    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: WILLIAM J. CLINTON (2000, Book I)]
    [February 25, 2000]
    [Pages 317-321]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    Remarks on Funding for Native American Programs and an Exchange With
    Reporters
    February 25, 2000

        The President. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I am delighted
    to be joined today by Senator Akaka and
    Senator Johnson; Sue Masten, the president of the National Congress of American
    Indians; Kelsey Begaye, the President of the
    Navajo Nation; and other distinguished tribal leaders from all across
    our country.
        I'd also like to thank a few Members of Congress who are not here
    today but who have been vital to our efforts to increase support for
    Native Americans: Senators Daschle,
    Domenici, Bingaman, Inouye, Nighthorse
    Campbell, and Dorgan; and Representatives Kildee,
    Kennedy, and Hayworth.
        Before I leave to give out the Baldrige Awards, I just want to say a
    few words about the importance of bringing the promise of prosperity to
    Indian country.
        Nearly four centuries ago, not far from where we stand today, the
    Powhatan Confederacy enjoyed a prosperous trading partnership with the
    newly settled European colonists. As our country grew, many tribes gave
    up their land, water, and mineral rights in exchange for peace, health
    care, and education from the National Government. They formed solemn and
    lasting pacts with our country, agreements the United States, to be
    charitable, has not always lived up to.
        While some of today's tribes have found success in our new economy,
    far too many have been caught in a cycle of poverty and unemployment.
    Too many have suffered from Government's failure to invest proper
    resources in education, infrastructure, and health care. The facts, of
    course, are all too familiar. American Indian unemployment remains
    unacceptably high, reaching 70 percent on some reservations. One-third
    of American Indians and Alaska natives still live in poverty and many
    lack decent health care. Indians are the victims of twice as many
    violent crimes as other Americans. Nearly half the roads and bridges on
    reservations are in serious disrepair. Many schools are crowded and
    crumbling. More than 80 percent of the people in Indian country are not
    connected to the Internet, and one-third of Indian children never finish
    high school.
        These facts are discouraging, but clearly not irreversible. That's
    because of something no statistic can measure accurately, the potential
    of the more than 2 million members of tribal nations in the United
    States. I am confident that with the right tools and the right support
    we can, together, bring new opportunity with new investment to Native
    Americans and to Indian reservations. That's something I made clear back
    in 1994, when I met with leaders from over 550 federally recognized
    tribes in our first government-to-government meeting here at the White
    House, and when I visited the Pine Ridge Reservation last summer. I want
    to make that even more clear today.
        We're in the midst of the longest, strongest period of economic
    growth in our history. There is no better time than now to make sure
    Indian country has the tools to succeed in the new economy. If not now,
    when will we ever step forward to bring the hope of a good job, decent
    health care, safe communities, quality education,

    [[Page 318]]

    and new technology to every corner of this Nation, from Penobscot,
    Maine, to Window Rock, Arizona?
        I was proud to announce in my State of the Union Address the single
    largest budget increase, nearly $1.2 billion, for new and existing
    programs that assist tribal nations. This bipartisan budget proposal
    includes funding to increase economic opportunity, health care,
    education, and law enforcement for Indian communities, in a cooperative
    effort with all agencies of our Government.
        One of the first steps must be to make sure American Indian children
    and children everywhere in America have the education they need to
    succeed. My budget more than doubles last year's funding to replace and
    repair schools on reservations and to address the growing digital divide
    with grants to tribal colleges for information and technology training.
        The information superhighway links people and communities across
    very great distances, but we can't abandon our old highways either. Our
    budget includes unprecedented funding to improve roads and bridges in
    Indian country. It also takes steps to strengthen tribal communities
    through improved public safety and health care. It increases funding for
    law enforcement officials and alcohol and substance abuse programs.
    Finally, it includes a 10 percent increase for the Indian Health
    Service, to expand access to high quality health care.
        Working with members of both parties, representatives from tribal
    communities, and leaders from the private sector, together we can pass
    this budget and give the people in Indian country the tools they need
    and deserve to succeed. These are important steps, and we have an
    historic opportunity to achieve them this year. I ask Congress to work
    with me to seize this vital opportunity.
        An old adage of the Sioux says, ``Each of us were created in these
    lands and from them will spring the future generations of our people.''
    We should all begin this new century by honoring our historic
    responsibility to the new generations of the first Americans.
        Thank you.

