[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 30, Number 16 (Monday, April 25, 1994)]
[Pages 836-849]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Interview on MTV's ``Enough is Enough'' Forum

April 19, 1994

    Tabitha Soren. Welcome to MTV's ``Enough is Enough'' Forum with the 
President of the United States, Bill Clinton. Joining the President is 
an audience of 200, 16- to 20-year-olds from here in DC and all over the 
country. Obviously, there are a lot of issues on the President's mind 
today, including some hard decisions on the U.S. role in Bosnia. But 
we've invited him here to talk about violence in America.
    Alison Steward. ``Enough is Enough'' is a comprehensive campaign put 
forth by MTV to explore the subject of violence, giving young people an 
outlet for their concerns and bringing them closer to the people who can 
bring about a change.
    ``Enough is Enough'' is also the cry of a generation of young people 
who, according to an MTV poll, specify violence as their number one 
concern, surpassing the economy and job opportunity.
    Ms. Soren. Despite the fact that violence is young people's number 
one anxiety, the country's crime rate has actually gone down in recent 
years. However, violent crime committed by young people has exploded. We 
are losing a whole generation to crime, to drugs, to lost hopes.
    Mr. President.
    The President. Thank you, Tabitha and Alison. Thank all of you for 
joining me, and I want to thank MTV for giving me a chance to keep my 
commitment to come back on the show, to talk about something I care a 
lot about: the rising tide of violence in America, especially among 
young people.
    As you heard, the crime rate overall in our country has pretty well 
leveled off, but it's still going up among young people. Young people 
are the principal perpetrators of violent crime; young people are also 
the principal victims of violent crime.
    You may have seen the public service announcement I did with a young 
teenager from here in Washington, Alicia Brown. And on the day we taped 
this announcement and then the day we announced it, she was on her way 
to the funeral of her sixth friend who had been felled by gun violence. 
It's a terrible problem.
    I want to talk today about what we can do about it together. In 
Washington, we're debating a crime bill that I care a lot about, which 
will put more police officers on the street, working with young people 
in their community; which will give a whole range of prevention programs 
that work a chance to work in every community, everything from after-
school programs to midnight basketball to jobs for young people. We are 
seeing that work in places, so that I know it will work if we can put it 
everywhere.
    But I have to tell you, no matter what we do with the laws, we have 
to have a change in behavior and attitude and feeling among young people 
all across this country, in every

[[Page 837]]

community in the country. And maybe we can talk a little about that 
today, too.
    I met a young man about a week ago, named Eddie Cutanda, from 
Boston, who was working with the Boston police in their community 
policing program. And he said, before he met these two men, he hated 
police officers. But he wanted me to know and he wanted the country to 
know that he did not represent a lost generation. He said of all of you, 
he said, ``We're not a lost generation, but sometimes I think there are 
a lot of adults who'd like to lose us, and we can't let that happen.''
    So, today, maybe together we can figure out what we can do about 
this awful problem and give you and your generation your future back.
    Ms. Soren. Okay, Mr. President, let's get down to it. We've got our 
first question over here. Tell us who you are and what your question for 
the President is.

Teen Suicide

[A 17-year-old participant discussed the feelings of hopelessness and 
despair many people in her generation experience and asked what can be 
done to help young people understand how important their lives are.]

    The President. Well, first of all, you asked a good question. Maybe 
the question you asked is the most important question. Suicide among 
young people, as you probably know, has doubled in the last 10 or 15 
years. And it reflects a larger problem of millions of young people who 
don't commit suicide.
    I think it is rooted in part in the fact that there are a lot of 
young folks who grow up never feeling that they're the most important 
person in the world to somebody. I know--there were times in my 
childhood when I had a difficult childhood, but I always knew I was the 
most important person in the world to my mother and that somehow 
together we would get through whatever we were going through.
    With so many kids growing up in difficult family circumstances, in 
violent neighborhoods where there's so much destructive things around, 
including drugs, my own opinion is that we have to really make an effort 
to reach children when they're very young but not to give up on them 
when they're adolescents and they're going through the toughest times of 
life, so that they always know that they matter.
    The other thing we've got to do is to somehow get out of this sort 
of instant emergency way we tend to look at life. I mean, we all have 
more information today, more access to information than any generation 
before us. You can turn on the television and see 50 channels in a lot 
of the communities where you live. We've got a lot of information, but 
we think everything happens right now. And the truth is, a lot of things 
take a long time to unfold; a lot of the meaning of life takes a long 
time to develop.
    And one of the things that I find--to go back to your comment about 
young gang members not expecting to live very long--is that I find a lot 
of young people think the future is what happens 30 minutes from now or 
3 days from now, instead of what happens 5 or 10 or 15 years from now. 
And somehow, the adults in this country--we have to find a way to help 
young people think in a hopeful way about 5 and 10 and 15 years from now 
and understand that there are sacrifices and tough times and 
disappointments that never go away in life. They never go away no matter 
how old you are and how much you get things together. But if you can 
keep your eye on the future, then suicide doesn't become an option 
because you know there can always be a better tomorrow.
    So those are the two things I think we have to do: Teach people 
they're the most--everybody needs to be the most important person in the 
world to somebody. And people need to think of the future in terms of 
the real future, what happens years from now, not what happens minutes 
or days from now.
    Ms. Soren. What's your question for the President?

Caning in Singapore

[A participant discussed the sentencing of an American student to be 
caned in Singapore and asked if a similar penal system that does not 
base itself on the strong belief in individual rights would be 
beneficial in the U.S. in combating crime.]

    The President. Well, that's not where I thought you were going with 
the question. Good for you.

