[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 36, Number 52 (Monday, January 1, 2001)]
[Pages 3204-3209]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]
<R04>
Remarks on the Budget and an Exchange With Reporters
December 28, 2000
The President. Good afternoon. I wanted to take this opportunity to
say a few words about our latest budget projections and what they say
about the continuing strength of the American economy.
We began 8 years ago to put our fiscal house in order at a time when
the Federal deficit was $290 billion and rising and the national debt
had quadrupled in the previous 12 years. Interest rates were high,
growth was low, and the confidence of the American people was shaken.
Our new strategy of fiscal discipline, investing in our people, and
expanding trade has helped to bring us the longest economic expansion in
history. That has given us the chance, along with continued fiscal
discipline to balance the budget, to turn decades of deficits into the
biggest back-to-back surpluses in history.
Over the past 3 years, we have paid down our national debt by $360
billion. Today we received more good news. Our updated projections show
that in this fiscal year alone we expect to pay down the debt by an
unprecedented $237 billion, meaning that over the course of just 4
years, we will have paid down the debt by $600 billion.
When I took office, our Nation's debt was projected to be $6.4
trillion this year. At the end of this year, it will instead be $3.2
trillion, one half of what it was projected to be. It will be 31 percent
of our annual gross national product. In 1993 it was 50 percent of our
gross national product.
In interest rates savings alone, there will be in one year--this
year--$166 billion. We are spending--this year we will spend $166
billion less in interest on the debt than we were projected to be
spending 8 years ago.
There is more good news in these numbers. Let's start with what the
budget experts called the baseline. That's a budget that just increases
with inflation and no new initiatives. The new projections show that if
we took that budget and committed the entire surplus to reducing the
debt, we could make America debt-free by 2009.
Of course, no one is suggesting that any administration and Congress
will go that long with no new initiatives. I have often said that I
believe we should use a portion of the surplus to make critical
investments in education, provide a prescription drug benefit through
Medicare to our seniors, and have a targeted tax cut.
If the incoming administration and the new Congress make such
decisions, they could still get us out of debt early. And I want to
emphasize, obviously, it is for the incoming administration and the new
Congress to decide exactly which projects to address and in what manner.
But these new projections mean that a fiscally responsible approach that
includes new investments
[[Page 3205]]
similar to the ones I described would still permit us to make America
debt-free by the end of the decade--in other words, 2 years earlier than
the last time we met.
Therefore, even though I told you I would never draw on another one
of these charts--[laughter]--because there is more good news, I'm going
to do it. But this is the last time I will do it--[laughter]--this year.
It means we can get out of debt by 2010. Now, that is a future that all
Americans can look forward to. And we don't wait to reap the benefits of
this sort of debt reduction. By paying down the debt, we have already
helped to keep interest rates down.
This is an amazing thing. Secretary Summers told me this before I
came out here: After 8 years of very strong economic growth, long-term
interest rates are about 2 percent lower than they were when I took
office. That's meant lower mortgage payments, lower car payments, lower
student loans, lower business loans. It has freed up more capital for
private sector investment. We aren't borrowing the money that people
thought we would be borrowing in the Government, and that means there is
more money for others to borrow at lower cost.
If we stay up on the path that got us here, by 2010 we will free up
12 cents of every dollar the American people pay in taxes that can go
back to them in tax relief or can go into investment in our common
future. And that is a profoundly important thing. Just think of it, in 9
years, 12 percent of the Federal budget now committed to interest on the
debt could be gone, and that money then would be free for tax relief or
for investment in our future.
I think, as I have said many times, that as these interest rates go
down, some of this money ought to be dedicated to Social Security,
because no matter what path you take for preparing for the retirement of
the baby boom generation, any of the proposed scenarios have a
significant associated costs. And one of the ways to do this and a way
that is painless to the American people is to take advantage of the fact
that you're not going to be making interest payments that previously
would have been made.
This shows the long-term consequences of a long-term responsible
budget policy. There are huge economic benefits. And if we continue,
then we can honestly say, for the first time since Andrew Jackson was
President in 1835, the children of America will face the future
unburdened by the mistakes of the past. That is something that I believe
we ought to do. The American people have earned an unprecedented
opportunity to build that kind of America for our children, and I hope
we will do it.
Thank you very much.
Middle East Peace Process
Q. Mr. President, since last we asked you about the Middle East
yesterday, there have been a number of developments. There have been
bombings in Tel Aviv, an ambush. Prime Minister Barak did not go to that
summit meeting in Egypt. What does that make you think about the
prospects for nailing down a final agreement while you're still in
office?
The President. Well, first of all, I condemn the violence. And I
believe it is the violence and the bus that prevented the Prime Minister
from going to Egypt; I don't think it is a lack of desire to pursue the
peace process. Chairman Arafat is consulting with President Mubarak and,
I believe, wants to talk to some of the other Arab leaders.
The important thing to note is that Israel has said--I put some
ideas on the table. They go beyond where we were at Camp David; they
meet the fundamental needs that both sides expressed at Camp David. And
the Israelis said that they would agree to try to close the remaining
gaps within the parameters of the ideas I put forward if the
Palestinians will agree. And I think that this latest violence only
reminds people of what the alternative to peace is.
Look, I expect there to be more in the next few days, as long as
we're moving toward peace. There are a lot of enemies of peace in the
Middle East, and there are a of people that have acquired almost an
interest in the preservation of the status quo and the agony of the
Israelis and the abject misery of most of the Palestinian population.
So I expect that we will have to continue to combat violence. But if
we can get a peace which meets the fundamental longstanding desires of
both parties and we start to have
[[Page 3206]]
common efforts in security that go even beyond what we've had for the
last few years and we start to have common efforts to build an economic
future that benefits everyone, we will have more political and economic
stability and we'll have a different future. But in the meanwhile, this
thing has been going on a long time, and a lot of people don't want to
give it up. And so they're going to try to disrupt it.