    Oil Prices

        Q. Mr. President, at least two OPEC nations seem to have decided
    that they're going to increase their oil output. I'm wondering if the
    United States put direct pressure on them, and why do you think they are
    doing this?
        The President. Well, I think that they're doing it because they
    believe it's in their long-term best interest. They don't want oil
    prices to go as low as they dipped at the bottom, not all that long ago,
    and we shouldn't either. But they know if oil prices are too high, one
    of two things will happen. Either they will provoke any economic
    downturn among their customers, and then the demand will fall off and
    the price will drop; or they will provoke more competition from non-OPEC
    members, and the supply will go up in ways they don't have control over.
    So I think that they would be making a sound decision to try to
    stabilize prices at a lower rate.
        Q. Was there diplomatic pressure put on them to do this from the
    United States?
        The President. I think--we are in constant contact with all the oil
    producers and all these other--as we are with other countries around the
    world. I wouldn't characterize it that way, however. I think this is a
    decision they will make on their own, based on what they believe is in
    their interest.

    Iraq

        Q. Are you easing the import restrictions on dual-use technology to
    Iraq, sir?
        The President. What we are reviewing is whether there is some way to
    continue our policy of meeting human needs without allowing Saddam
    Hussein to rearm. I think it's clear to
    everybody who has looked at the facts, however, that they're exporting
    about as much oil now as they were before the embargo was imposed. And
    any continued suffering from lack of food and medicine on the part of
    Iraqi children or the poor is the result of Saddam Hussein's policies,
    not this embargo.
        If you look at the difference in the health indicators of children
    in the north of Iraq where this program, the oil for food program, has
    been administered by the United Nations and in the rest of Iraq where
    it's been administered by Saddam Hussein,
    it's perfectly clear that he has increased the misery of his people and
    has blamed us for something that is no longer--clearly--clearly no
    longer attributable to the international community.

    [[Page 319]]

        Nonetheless, if there is a way to further free up resources for the
    overall health and development of the people of Iraq without doing
    anything that will make it easier for him to
    rearm in ways that will be damaging to his neighbors and to the
    stability of the region, we ought to be open to that. And we ought to be
    careful and constructive in listening to arguments about it.
        Yes, April [April Ryan, American Urban Radio Networks].

    Secret Service Promotions Lawsuit

        Q. Mr. President, what are your thoughts about the black Secret
    Service filing a suit against the Service in reference to promotions
    there, and especially in light of the fact that you supported the Secret
    Service officers that filed suit against Denny's several years ago?
        The President. I knew what the facts were there. This case has just
    been filed. There are a lot of members of racial and ethnic minorities
    who have done very well in the Secret Service, and I think that it's
    better not to comment on the merits of the case. I will say this--I try
    never to pass up a chance to say I think that it is a superb
    organization. They do a wonderful job. And we have been, my family and
    I, very well served by men and women in the Secret Service of all racial
    and ethnic backgrounds. And I think that, beyond that, I shouldn't
    comment because it's in litigation, and there are very specific facts
    that are alleged that it would be wrong to comment on. But I think the
    Secret Service has given a lot of different kinds of Americans a chance
    to serve, and they have done it superbly well there.
        Go ahead, John [John Roberts, CBS News].

    2000 Presidential Election

        Q. Mr. President, I know that you hate to talk politics, sir, and I
    don't mean to keep you here for a long time. And I realize that you
    don't want to influence the race, but we are about to go into a very
    important week here in the primary season. And I'm wondering, sir,
    without asking you to handicap the race, who do you see as being the
    stronger Republican candidate to go up against the eventual Democratic
    nominee in November?
        The President. Sounds like a handicap question to me. [Laughter]
        I'll give you a straight answer which won't sound straight. I don't
    think you can know now. I mean, what happens is, in national political
    life, one person begins and is in total control of the way he or she
    presents himself or herself and is hot as a firecracker. And then a
    fuller picture comes out, and maybe even an attack or two comes out, and
    then that person once again returns to the ranks of human beings, and
    people make more reasoned and seasoned judgments.
        And we're in a period where there's been a shift in that. But I
    think you have no way of knowing whether today's facts will be
    November's facts. So I don't think that--for our Democrats, my advice
    not only to the Vice President but for all
    of our people out there running is, run on what we believe in; run on
    what we've done; run on what you want to do. And don't worry about what
    the Republicans are doing. Just go out there and make your case to the
    American people, and don't worry about it, and time will take care of
    it. And then eventually these races, including the Presidency, will be
    joined. There will be two choices. There will be debates, and people
    will draw their own conclusions.
        But I don't think--I think it is utterly impossible on today's facts
    to answer the question that you've asked with any confidence, because
    look how different today's facts are than the facts 6 months ago. And 6
    months from now, they might be different again.
        John [John Palmer, NBC News].