[[Page 838]]

    Ms. Soren. He's obviously talking about the caning in Singapore.
    The President. Yes--the young man, Michael Fay, in Singapore. As you 
know, I have spoken out against his punishment for two reasons. One is, 
it's not entirely clear that his confession wasn't coerced from him. The 
second is that if he just were to serve 4 months in prison for what he 
did, that would be quite severe. But the caning may leave permanent 
scars, and some people who are caned, in the way they're caned, they go 
into shock. I mean, it's much more serious than it sounds. So, on the 
one hand, I don't approve of this punishment, particularly in this case.
    Now, having said that, a lot of the Asian societies that are doing 
very well now have low crime rates and high economic growth rates, 
partly because they have very coherent societies with strong units where 
the unit is more important than the individual, whether it's the family 
unit or the work unit or the community unit.
    My own view is that you can go to the extreme in either direction. 
And when we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical 
Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of 
individual freedom to Americans, it was assumed that the Americans who 
had that freedom would use it responsibly. That is, when we set up this 
country, abuse of people by Government was a big problem. So if you read 
the Constitution, it's rooted in the desire to limit the ability of--
Government's ability to mess with you, because that was a huge problem. 
It can still be a huge problem. But it assumed that people would 
basically be raised in coherent families, in coherent communities, and 
they would work for the common good, as well as for the individual 
welfare.
    What's happened in America today is too many people live in areas 
where there's no family structure, no community structure, and no work 
structure. And so there's a lot of irresponsibility. And so a lot of 
people say there's too much personal freedom. When personal freedom's 
being abused, you have to move to limit it. That's what we did in the 
announcement I made last weekend on the public housing projects, about 
how we're going to have weapon sweeps and more things like that to try 
to make people safer in their communities. So that's my answer to you. 
We can have--the more personal freedom a society has, the more personal 
responsibility a society needs and the more strength you need out of 
your institutions, family, community, and work.

[At this point, MTV took a commercial break.]

    Ms. Soren. Welcome back to MTV's ``Enough is Enough'' Forum with the 
President.
    Ms. Stewart. We punish more than any other nation. We produce more 
guns than any other nation, yet we have more violent crime than any 
other nation. What are our leaders doing about the situation? And will 
their newly proposed efforts trickle down to you and me?

[At this point, a videotape about proposed crime legislation was shown.]

    Ms. Soren. Obviously, there was a lot of information crammed into 
that package. But here's our first question.

Handgun Legislation

[A participant praised the Brady bill and asked what the President 
proposes to do about the flow of illegal guns into this country.]

    The President. Well, first, let's get that out--the Brady bill is 
working. It is true that you can still buy an illegal gun with cash in 
the streets. But it's also true that a lot of people with criminal 
backgrounds try to buy guns in regular gun stores, and now they're being 
checked. And it's really working to prevent the sale of guns to a lot of 
criminals. So it doesn't solve all the problems, but it helps.
    Now, in terms of stemming the flow of illegal guns into the country, 
we can do things that I have already done, for example, to ban the 
import of certain guns in the country. The big problem is the number of 
guns we have in the country already and what happens to them. They're 
already about 200 million guns in circulation. And there are still a lot 
of things that are legal that shouldn't be.

[[Page 839]]

    There is a horrible--I mean, to me--story on the cover of USA Today 
about people making automatic weapons in the United States saying, well, 
you know, if one of these automatic weapons gets taken out from under a 
bed and used by some kid illegally, it's not their problem.
    I think we should ban the--several kinds of semiautomatic assault 
weapons. I think we should pass the ban on handgun possession by minors, 
unless they're with an adult supervisor and using it for approved 
sporting purposes. I think we should go further in trying to regulate 
what these gun dealers do with these guns because they will--sometimes 
they put them in circulation in ways they know they're going to wind up 
in the hands of criminals. All these things we're moving to do now. Will 
it solve all the problems? No, it won't. Is it a step in the right 
direction? Yes, it is.
    And you cannot--one of reasons we've got the highest crime rate in 
the world and the highest murder rate is that we have more guns in the 
hands of more criminals and people who are likely to act in an impulsive 
manner. You can't--and there's no place else in the world where this 
would happen, where you'd have just people walking the streets better 
armed than the police. It's not right, and we've got to do something 
about it.
    Ms. Soren. Mr. President, we have a question over here.

[A participant asked why the President is spending money to make it 
difficult for law-abiding citizens to obtain guns legally when the money 
could be spent on enforcing criminal justice.]

    The President. Well, first, we are doing that. I mean, this plan of 
mine--you heard the young people commenting about debating whether 
100,000 more police officers will make a difference. It will make a 
difference. It will not only catch more criminals, it will prevent more 
crime. We know that when you have police walking the streets, knowing 
the families, knowing the kids in the neighborhood, making their 
presence felt, the crime rate goes down. We also know you catch more 
criminals more quickly. The crime bill actually puts more people in 
prison. So there are a lot of issues being dealt with there.
    But keep in mind the restrictions that are put on gun ownership in 
terms of having to have background checks and waiting periods to catch 
people with criminal records. One hundred percent of the criminals in 
this country do not buy their guns off street corners. A lot of them buy 
them through gun stores, and we're going to catch those now. So it's 
worth doing. It's worth a little bit of sacrifice on the part of law-
abiding gun owners to do that.

[At this point, MTV took a commercial break.]

    Ms. Stewart. Welcome back to MTV's ``Enough is Enough'' Forum with 
the President. We're talking about crime legislation, and Tabitha's with 
someone who has a question.

Crime Legislation

[A participant asked who the ``Three strikes and you're out'' proposal 
applies to, and how many people it will affect.]

