    Note: The discussion began at 11:08 a.m. at the Kentuckiana Warehouse.
    In his remarks, the President referred to Gov. Paul E. Patton and Lt.
    Gov. Stephen L. Henry of Kentucky; State Auditor Edward B. Hatchett,
    Jr.; Senator Larry Saunders, president, and Senator Walter Blevins, Jr.,
    president pro tempore, Kentucky Senate; Representative Jody Richards,
    speaker, Kentucky House of Representatives; Gene McMurry, Carroll County
    judge; Mayor Bill Welty of Carrollton; and Melvin and Brett Lyons,
    owners, Kentuckiana Warehouse.