[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 33, Number 42 (Monday, October 20, 1997)]
[Pages 1561-1566]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Exchange With Reporters Aboard Air Force One

October 13, 1997

Brazil-U.S. Relations

    Q. Are you going to get a bad reception in Brazil?
    The President. I don't think so. You know, historically, there have 
been strained relations between the United States and Brazil. I met with 
President Cardoso when he was President-elect at the Summit of the 
Americas, and of course he's been to see me. And we worked very hard on 
this. I think it will be a very good trip.

1996 Campaign Finance Inquiry

    Q. Janet Reno says she might want to interview you as the 
investigation goes on. Do you have any problem with that?
    The President. As I said before, I'll do anything that is necessary 
to get her and the Justice Department the information they need. I just 
want them to have the information they need and then be free to make the 
right decision.

White House Communications Agency Videotapes

    Q. Do you understand why she's mad, and have you done anything to 
try to prevent it from happening again?
    The President. Of course I do. You think she was mad; you should 
have been there when I heard about it.
    Q. So you were mad, too?
    The President. Of course, but I'm--first of all, I think Lanny 
Breuer was on television yesterday explaining what happened on the 
delayed notification. And, you know, I think he made a mistake--but he 
said that. And he's worked very hard at his job. And they're all--as you 
can imagine, they've got all this work that any White House Counsel 
would have and then all this to do. But I think it was a good thing that 
he and Mr. Ruff went on and explained the facts of what happened.
    And as far as WHCA is concerned, what they--I don't think they 
intended to mislead anybody. They've been working hard to try

to find all the information they've got. I think they've got a few more 
tapes which, as I understand it, won't surprise any of you that have been 
going to the fundraisers with me for the last years. They basically just--
as I understand it, that's what they are, they show events. And they're 
going to turn them over.

    Q.  [Inaudible]--any of these tapes of you directly soliciting or 
anything like that. You don't think----
    The President. Look at them. I think they're perfectly fine. But I 
want the committee to have them, the Justice Department to have them.
    WHCA tries to take a little snippet of everything that I'm involved 
in so they have it recorded for history. It's fine. I do want to make it 
clear that--as I understood the inference of the first--I was unaware of 
this because I never saw the request for information or the efforts to 
provide it. But I think Mike has made it clear that we never had any 
sort of secret taping system like was--the Kennedy or Nixon or Johnson 
administrations did. We've never done anything like that.
    Q. Mr. President, is Congress nitpicking with you--the committee 
nitpicking by wanting all this information and wanting names of people 
who handled the tapes and all these other, what seem minute details? Is 
that nitpicking?
    The President. We had given them 100,000 pieces of information 
before--the committee--and we'll give them whatever they need to do 
their job.
    But I think they'll find, for example, on handling the tapes--you 
know, all these WHCA people that I've dealt with, they're career 
servicepeople, they're not political. They're trying to do their job, as 
they see it, to get some video record of the things a President does. 
And they're doing their best to fully comply. They're career military 
people, not politicians, and for all I know they've never been involved 
in anything like this before. And I think they've done their best. 
They've worked like crazy to try to find out if they had anything else 
on file. And I think they're doing--I think the Senate and the House and 
the Justice Department will be satisfied that all those folks did their 
best.

[[Page 1562]]

Attorney General Janet Reno

    Q. Attorney General Reno has been under a lot of pressure from a lot 
of quarters. Having been a State attorney general, what kind of standard 
do you have for how an attorney general should handle this kind of a 
situation and deal with the----

    The President. There is one quarter from which there has been no 
pressure--ours. I have gone out of my way to have no conversation with 
her--about this or, frankly, anything else, which I'm not sure is so 
good, except I saw her at the event the other day, that we did the other 
day, that we did for the police officers, where we announced the trigger 
locks on handguns.

    I think the Republican attacks on her have been completely 
unwarranted. It's interesting--it would be hard to make a case that she 
was reluctant to follow this law. There are facts, there are standards, 
there are all kinds of procedures set out about how this law is supposed 
to operate. And she ought to be let alone to implement it.

    Q. When you say that it's been not so good that you haven't been 
able to always have contact with her, do you mean there have been times 
you would have reached out to her on some issue or some subject that you 
haven't because you were afraid about how it might be perceived?