    Situation in Chechnya

        Q. Mr. President, there were reports today of really some horrendous
    atrocities in Chechnya, allegedly carried out by the Russians. Does this
    give you even more concern than you've had in the past about Russian
    behavior there?
        The President. Well, of course it does. The reports are very
    troubling, and I think they again make the case for the right kind of
    unfettered access to Chechnya and to the people there by the appropriate
    international agencies.
        I think, you know, in every conflict of any duration, there are
    always excesses. I'm not excusing anything. I'm saying that if you look
    at the fact that this is the second incarnation in this decade of the
    conflict in Chechnya, if you look at the bitter feelings, the tensions
    there--and I think it is imperative for the Russians to allow the
    appropriate international agencies unfettered access to do the right
    inquiries, to

    [[Page 320]]

    find out what really went on, and to deal with it in an appropriate way.
    I think that these reports should increase the sense of conviction that
    people all over the world have about that.

    Permanent Normal Trade Relations With China

        Q. One quick question on China. Key Democrats are saying right now
    that the chances of getting your trade policies through Congress are not
    very good, rather bleak. And it comes at a time when China has been
    doing a lot of saber rattling and also has been telling, basically, the
    United States to mind its own business regarding Taiwan. Do you really
    think you can get those trade policies through in this environment?
        The President. Well, I think the environment is unfortunate, but I
    think you have to see those statements in terms of--in the context of
    the election in Taiwan for Presidency. I think that's what's going on
    here. Keep in mind, the United States has had now for two decades a
    ``one China'' policy that says we believe in one China, but we believe
    the differences between Taiwan and Beijing have to be resolved in a
    diplomatic manner, and we support a cross-strait dialog.
        So in the context of this season, the President of Taiwan announced
    that he thought they ought to start acting like there was not one China,
    that it was--that they should be state-to-state relations. Then the
    Chinese made some military maneuvers which raised questions. We said the
    same thing then we said in light of their statements here. But it would
    be a mistake for either side to abandon a policy that has served both
    well for the last 20 years.
        Now, having said that, in the absence of some destructive action, it
    would be a terrible mistake for the United States and for those who
    basically find this an uncomfortable vote to use this as an excuse to
    isolate China and almost guarantee the very things they say they're
    worried about.
        Look, this is an economic no-brainer. It's almost--it's amazing to
    me that anybody could say the contrary. China opens all their markets to
    us for reducing tariffs, allowing us to invest there, allowing us to
    open business there. In some areas, we no longer have to transfer
    technology. We get special rights outside the WTO if they bombard our
    markets unfairly with cheap products that forge a big surge and throw a
    lot of Americans out of business. We have special rights in this
    agreement to go against them, something most Members of Congress don't
    know. So it is clearly an economic plus.
        So the real issue is, from the point of view of national security,
    do you want them in the international system as responsible players, or
    do you want to say, ``We don't want you in the international system
    until you're governed exactly the way we think you should be and until
    you do exactly what we think you should. And until that time, we will
    keep you out, so there''? Now, based on all your knowledge of human
    nature, which do you think is more likely to produce constructive
    partnerships and constructive conduct on the part of the Chinese?
        All I can tell you is, I know this is an election year. I know that
    some Members are receiving pressure--in both parties, I might add. I
    think it is very interesting that most of the religious groups, for
    example, that have done missionary work in China and have seen the
    impact of religious persecution or the absence of religious liberty
    there--virtually all of them that have actually worked in China strongly
    favor China's coming into the WTO because they understand once there are
    millions and millions of Internet connections, once the Chinese are open
    to the world, once they are involved in an international system, the
    Government will be more likely to be responsible, and the people will be
    more likely to find their own freedom.
        And I believe that if we do not do this, that our country will be
    regretting this 5, 10, 15, 20 years from now. We will be shaking our
    heads saying, what in the world got ahold of our judgment in the year
    2000? If we do it, 10 years from now, we will marvel that it was ever
    even a hard debate. That's what I believe. And so I'm going to stick
    with it, and I believe we'll make it.
        Now, the statement on Taiwan may get harder, but you have to see it
    in the context of the electoral politics playing out in Taiwan and not
    necessarily assume that some destructive action will follow--just as I
    saw the Taiwanese provocative comments in the context of the Taiwanese
    elections.
        Thank you. Thank you all very much.

    Note: The President spoke at 1:17 p.m. on the South Grounds at the White
    House. Following his remarks, he went to the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel
    for the presentation of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards.
    However, a fire in the hotel at the beginning of the President's

    [[Page 321]]

    remarks there prevented him from completing his planned participation in
    the awards ceremony.