    The President. Well, I hope only a small number of people. Let me 
answer your question in this way: First of all, a small percentage of 
the criminal population--of the criminal population--commits a large 
percentage of the truly violent crimes. A lot of those folks, they're 
``One strike and you're out''. You commit murder or rape or something 
else, you get a life sentence.
    The ``Three strikes and you're out'' bill is designed to deny parole 
to people who commit three violent crimes in a row where, by accident, 
the consequence was not as serious as it might have been. That is, no 
one died or the building didn't burn down or whatever, so the victims 
weren't hurt as badly. But this is a person who is plainly prone to do 
things that will cause life or serious bodily harm. So it will cover--
the reason that I recommend coverage--it doesn't cover drug offenders, 
for example. It covers people who do things that are designed to hurt 
people repeatedly, and they're just lucky that nobody has died, so they 
haven't gotten a life sentence. But if they do it three times, they 
still have to serve unless they are specifically commuted; they're not 
eligible for parole.
    Ms. Soren. So does that mean it ends up affecting about 200 to 300 
people a year?

[[Page 840]]

    The President. It wouldn't affect many people. But as I said, we 
know that a small percentage of the people are serious repeat offenders. 
A small percentage of the criminals are serious repeat offenders. And if 
this is drawn right, it will make us safer at relatively lower costs. A 
lot of people go to jail when they ought to do something else, go to a 
boot camp, be in some alternative sentencing. Arguably, we have too many 
of certain kinds of offenders in jail, but there are some people who get 
out too quickly, like that man that kidnaped and killed Polly Klaas, for 
example.
    Ms. Soren. ``Three strikes and you're out'' is so popular, but a lot 
of critics say that perhaps the jails will fill up with 60-, 70-year-old 
men and women past their crime-producing life. Do you think that's 
smart?
    The President. Well, it could happen, but let me say that in many 
States today--in my State, for example, where I'm from, if you get a 
life sentence you can't get out unless you get parole commuted by the 
Governor, anyway. So about 10 percent of our prison population are 
people on life sentences. It is rare for people over 70 to commit those 
serious crimes. It sometimes happens. If they are clearly not a danger 
to society, they ought to be able to make their case and get their 
sentence commuted.
    Ms. Stewart. Mr. President, we have a question up here.

[A participant asked how the President proposes to prevent violent crime 
in communities where children think violence is the only way to solve 
problems.]

    The President. Perhaps the best thing about this crime bill from 
that point of view is that this is the first crime bill in my lifetime 
that--as far as I know, anyway--that has a huge amount of money 
allocated to crime prevention, to programs that work in the 
neighborhoods, for example, before and after school programs, programs 
to keep young people active, programs to give young people jobs in the 
summertime or after school, programs to give people something to say yes 
to, not just tell them something to say no to.
    There's also a huge amount of money in this crime bill for drug and 
alcohol education and prevention, as well as treatment. And there's some 
money in there that can be--for example, suppose in your community 
you've got an innovative project that you want to try. Under this crime 
bill, the States and the localities will be able to have the flexibility 
to try some things that they know work and expand them.
    One other thing I want to say--just to put a plug in because it 
hadn't come up yet--I believe that a lot of the violence that happens 
among young people your age and younger, where people just pull out 
knives or guns and shoot each other because they've been fighting over 
something--I think people can be educated out of that. There's a lot of 
evidence that you can teach young people who grow up in tough 
environments that there are other ways to solve their problems other 
than shooting or cutting up each other or beating each other. And 
there's some money in this crime bill to do that in schools all across 
this country. I also think that's very, very important.
    Ms. Soren. Next question.

Prisons

[A participant asked if sending criminals who commit minor crimes to 
prison is effective and asked if the correctional system can be changed 
so that prisoners do not become better trained criminals while in jail.]

    The President. Well, first of all, you're echoing what was on one of 
the earlier film segments, that a lot of young people do not fear going 
to prison. A lot of them come out of prison just better trained 
criminals.
    I think there are two things that we have to focus on. First of all, 
if you do a crime, you've got to expect to either do some time or be 
punished for it. You can't stop the system of having consequences for 
destructive behavior. But I think there are two things we can do. Number 
one, there ought to be alternatives to prison for first-time nonviolent 
offenders. People ought to get a chance to do something else that 
connects them to the community and gives them the future. Number two, if 
young people do go to prison and they're going to be paroled, and most 
everybody does get paroled, then they shouldn't be paroled unless, in 
prison, there is a good program for alcohol and drug abuse preven- 

[[Page 841]]

tion, there is a good program for education and training, there's a good 
program, in other words, to prepare people to reenter society and be 
more successful, instead of just preparing them to do what they used to 
do, better.
    If all you do is go to the penitentiary and you deal with people who 
are tougher than you are, who are better fighters than you are, and you 
spend 2 hours a day in a weight room pumping iron, then when you get 
out, you're just prepared to do what you used to do better than you did 
before you got in. So we have to change the way people spend their time 
in prison, and we've got to divert as many first offenders as we can 
from prison the first time in community-based settings and boot camps 
and things like that.

Community Programs

[At this point, Ms. Stewart introduced a videotape on community programs 
designed to help children when they are small. A participant then asked 
how the President can discourage kids from becoming influenced by the 
high profits of drug dealing and pursuade them to join community 
programs designed to help them.]