    The President. I haven't even entertained it one way or the other. I 
just think that, at least until she finishes her complete review of this 
and makes a decision one way or the other, it's better if all the 
contacts be sort of in official channels unless some huge national 
emergency arises. You know, Mr. Ruff talks to the Justice Department all 
the time. I just want to make sure, particularly with all this 
unwarranted political talk in the air coming from other quarters, I just 
want to make sure that we don't compound it in any way, shape, or form. 
I think that these are legal judgments that have to be made on the basis 
of the facts, on the basis of what the practice is, and of course the 
law, all the things that are in that law. It's very explicitly set out, 
and so I think she should be left alone to do it. That's what I'm trying 
to do.

White House Communications Agency Videotapes

    Q. There is this one tape, in which a fellow who turned out to be 
a--says, ``James Riady sent me.'' And Republicans are trying to make a 
big deal out of that. What do you say about that?

Is there anything nefarious there?

    The President. That's the wealthy Asian who was a resident immigrant 
that gave the DNC a lot of money over a long period of time? Well, first 
of all, until the DNC decided to return his contributions, I was unaware 
that he had given and certainly how much he had given. But I don't think 
there is anything to be made of that. He was an Indonesian. He was a 
friend of James Riady, who--I have known James since the 1970's in 
Arkansas. So I draw no inference from that, and neither should anybody 
else.
    You know, I've already testified--discussed that, that the Riadys, 
when they came--James came to see me in the meeting that's been 
discussed. He basically said he supported my China policy and urged me 
to stick with it. That was it.
    As I've said repeatedly, a lot of other people, in a way that was 
totally appropriate, in discussing the Middle East with me or the 
expansion of NATO or the problems between Greece and Turkey, you know, 
have been much more explicit and specific in detail than saying, 
``Here's what I think we ought to do.'' That's part of the way a 
democracy works; people should express their opinions. I took no offense 
at it.
    Q. As you watch these tapes, these moments, the same kind of scene 
again and again, what goes through your mind? All the work that was 
involved? I mean, you seem to----
    The President. I haven't watched, so I don't know. But as I have 
said repeatedly, and I know that some of you have scoffed at me for 
saying it, the coffees in particular I found quite helpful, because they 
brought in all kinds of people from all over America and they just 
talked. Most of the times--I would say the vast majority of the times--
the issues raised by people at the coffees did not bear directly on 
their personal business activities. And I wish, I have said repeatedly, 
that we had at least a print reporter at all

[[Page 1563]]

these coffees so they would have been reported and there wouldn't have 
been any undue suspicion about it. It never occurred to me one way or 
another, because Presidents have meetings all the time without reporters 
there. But in this case--we still meet with groups of people, although 
not necessarily just political supporters. I think those kinds of things 
are good.
    But in terms of the fundraisers, when I see the films of those, it 
just reminds me of how hard we worked last year. And we knew we

were going to be outspent, and we just didn't want to be outspent too bad, 
so we did a lot of fundraisers.

1996 Campaign Finance Inquiry

    Q. Mr. President, Janet Reno, by Wednesday, has to make a decision 
about whether to proceed to the next stage of the investigation of the 
fundraising phone calls. Early reports say she won't go forward because 
there is no direct proof that you made phone calls. How do you feel 
facing that deadline and those reports?
    The President. I do not want to say anything that interferes with 
her decision in any way. I have no comment.
    Q. Are you saying uncategorically that you would speak to her if she 
wanted to interview in connection to that?
    The President. I think, first of all, it's up to them to decide--the 
task force, the Attorney General--whether they have the information from 
me they think they need. If they think they need more, as I have 
repeatedly said, I will do whatever I can to get them whatever 
information they think they need.
    Q. Including speaking to her?
    The President. If she wishes to interview me.

