[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 36, Number 39 (Monday, October 2, 2000)]
[Pages 2246-2248]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks Prior to a Meeting With Cabinet Members and an Exchange With 
Reporters

September 28, 2000

Budget Negotiations/Tobacco Lawsuit

    The President. Is everyone in? Good. Well, as you can see, we're 
about to have a Cabinet meeting, the primary purpose of which is to 
discuss the budget negotiations that will be going on now until the end 
of Congress.
    Two weeks ago I met with congressional leaders in this room, and we 
pledged to use the short time left in the fiscal year to do some 
important things for the American people, to resolve our differences on 
a host of issues, to put progress over partisanship.
    Since then, the Senate has passed normal trade relations with China 
legislation, and I applaud that. But beyond that, nothing has been done 
to finally raise the minimum wage, pass hate crimes legislation and a 
real Patients' Bill of Rights, pass a Medicare prescription drug benefit 
for our seniors, to enact the new markets legislation. The leadership 
promised action, but so far the results don't show it.
    Now there are just 2 days to go in the fiscal year, and only 2 of 
the 13 appropriations bills have passed that are so necessary to keep 
our Government running. Still the Congress hasn't provided the funds to 
help build and modernize our schools, to continue to hire 100,000 new 
qualified teachers for smaller classes in the early grades, to improve 
teacher quality and strengthen accountability so that we can identify 
failing schools, turn them around, shut them down, or put them under new 
management. And nothing has been done to fund the largest gun 
enforcement initiative in history to keep guns out of the hands of 
criminals and children, something that Republicans have said that we 
ought to do more of.
    Right now another important decision is pending in Congress, even as 
we meet here. The Congress is choosing whether or not to lower the 
national drunk driving standard to .08 percent blood alcohol content, a 
move that we know, from the experience of States that have already done 
it, could save hundreds of lives every single year in the United States. 
I know that Congress is, as always, under a lot of interest-group 
pressure not to do this, but I hope, for the sake of highway safety and 
human life, they will.
    Later this week, Congress will send me a short-term budget 
resolution. I expect I'll sign it so that we can continue to meet our 
responsibilities to the American people, but I ask Congress to finish 
the work they were sent here to do. Let's sit down for serious 
negotiations on a budget that preserves fiscal discipline, invests in 
our people, and produces real results and real progress for America.
    I'd also like to say a few words about our efforts to hold tobacco 
companies accountable. Today the court ruled that our case alleging the 
tobacco companies were engaged in fraud in marketing tobacco can go 
ahead, although not on the other counts. This remains a very important 
opportunity for the American people to have their day in court against 
big tobacco and its marketing practices. I urge Congress to provide the 
funding to allow the lawsuit to move forward and not to shield the 
tobacco industry from the consequences of its actions.
    Thank you very much.

Minimum Wage Legislation

    Q. Mr. President, the Republican leadership would like to attach 
certain provisions and amendments to the minimum wage bill, which are 
opposed by organized labor.

[[Page 2247]]

Would you sign the bill if it came to you with their additions to it?
    The President. Well, I don't believe that we ought to lower the pay 
of many tens of thousands of Americans under present Federal law to 
raise the pay of people who plainly deserve a minimum wage. I do not 
believe the minimum wage should be a vehicle to wreck fair labor 
standards that have been well established in our law and that could not 
be repealed on their own.
    I think some tax relief for small business is appropriate. The 
initial package was more than 3 times as high as the one that Congress 
attached when we raised the minimum wage in 1996. And if we're going to 
have that much tax relief, then I want to talk about what it's going to 
be and who is going to benefit.
    But this Congress has some interesting priorities. It didn't take 
them any time to repeal the estate tax or to pass other big tax cuts 
that benefited people in very high income levels, but they can't seem to 
get around to raising the minimum wage. The last time we raised the 
minimum wage, they said that it would hurt unemployment, hurt the 
economy, hurt the small businesses of the country. We set a new record 
for small business starts every year since. We've got a 30-year low in 
unemployment. This is just a simple question of whether we're going to 
give 10 million hardworking Americans a chance to have a decent life and 
to take care of their children in a decent way. And I hope they'll pass 
it.

Yugoslav Elections

    Q. Mr. President, if you're convinced, as you said a couple of 
minutes ago, that Yugoslav opposition has made a persuasive case that 
they've won the election outright, why have you not explicitly called 
for Mr. Milosevic to step down?
    The President. Well, I thought we did say that. I think when the 
head of the Serb church says that he considers Mr. Milosevic's opponent 
to be the new President of Yugoslavia, I think it's--and when the 
commission that is totally under the thumb of the Government, without 
any outside observers, even they acknowledge that he won 49 to 39 or 38 
percent, and when they have evidence that by no means all the votes for 
the opposition candidate were counted, I think that's a pretty good case 
that it's time for democracy and for the voices of the people of Serbia 
to be heard. And that's what I think should happen.
    And as I said, when that happens, I would strongly support immediate 
moves to lift the sanctions.

RU-486

    Q. Mr. President, the abortion drug RU-486 was approved for sale 
today. Is that fight finally over? And why did it take so long?
    The President. Well, first of all, this administration treated that 
issue as purely one of science and medicine. And the decision to be made 
under our law is whether the drug should be approved by the FDA on the 
grounds of safety. And I think that they bent over backwards to do a lot 
of serious inquiries.
    And Secretary Shalala can explain it in greater detail than me, but 
there's a long history here about why it took so long. But the FDA is 
basically doing its job. It's now done its job. And I regret that some 
members of the other party apparently have already tried to politicize 
it. I note Dr. Healey, who was the NIH commissioner under President 
Bush, said that she agreed with the decision of the FDA. And I think it 
ought to be treated as the scientific and medical decision it was, and 
we should respect the fact that it was a nonpolitical inquiry and that 
they took so long to try to make sure they were making a good decision.
    Press Secretary Joe Lockhart. Thank you very much. Thank you; thank 
you.
    Q. How do you think that affects the debate over abortion? And do 
you think a Bush administration will try to overturn it?
    The President. Why don't you ask him that question? You should ask 
him that question, not me. I think that's for the people that are out 
there running to answer.

Note: The President spoke at 3:05 p.m. in the Cabinet Room at the White 
House. In his remarks, he referred to President Slobodan Milosevic of 
the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro); Yugoslav 
opposition candidate Vojislav Kostunica; Serbian Patriarch Pavle, 
president of the Holy Synod of Bishops of

[[Page 2248]]

the Serbian Orhtodox Church; and former National Institutes of Health 
Director Bernadine P. Healy. A tape was not available for verification 
of the content of these remarks.