    The President. Well, I think there are only two ways that a teenager 
who has a chance to make that kind of money won't do it. And maybe you 
need them both. One is that all the teenager's peers and family members 
and friends and everybody else needs to always say that this is wrong, 
and the teenager needs to believe it's wrong. Keep in mind, most of us 
obey the law most of the time not because we think we're going to get 
caught, but because we think it's wrong.
    The second thing is we need to do a better job of making people 
think there is a real price. When somebody gets into something like that 
for serious money, then we have to do what we can to cut it off. We have 
to try to be more effective on the law enforcement end, and not just 
with the people like the teenager but with the people that are supplying 
them with the dope and the money, the bigger people. And we've got to 
try to be better at that. And of course, we're trying to give ourselves 
some resources to do that better, too, in this crime bill.
    But I don't think it's very complicated. I think you either--if 
you're doing the wrong thing for money, you've either got to stop it 
because you think it's wrong or because you think you're going to get 
caught and you don't want to pay the price. And if you can't--if you 
don't have those two things, it's not very good.
    Now, let me make one other point. I think also there has to be more 
hope. I think the midnight basketball and all those things are great. I 
really support them. And funding for them is in our crime bill. But I 
also think there has to be a longer term hope, that maybe you won't have 
$1,500 in your pocket living a straight life tomorrow, but if you go 
back to school, you can get an education, and there will be a decent job 
and a good life for you over the long run and there will be more money 
at less risk with more happiness over the long run. Those are the things 
I think we have to do.
    Ms. Soren. What's your question for the President?

Community Center Funding

[A participant asked what funding is available to help her group start a 
community center in east Baltimore.]

    The President. First, there might be some funding through the 
Housing and Urban Development Department. And I would urge you to write 
Secretary Cisneros about that or give me something on it now. Secondly, 
your community, if they would support it, your local community could ask 
for funding through this crime bill prevention strategy to do it.
    I think it's very important. These community centers can make a huge 
difference, especially if the tenants support them, if the adults as 
well as the kids support them. But I think that you should be able to 
get some support for that from one of those two sources.
    Mayor Schmoke in Baltimore has been extremely active in the whole 
housing area. He's done some of the most innovative and impressive 
things in the country, and there may be, for all I know, some help the 
city government itself can give you. But if you'll give me your name and 
address at the end of the program, I'll see what I can do to help.

[[Page 842]]

    Q. Okay, thank you.
    Ms. Stewart. Okay, who are you, and what's your question for the 
President?

Television Violence

[A participant asked why the Attorney General and the Congress are 
focusing on TV violence when real violence has become such a problem.]

    The President. I don't know that the Attorney General and the 
Congress want a law--at least I don't think a majority of the Congress 
wants a law to limit what can be on television. But there is some 
evidence that the accumulated exposure to random violence over years and 
years and years by a generation of young people who watch far more 
television than their predecessors did has some effect on people's 
willingness to then go out and recreate what they've been exposed to on 
television.
    Now, I'm not against all violence in movies and TV. I thought--for 
example, I thought that movie ``Boyz N' the Hood'' was a great movie, 
because--it was a very violent movie, but it showed you the real--it was 
a true movie. I mean, it showed you what the horrible consequences to 
life and to family was of that kind of behavior.
    But I think what bothers people about television is not so much this 
or that or the other program but the overall impact of watching several 
hours a day every day and just one violent scene after another coming at 
you. If you start doing that when you're about 5 years old, by the time 
you're 15, 16, or 17, there may be a whole lot of messages in your mind 
that may make you more prone to be violent, again, if you don't have an 
off-setting influence from the family, the school, the church, the 
community, some other place. That is the concern. It is not that there 
are bad people doing the television or that one program or two, in and 
of themselves, can make a difference. The question is whether the 
overall impact of it makes young people more likely to be violent.
    Ms. Soren. Mr. President, our next question is over here.

Public Trust in Government

[A participant expressed the frustration and anger many young people 
feel toward the bureaucracy of Government and asked if the present 
administration will be able to keep its promises and make a difference.]

    The President. Well, all I can say is you just have to watch and 
see. Insofar as the Congress has worked with me, we've been able to do a 
large number of the things that I said I'd do when I ran for President. 
I came on MTV, and we talked about the motor voter bill; we signed it 
after years of not signing it. It took--for 7 years the Brady bill was 
hung up in Congress. When I became President, we passed it; we signed 
it. The national service bill was something I ran on, trying to get 
young people like you interested in community service and then allowing 
you, in return for that community service, to earn money against a 
college education. It was passed and signed.
    So we're able--we are making progress on the commitments I made to 
the American people in general and to the young people of this country. 
We redid the student loan program, so now you can pay a loan back--
college loan back as a percentage of your income. So I'm trying to do 
what I say I'll do. All I can tell you is--this is a general rule--
cynicism is a cop-out because once you become cynical and you say 
somebody else is not going to do something, that lets you off the hook. 
And in the end, we can only go forward if we believe in each other, 
until we understand we can't believe in each other anymore.
    So I would plead with you--it's a very fair question. You've got a 
lot of reasons to be disappointed. But we can make a difference if we 
work at it together. And neither you nor I will be able to do everything 
we want to do, but we can do a lot of the things we should do if we'll 
get to work on it.

Whitewater and Vietnam Draft

    Ms. Soren. Mr. President, you speak so passionately and directly 
about issues like violence and education. But why is it, when the issues 
pertain to you personally, like the draft or Whitewater, that people 
seem to get the idea that you're giving them less than a straight 
answer, even when you have nothing to hide?
    The President: Well, first of all, I think it's hard to know what 
the rules are; they