Brazil-U.S. Relations

    Q. Can I switch the subject? Back to Brazil, where do you think this 
American bashing is coming from? How do you account for it?
    The President. You mean, the recent press lately? Well, I don't 
know. There is some speculation that there were some problems with the 
advance team in Brasilia, something like that. Is that right? I don't 
know about that; I can't comment on it. But this is a rather challenging 
trip for the advance team because we have so many Members of Congress 
and so many Cabinet members. It's sort of a big group to move around.
    I hope that our people haven't done anything inappropriate. I know 
that that's something we worked very, very hard on. When I became 
President, I heard sort of generic criticisms that often the 
Presidential team--everywhere, I don't mean my predecessor, I mean just 
generically--sometimes they were thought to be a little overbearing. So 
we've done a lot of kind of training work on that topic, and we try not 
to do that.
    So I don't know anything about the facts; if we did anything we 
shouldn't have done, I'm sorry. But I can tell you this, the 
relationship that I hope that we have with Brazil is better than it's 
been in a very, very long time, maybe ever--but certainly in a long 
time. And the relationship we need to build with Brazil is critical to 
the future. If you go back to Ron Brown's list of 10 emerging nations, 
go back to anybody's analysis of which countries will really have a huge 
impact on the future, particularly for us in our backyard, Brazil is one 
of them and one of the leading potential candidates for a much larger 
role in the world in the 21st century. And I view that as a positive 
thing.
    I think it's an exciting, interesting place with a fabulous 
culture--great music. I was down here listening to my Brazilian music I 
brought along with me.
    Q. You brought some?
    The President. Oh, yes.
    Q. What did you bring?
    The President. I've got a lot of my old Antonio Carlos Jobim 
records. But I also have some newer records back at the house; I left 
some of them back.
    I feel basically quite positive. I think Cardoso has been an 
exceptional leader, defending Brazil's national interests, understanding 
its unique challenges, and trying to form a constructive partnership 
with us while building a MERCOSUR alliance and reaching out to other 
countries on the South American continent. So I feel very upbeat.
    But if there are a few scratches on the record that you hear as we 
go in, keep in mind, you have to see this against the background of the 
historic relationship between

[[Page 1564]]

the United States and Brazil, which was much more tense and conflicted 
than it is today.

Relevance of Trip to South America

    Q. Mr. President, for the average person back home,

what would you hope that he or she would draw from your experiences that 
you're having here in South America--the trip itself, your message?

    The President. Well, I would hope that the average person would 
think, number one, it's a good thing for America that these countries 
believe in democracy and free markets, because that means that it's less 
likely that we'll have the kind of difficulties we had 30 or 40 years--
actually going back to the beginning of the century in the Americas 
because of political upheavals, military dictatorships, things of that 
kind.
    Number two, I am convinced that there is an increasing determination 
among the South Americans to join us in a common fight against drug 
trafficking and crime, and that's important.
    Number three, I hope they will see through your reporting and the 
pictures you send back that there is an enormous amount of economic 
potential down here, and it's a great market for America's goods and 
services, and we ought to be selling more to these people. They have 
been very willing to buy our products. Seventy percent of our increase 
in trade in the last year has come from Canada to the tip of South 
America, and we need to do more. I hope that--and I hope all of you when 
you leave here will think that we made a better case for fast track just 
by being down here, just by seeing the enormous economic potential and 
how the Latin Americans can use things that we have to sell in ways that 
benefit us both.

Fast-Track Trading Authority

    Q. [Inaudible]--until now?
    The President. Well, I think there are a lot of reasons. But I think 
one problem is, there is a lot of residual over NAFTA. The people who 
were against NAFTA are against this. But in the case of NAFTA, you had 
Mexico on our border with 100 million people and a set of very specific 
terms in the trade agreement, so that there were a lot of winners as 
well as people who thought they were going to lose. So the scales of the 
debate were more evenly balanced. Plus the other consequences--the 
political consequences, the immigration consequences, the drug 
consequences, as well as the economic benefits, were all much more stark 
and immediate with Mexico and NAFTA.
    The fast-track vote is a process vote to give the President the 
power to present other trade agreements to the Congress. Two categories 
of them have generally been very popular with both Democrats and 
Republicans--that is, anything that expands global trade under the WTO, 
which is good for us because we're competitive; and sector-specific 
agreements, like the information technology agreement we negotiated 
which is going to create tens of thousands, maybe even a couple hundred 
thousands good American jobs in the next few years.
    The third category is where the controversy is. It would give 
Ambassador Barshefsky the ability to try to negotiate an agreement with 
other individual countries. Except here, the people who weren't for 
NAFTA or the people who think that it didn't work or the people who were 
worried about something else, they have their worries out there, but we 
don't yet have the specific benefits out there except in a conjecture, 
because I don't have an agreement. NAFTA was a specific agreement. So, 
in a way, the opposition can burn a little whiter heat and show a little 
more intensity. And I think that that's a difficult thing for us.
    I also think, in fairness to the Democrats, we have raised the 
issue--all of us, I'm not using the Presidential ``we''--our party put 
the question on the agenda, really, about the role that labor standards 
and environmental standards should have in the trade equation. And we're 
having an in-house debate about what the best way to do that is.
    You know, Senator Moynihan, for example, who's got a very strong 
pro-labor record at home and abroad and a very strong trade record, 
thinks that there shouldn't be trade sanctions applied for specific 
environmental or labor issues but we ought to be able to go at it in 
other ways. Mr. Gephardt believes we shouldn't have another trade 
agreement unless it contains trade sanctions for labor

[[Page 1565]]

and environmental reasons, or at least that we ought to try to negotiate 
that.
    What I tried to do is to leave most of our options open there so 
that I could get the best agreement I can. But knowing that, regardless, 
I'm not going to negotiate an agreement that I do not believe is in the 
best interest of the United States. Congress will be able to review it 
and decide whether it helps create jobs and a better future for us. And 
I think that engaging these countries will increase our ability to 
influence them as they try to raise labor standards and deal with 
environmental issues.
    The Venezuelans--we were talking--they understand that they can't 
preserve their democracy in a free market economy unless they try to 
strengthen the social compact. They've got to figure out a way for more 
people to do well, and they've got to figure out an intergenerational 
strategy that not only supports education for children but protects the 
environment.
    So I think that we're going in the right direction--the direction 
that the opponents of fast track want to go in, that is, those that are 
really interested in the labor and environmental issues.
    There are some people who simply think that globalization always 
works to our disadvantage, and I just don't agree with that. And I think 
that it's not a realistic option. The global economy is on a fast track. 
The Europeans are reaching out to the MERCOSUR nations. Even though our 
exports have grown a great deal to Latin America, the European exports 
have grown even more and now outpace ours. And their trade union 
movements in their country, for example, and other people like--they 
seem to understand that, because of what they have to sell and because 
of the trade relationships, they're going to come out, net, ahead. 
That's what I believe is the case in America and why I'm pushing this so 
hard.
    Q. Are you going to win?
    The President. I think so. It's a tough fight, but I think we'll 
win. But it's just a--it's really a debate over principle with me. And I 
believe the United States has to create more high-wage jobs for the 
future so that we can start growing together again. The last couple of 
years, we've finally got some indication that the bottom 40 percent of 
our workers are beginning to raise their incomes equal to and after 
taxes maybe even a little more, in percentage terms, than the upper 20 
percent. But that's after 20 years of complete stagnation.
    And the evidence is not clear yet. We have to change the job mix 
every year. The last 2 years, more than half our new jobs have paid 
above-average wages--dramatic contrast from the eighties and the early 
nineties. The only way for us to keep that trend going and accelerate it 
is for us to trade more in areas where we have a competitive advantage, 
where we make things that are sophisticated, with workers who make good 
incomes--we make more of that. That's the first thing.
    The second thing is, I believe the United States has to send a 
signal to our allies, particularly in this hemisphere, and our allies in 
Asia and in Africa, that we know we're in a new world and it's a world 
in which we're interdependent and which we want to lead through 
partnerships.
    So I think the political interest we have in having stable countries 
growing more successful, being firmly democratic, working with us on 
issues like labor and environmental conditions argues overwhelmingly for 
the adoption of fast track and giving the President the authority to go 
do this work. There is a principle at stake here, so I would be fighting 
for it if I thought I had no chance to win, because it relates centrally 
to the way I see the world unfolding and the ties that I've tried to 
create for the United States in the Americas, in Asia, in Africa, as 
well as reaffirming our historic ties to Europe.

Note: The exchange began at 3:15 p.m. en route from Venezuela to Brazil. 
In his remarks, the President referred to President Fernando Cardoso of 
Brazil; Counsel to the President Charles F.C. Ruff; Press Secretary Mike 
McCurry; and businessman James Riady of the Lippo Group. A tape was not 
available for verification of the content of this exchange.

[[Page 1566]]