[[Page 843]]

keep raising the bar. Let me just give you a real answer to that. I was 
asked by the press and the Republicans to agree to a special counsel on 
Whitewater, right, even though there were--no one had accused me of 
doing anything wrong, and therefore, there was no ground, traditionally, 
to have a special counsel. Everybody said, prove your innocence. In a 
country where people are presumed innocent, the President isn't. You've 
got to go prove your innocence, even though no one's accused you of 
anything wrong. So I agreed. I said, okay, we'll have a special counsel.
    Then, in past special counsels, Presidents have resisted subpoenas, 
applied things like executive privilege. I cooperated entirely. And the 
Watergate special counsel said we were a big departure from the past; 
this administration has totally cooperated.
    The press keeps saying, ``Well, we said special counsel, but now we 
want to ask questions anyway. And you've got to have all the answers 
right now, and if you don't, you're not being forthcoming.'' Well, I 
couldn't remember everything I was asked. It's been a long time since 
you had somebody who's given you 17 years worth of tax returns, for 
example. But I don't think it's fair to say we haven't been candid.
    Now, maybe in the beginning I didn't want to just shut the 
Government down and just do Whitewater. And I still don't. But I have 
tried to be as honest as I could. I also, frankly, have questions. I 
don't think just because you become President that everything all of a 
sudden should be subject to answering.
    I disagree on the draft; I did my best to be candid. And that's 
another interesting thing, the person that made the draft charge against 
me was the person who changed his story. Not me, I didn't change mine; 
somebody else changed theirs.
    Ms. Soren. I think what angers young people about Whitewater is the 
fact that it seems like it's slowing down all of the other important 
issues that they want to get through.
    The President. I think that does bother you, but you shouldn't worry 
about that, at least not now, because the reason I agreed to have a 
special counsel look into it is so anybody who asks me a question, I can 
say, I'm going to give it all to the special counsel. If I did anything 
wrong, he'll find out--so that it wouldn't slow us down.
    And let me just say, this year already, we've signed a major 
education bill to try to improve public schools in America and set 
world-class standards for all our schools. We are proceeding at a very 
rapid rate on the crime bill. We are proceeding toward passing a budget 
at the most rapid rate in recent memory, which, if it passes, will lower 
the Government's deficit for 3 years in a row for the first time since 
Harry Truman was President. We are proceeding on health care reform. So 
we are moving ahead.
    So far, the work of the Congress has not been diverted, and the work 
of the Presidency has not been diverted. I know it may be hard--you 
can't tell, in other words, from the news coverage that, but that's the 
truth. And we're not going to let it be diverted if we can possibly help 
it.

Violence in Schools

[Ms. Stewart showed a videotape on guns at school. A participant then 
described the shooting of a teacher in his school and asked when funding 
would be available for metal detectors.]

    The President. In the crime bill there's about $300 million for safe 
schools. And the money will be given out to the schools that have a 
demonstrated need for it. So I would urge you to apply for the money.
    I don't know what all of your reaction to all this was, but I 
remember when we all started going through metal detectors to get on 
airplanes, a lot of people were upset. Now everybody just does it as a 
matter of course. I think until we get guns out of the hands of our 
young people, every school that needs it ought to have whatever security 
is needed to take care of that. You ought to be safe at school. Then 
you've got the problem of going to and from school. That's what the 
community policing is supposed to take care of. But I think every school 
that needs it ought to have this kind of security. People should be safe 
in the school, and they ought to know when they get there they're going 
to be safe.

[[Page 844]]

Bosnia

[Following a commercial break, a participant stated that she voted for 
the President because he indicated he would not let ethnic cleansing 
continue in Bosnia, and she expressed frustration with the current 
policy.]

    The President. Well, first of all, go back and talk about everything 
I said. I also said that the United States should not enter the war, a 
civil war, on the side of the Bosnian Government. I said that the United 
States should not put its troops there to get involved in what was a 
centuries-old conflict. But we should do, what we could to stop the 
fighting and to stop ethnic cleansing. So you have to tell the whole 
story; if you're going to give my campaign commitment, give the whole 
thing.
    I advocated having NATO's air power put at the service of the 
Bosnian Government to stop aggression by the Serbs and lifting the arms 
embargo. The United Nations was in Bosnia. Our United Nations allies, 
France and Britain, would not support lifting the arms embargo. It took 
me from the time I took office until August to get NATO committed to use 
their air power to try to stop the aggression; they did. Then, finally, 
we began to do that.
    Now look what's happened. In 15 months, which may seem like a long 
time, but is not such a long time, we now have finally relieved the 
siege of Sarajevo, and the Croatians and the Muslims have gotten 
together in an agreement. The Serbs are doing what they've always done; 
they're just trying to get as much land as they can for greater Serbia.
    We're doing what we can, but everything we do, we do through the 
United Nations or through NATO. I have never favored--I was explicit in 
the campaign--unilateral United States action. If we do that, if we go 
into Bosnia all by ourselves, say, ``We know what's right, nobody else 
does,'' then why should any other nation ever work with us through the 
United Nations? Why should the nations who don't agree with the embargo 
on Iraq that we imposed go along with it?
    So I think we have done the best we could with a very difficult 
situation when we don't have troops on the ground, and I don't think we 
should until we get a peace agreement. I also believe that American 
troops should participate in Bosnia in trying to enforce a peace 
agreement once one is achieved.

[Ms. Soren asked if the President would support expanded air strikes 
given recent events in Gorazde.]

    The President. Well, I'm working on that. I met for an hour and a 
half this morning; I'm going to work for the rest of the day. Then I'll 
have an announcement about what our policy will be later. But I can't 
announce it now.
    Ms. Soren. Not now? Okay. Thanks a lot.
    The President. I understand your frustration. Let me just say, I 
understand your frustration, but when I took office, the United Nations 
was already there. Their job was to try to provide humanitarian relief. 
Since I have been there, the U.S. took the lead in providing the longest 
humanitarian airlift in history, longer than the Berlin airlift after 
the Second World War. We pushed NATO to get more actively involved. We 
have been actively involved. We have made some progress.
    There is still a war on the ground. The Bosnian Government has a 
bigger army than the Serbs do, but the Serbs have the heavy artillery. 
We tried to take the heavy artillery away from Sarajevo. That has worked 
so far. But until they reach an agreement, both sides are still fighting 
on the ground. Yes, Gorazde has been attacked by the Serbs; the Bosnian 
Government's also made some military gains elsewhere.
    Do I think what the Serbs did was right? No, I don't. The United 
Nations recognized Bosnia. Should they have never imposed an arms 
embargo on them? I don't think they should have. But right now we are 
doing everything we can to bring an end to the war on terms that provide 
the Bosnian Muslims and the people who want to be part of a multiethnic 
state the best deal we can possibly get, given the circumstances as they 
exist. And that's the best we can do. The United States cannot go over 
there unilaterally, send its forces in, and start fighting on the side 
of the Bosnian Government. I don't think that is the right thing to do.

[[Page 845]]

Music and Violence

[A participant stated that her favorite rapper was Snoop Doggy Dogg and 
asked the President's opinion on gangsta rap.]

    The President. I don't know. I'm not dodging your--I just don't 
know. I read an article about Snoop Doggy Dogg. It is not exactly my 
music, you know; I don't necessarily know a lot about it. [Laughter] So 
I read an article about it, and I was interested in the--in the article 
that I read he talked about his life, you know, and the time he'd done. 
And the writer of the article talked about the whole idea behind gangsta 
rap was trying to dramatize how difficult life is for young people.
    So I guess the answer is, it depends on what the end of the song is. 
I mean, what is the purpose of it? Is it to make people understand and 
empathize with and try to do something about these terrible problems? Or 
is it to legitimize violence and criminal conduct and, ultimately, self-
defeating behavior? And for me to answer your question, I'd have to know 
the answer to that, and I just don't know enough to answer it.

Gun Exchange Programs

[A participant discussed the effectiveness of the gun exchange program 
and asked what national programs could be enacted to get guns off the 
streets.]

    The President. Well, actually we're looking at that. We're looking 
at what, if anything, we can do on a national basis to try to have a 
more effective handgun purchasing program or gathering program.
    I'm not so concerned that maybe some people buy them on the black 
market and make a little profit on them if the guns are actually 
destroyed and taken out of commission, and if then we have more control 
over the circumstances under which people buy the next gun. But you're 
talking about tens of millions of guns. We're talking about major 
numbers of guns. And it seems to me if we're going to do this 
effectively--and I think we ought to look at it--you have to know what 
happens to the guns when the government takes possession of them, 
whether it's a city or a State or the Federal Government, what happens 
to them then.
    I think there's a lot of merit in doing this, but it seems to me you 
have to melt down the guns, you've got to destroy the weapons in order 
for it to be worth the effort so you reduce the overall supply of black 
market guns.

Teen Violence

[A participant stated that she believed violence among teens was 
becoming something of a status symbol.]

    The President. You mean you think a lot of people do it because they 
think it's the thing to do now?
    Q. Yes.
    The President. I think there's something to that. But that's why I 
think it's so important that in the schools and wherever else young 
people can be found, there are real efforts to show people that it is 
not a status symbol, that it can ruin your life, that it can destroy 
somebody else's life, and that there are other more satisfactory ways to 
resolve your conflicts.
    I mean, there was just another story today about one student 
shooting another student over a girl they were both interested in. Well, 
you know, if you live long enough, that will happen to you several 
times; you can't start shooting people over that. But it happens all the 
time now.
    And I think that it's a terrible indictment of all of us, the adults 
in this country, that we haven't provided the kind of leadership to our 
young people to know that that is not the way to behave. And I think 
there are too many young people who just feel like they're out there on 
their own. How many of these films did we see where these young people 
say ``Our parents don't care about us. No grownups care about us. Nobody 
really cares about us?'' If you go back to that, people have to believe 
they're really important to somebody who really cares about them before 
that person can help to change their behavior. I really believe that. 
And I say we've got to--and that goes back to your question about the 
gangster rap. She asked the same question in a different way. I don't 
know. I just know we've got to demystify violence, and we've got to say 
it's a bad thing. It is not a good thing; it is a bad thing.

[[Page 846]]

Drugs and Crime

[Ms. Soren discussed drugs as a major cause of random violent crime, and 
a participant asked the President if he thought mandatory sentences for 
drug offenders were effective.]

    The President. I think the mandatory sentencing program has--of 
course, keep in mind, that's basically a Federal program, although New 
York also has a mandatory sentencing program. Some States have it, and 
some States don't. By and large, there have been a lot of problems with 
mandatory sentencing programs related to drugs because they tend to 
treat cases that are different, the same.
    The second thing I have to say is that there isn't enough drug 
treatment on demand. We know that appropriate drug treatment, if you 
also accompany it with something that a young person can do, works in 
more than half the cases. So I think what we need to do is to focus on 
having an appropriate level of punishment but also an appropriate 
alternative so people can move out of the life they're living. That's 
what I think.
    So the mandatory sentencing program, there have been problems with 
all of them, largely because they tend to treat cases that really are 
different, fundamentally the same.
    Now, on the other hand, if you listen to anybody talk, they'll also 
tell you a lot of people get parole without doing an appropriate amount 
of time. So the system is not as rational as it ought to be. And I do 
think there's some problems with the sentencing. I'd like to see some 
changes.
    Ms. Soren. Many politicians are afraid to back away from the 
mandatory minimum sentencing that started in the eighties because it 
would make them look soft on crime. But if your ``Three strikes and 
you're out'' becomes law, couldn't you repeal the mandatory minimums?
    The President. I think we could certainly change it some. Let me 
say, one of the things, though, that frustrates people when there were 
no guidelines is that people who were the same were treated wildly 
differently. That also makes--to go back to the young man's question--
this is the frustrating thing about--should there be sentencing 
guidelines or should there not be? When people who are different and 
their circumstances are different are treated the same, we all get mad, 
right? And we should. But when people who are the same in their offense 
and their degree of guilt are treated dramatically differently, we all 
get mad.
    So there is no perfect solution to this. But I will say again, what 
are the important things: crime prevention; when people get in trouble, 
do drug education and treatment, do education; and give people something 
to say yes to when they get out, because there will never be a fully 
perfect way of sentencing.
    Would I have the power to say, maybe we ought to take another look 
at this, with ``Three strikes and you're out,'' with my long support for 
the capital punishment? I think so. But there is no perfect answer to 
the sentencing problem when you have a crime problem as big as ours is. 
And the real thing you've got to do is focus on what happens to the 
people once they're in the prison, once they're in the boot camp. And 
more importantly, what can you do to keep people out of the system in 
the first place? What can we do to prevent this?

[A participant stated that she believed drug addicts should not be 
placed in prisons and asked if there should be more drug prevention and 
rehabilitation programs to help drug addicts.]

    The President. I agree with half of what you said. I think there 
should be more drug prevention programs, and I think they'd work, the 
drug education programs. I think there should be more drug treatment 
programs. But some of you, perhaps all of you know that my brother is a 
recovering drug addict who actually went to prison for 14 months. It is 
my opinion that if he hadn't been caught up in the criminal justice 
system, he probably would have died because his problem was so gross and 
so bad. And I think he would tell you the same thing if he were standing 
here with me.
    So I don't think it's inappropriate for people to do some time for 
violating serious crimes when they have a drug problem, and it may 
actually jerk them out of the life they're in and help to save their 
life. But I would say two things. Number one, you don't

[[Page 847]]

want to overdo the length of time they have to serve; if fundamentally 
they're not drug pushers, they're really drug users and abusers and 
addicts, you can overdo the length of time. And number two, you've got 
to have adequate drug treatment, as well as preparation for living a 
different life if you want a different kind of behavior coming out of 
the prison than you got going in. That, it seems to me, is the biggest 
problem.
    So a little time won't hurt people who are in the process of killing 
themselves anyway, if you make the most of them. But if you just send 
them to prison for a too-long sentence and you never do drug treatment 
and they get nothing when they come out, then you're right, it's self-
defeating.

[Following a commercial break, Ms. Soren conducted a poll of the 
audience to determine if they thought the Government's priority should 
be programs and education to prevent crime or punishment of criminals.]

    Ms. Stewart. Somewhat overwhelming for prevention in the room, 
President Clinton. Are you surprised by that at all?
    The President. No, because I think a lot of young people know others 
who have been to prison and haven't been deterred and because I think 
the problem seems so overwhelming. People know that you've got to change 
behavior, you have to change people from the inside out. You have to 
change community by community, school by school.
    My own belief is that we shouldn't make a choice, because the two 
things can work together. You can be tough, and you can be 
compassionate. You can be oriented toward prevention, but when somebody 
does something really horrible, you just can't walk away from it. You 
can't. So I think you have to do both.
    But one thing I'd like to say to all of you who are here--there is a 
limit to what the Government can do unless people are working at 
grassroots level. And everyone of you, if you really care about this, 
could make a contribution to making the problem better. Is there an 
organization in your school? Is there an organization in your community? 
If you believe in prevention, are you doing something to try to touch 
somebody else? Because most people have to be rescued one at a time, 
just the way they get lost, one at a time. And there will never be 
enough police officers; there will never be enough Government workers to 
do this. So I would just urge you--we had one young lady from Baltimore 
there who said she was going to work on setting up a community center. I 
think that there are things that you can do to give people something to 
say yes to that will make this prevention strategy work. And all the 
crime bill funds are basically just designed to give you the right, you 
and people like you all over America, to get together with people who 
care about this and do something about it in school after school and 
neighborhood after neighborhood.
    Ms. Soren. So even though there's approximately $16 billion for 
police and prisons, some of that money is preventative and treatment 
and----
    The President. In the House bill, I think, there is about $7 billion 
for prevention. There's a lot of money for prevention, much more than 
ever before from the Federal Government.
    Ms. Soren. One thing that we didn't get a chance to talk about, but 
there were a lot of questions about was the role of families in 
preventing violence. Can you legislate a better family? Can you----
    The President. No. No, but you can have pro-family policies. A lot 
of this violence occurs within the family. And you can have policies, 
for example, that don't push people into welfare. We lowered taxes for 
working people, one in six American families, for working people whose 
incomes are very low and who have children. We're trying to pass health 
care reform so people will never have to go on welfare just to get 
health care. We passed the family leave law, so when there are problems 
in the family, people can get off work and take a little time off work 
and tend to their problems with their children without losing their 
jobs.
    In other words, the Government can do things that say we want to 
support family. And with more and more single-parent families and with 
more parents having to work, even when their children are very young, we 
have to be thinking all the time about how we can do things to help 
people succeed as parents and as workers. And then, when fam- 

[[Page 848]]

ilies get in trouble, we need to work on how we can preserve the family, 
not just how we can deal with the kids after it falls apart.
    None of these things are easy, but frankly, if all of the families 
in this country were functional, we'd have less than half of the 
problems we've got today. I think all of you know that. We'd still have 
some problems, but we'd have less than half the problems we've got. And 
so we have to really keep that in mind.

[Following a commercial break, Ms. Soren invited participants to ask 
brief questions on any topic they choose.]

Popular Culture and Private Life

    Q. Mr. President, I'm curious to know how your meeting with Pearl 
Jam went.
    The President. It was great. [Laughter] My daughter was jealous that 
she wasn't in the White House that day.
    Q. Mr. President, do you speak any other languages?
    The President. I studied German in college, and I can still read it 
and understand it a little bit, but my speaking is way down.
    Q. Mr. President, I was wondering if you'd ever asked your daughter 
not to wear a specific piece of clothing to school.
    The President. No, I haven't, although we've had a lot of general 
conversations about clothing. [Laughter]
    Q. Mr. President, The world's dying to know, is it boxers or briefs? 
[Laughter]
    The President. Usually briefs. I can't believe she did that. 
[Laughter]
    Q. How do you feel about the Secret Service following you around 
everywhere you go?
    The President. It's hard sometimes. But they do a good job 
protecting me and my family. And it's their job, so I'm getting used to 
it. But it's hard.
    Ms. Soren. Do you keep a diary?
    The President. No. I try to collect my recollections on a periodic 
basis, but I don't keep a daily diary.
    Q. Mr. President, what was the best advice your mother ever gave 
you?
    The President. Never give up.
    Q. Mr. President, first of all, I want to say that I think you're 
great. Second of all, I want you to say, ``yes,'' ``no,'' or ``I don't 
know.'' Will you run in '96?
    The President. Probably. [Laughter]
    Q. Do you have a charity you contribute to regularly?
    The President. Yes, I do. We, my wife and I, contribute to a shelter 
for battered women and their children back home, regularly, and a number 
of other charities. We always give money to the Children's Defense Fund.
    Q. Mr. President, what's your idea of the perfect day?
    The President. A good book, a good game of golf, a long run, dinner 
with my wife and daughter, and movies with friends. You've got to stay 
up a long time to do all that. [Laughter]
    Q. What do you think about the Clinton jokes?
    The President. The what?
    Q. What do you think about the Clinton jokes?
    The President. Some are funny, and some aren't.

Presidential Nominations

    Q. Do you regret not giving Lani Guinier the chance to defend her 
views to the Senate?
    The President. Well, she defended them to a lot of individual 
Senators. The problem was we were facing a very divisive fight over an 
issue in which she and I had a fundamental disagreement, of which I was 
unaware at the time she was nominated. She might have been able to get 
confirmed, but based on what I was hearing from the Democrats, I doubt 
it. I think she's a very fine woman. She's one of the best civil rights 
lawyers in the country, and she's going to have a great career.
    Q. In light of Justice Blackmun's recent decision, what do you think 
the chances are that you will replace the vacant seat with a minority 
that will, in fact, represent the needs and the concerns of minorities 
like Thurgood Marshall once did?
    The President. Well, I'm going to try to make a good appointment, 
but I haven't made up my mind who to appoint yet. I think Justice 
Ginsberg, whom I appointed last time, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, will be 
terrific. And I will try to make--I hope when I'm done, you will think 
that all my Federal judge appointments not only are the most diverse

[[Page 849]]

but are the most excellent in American history. And we're on the way to 
having the most diverse and the most highly qualified appointments.
    Ms. Soren. Can you give us your short list?
    The President. I could, but I won't. [Laughter]

Popular Culture and Private Life

    Q. Mr. President, I was wondering, what is your favorite song, and 
do you think you could sing a little bit of it?
    The President. I have a lot of favorite songs, but I love the song 
that Ray Charles won the R&B Grammy for this year, ``A Song For You,'' a 
song written by Leon Russell. I don't know if you know it, it's an 
unbelievable song.
    Q. Would you sing----
    The President. No. [Laughter] ``Our love is in a place that has no 
space or time. I love you for my life. You are a friend of mine.'' Do 
you know the song? It's a wonderful song, but he sings it better than I 
do.
    Q. Do you support Howard Stern's candidacy for Governor of New York?
    The President. I support his right to run. [Laughter]
    Ms. Stewart. Do you have a favorite Biblical passage that means a 
lot to you?
    The President. ``Let us not grow weary in doing good, for in due 
season we shall reap if we do not lose heart.'' Galatians 6:9.
    Q. Mr. President, what's your favorite type of running shoe?
    The President. What did you say?
    Q. What's your favorite type of running shoe?
    The President. New Balance, and--I normally wear New Balance or 
Asics. I like them both. They're slightly different. I need some that a 
heavy guy can run in without falling. [Laughter]
    Q. What has been your toughest obstacle as President?
    The President. I think sort of the culture of Washington, a lot of 
partisanship and a lot of negativism and focus on process, who's in and 
out and who's up and down; instead of let's all get together, pull the 
American together, put the country first.

Admiral Frank Kelso

    Ms. Soren. Do you think Admiral Kelso should get all his stars when 
he retires, despite his role in the Tailhook scandal?
    The President. Based on the facts as I know them, I do. I believe 
that the evidence is not sufficiently compelling that he knew about it 
and that he was sufficiently culpable to deny him his stars. That's a 
very severe thing to do, and I don't believe the evidence warrants it. 
That's based on the Inspector General's report in the Pentagon.

Popular Culture and Private Life

    Q. Mr. President, who's your favorite jazz saxophonist?
    The President. Boy, that's tough. Probably Stan Getz.
    Q. Mr. President, how do you feel about your likeness on ``Beavis 
and Butthead?''
    The President. Sometimes I like it; sometimes I don't.
    Ms. Soren. We're about out of time. Thank you, Mr. President, for 
joining us today and continuing the dialog with young people.
    The President. Thank you.

Note: The interview began at 11:30 a.m. in the Kalorama Studio. In his 
remarks, he referred to entertainers Pearl Jam and Howard Stern, and 
Adm. Frank B. Kelso II, USN, Chief of Naval Operations. A portion of 
this interview could not be verified because the tape was incomplete.