But if you just look at the last few months, it's the best argument
for going ahead and finishing this. It's not going to get any easier. So
this is by far the closest we have ever been. We are much closer than we
were at Camp David, but there are still differences, and we're just
waiting. If the--the Israelis have said they will meet on these
conditions within the parameters that I laid out; if the Palestinians
will, and the Palestinians are negotiating--or talking--excuse me--with
the other Arabs, and we'll just see what happens.
Decision Not To Visit North Korea
Q. Mr. President, did the President-elect have any influence on your
decision not to go to North Korea?
The President. No. He said--actually, we had a very, very good talk
about it, and he did not discourage it at all. And it would not be fair
to put that on him. Let me just say, I briefed him on what I was doing.
I told him that Sandy Berger and Secretary Albright had talked to
General Powell and Condi Rice about it, and I explained what we were
trying to do. But I also told him that I wouldn't take the trip unless I
thought that I had time to organize it and devote the time to it to make
it right, because I was convinced that because of the leadership of
President Kim in South Korea, and because of the very good talks that we
have had with the North Koreans and the success we've had now for 6
years on the nuclear issue, that further progress could be made and that
it might just have to be something that was done when he became
President.
And that is the conclusion I made. We've made a lot of progress with
the North Koreans. On what we're discussing now, on the missile issues,
we've made a lot of progress. But I concluded that I did not have
sufficient time to put the trip together and to execute the trip in an
appropriate manner in the days remaining.
Q. Were they willing to go for a halt in the missile----
The President. I think that's all I should say. We made a lot of
progress with them, and I believe that the next administration will be
able to consummate this agreement. I expect visits back and forth. I
think a lot of things will happen, and I think it will make the world a
much safer place. I feel very good about what we've done. I simply
concluded that in the days I have remaining, I didn't have the time to
put the trip together in the proper way and to execute it in the proper
way. And so that's why I decided not to go.
But you should not infer from that that I'm concerned about it.
Indeed, I'm very pleased with the progress that has been made, and I
expect the next administration to build on it. And I think they'll be
pleased, too, when they look at the facts.
Budget and Incoming Bush Administration
Q. Mr. President, in your remarks on the budget, you almost seem to
be addressing an audience beyond this room, beyond most people on
television. You seem to be addressing your remarks to the next
administration. Do you think--what impact do you think a tax cut of the
proportions that George W. Bush campaigned on would have on the course
of the arrow on your chart?
The President. Well, first, I don't think it's appropriate for me to
comment on the specific decisions they will have to make--and the
Congress will make. But you can't see any of this in isolation. You have
to say--the real issue on the fiscal side is, what is the revenue
estimate; are you being conservative? We always were, and even these
reflect, by the way, pretty conservative estimates--because you can
always have a bad couple of years, and it throws everything off.
And then it's not just a question of a tax cut; you have to ask
yourself, in all these things--when you all are doing the math in your
head, you have to do the tax cuts plus whatever extra spending there
will be plus whatever you do on Social Security. And it's the aggregate
amount of money here; it's not just a question of the tax cut.
[[Page 3207]]
So I don't really think I can comment, nor do I think I should
comment on the specifics. I'm more interested in the big picture, the
arithmetic issues. But I'm just saying that I believe that as long as we
can do so, we should be shooting for a debt-free America by the end of
the decade, because I think that that will strengthen our country
enormously.
Clinton Family Income and Future Residences
Q. Mr. President, what can you tell us about the Clinton family debt
picture? Is there a new house in your future here in Washington, DC?
The President. Well, I hope so. Hillary has got to have someplace to
live. But we don't have--we haven't closed a deal yet. When we do, we'll
let you know. She needs an address, and I'd like to have someplace to
come see her. [Laughter]
Q. Will you be able to afford all that, Mr. President?
The President. Well, I hope so. I'm going to go out and go to work.
And----
Q. Where? [Laughter]
The President. I expect to make a living, and I'll get out of your
hair and get out of the media spotlight and go back to making a living.
And I expect to--I'll do a--well, I'll write a book and do a few other
things. But I think----
Q. For $8 million? [Laughter]
The President. I think I'll be able to support her. I don't know. I
don't have two bestsellers to my credit like she does, so I don't know.
Middle East Peace Process
Q. Mr. President, back on the Middle East. Two elements seem
different now than were present at Camp David. First of all, the
outlines of peace proposal are open, and you want to take a look at
them. And second, there seems to be much more of an effort to involve
Arab leaders as the negotiations move forward. Those two things were not
present at Camp David, yet the Palestinians still are holding back. What
do you think is holding them back, and what do you think would push them
across the line and move this forward?
The President. Well, I think the--first of all, I think that while
we have talked to all of the Arab leaders, I'm not sure that Mr. Arafat
has gotten to talk to enough of them. I think that he believes that--he
has always believed, I thought, that he was representing not only his
people but the larger Arab world, and in some ways the larger Muslim
world, in the Jerusalem issues. So I think that he's trying to work
through that.
But I don't think, as I've said repeatedly over the last several
years, I think when you're in a period like this--that is, where we're
sort of--the thing is in gestation, and it's either going to go forward
or it's not--I think that the less I say about it, the better.
Decision Not To Impose Sanctions on Japanese Whaling
Q. Is your decision not to impose sanctions on Japan for their
whaling program a reflection of the fact that you view your friendship
with Japan more important than the environment? And as a followup, how
do you expect a Bush administration to go through with Japan-U.S. trade
relations?
The President. Well, the first thing is, the answer to the first
question is no. We're working this whaling issue. We have serious
disagreements with them about it, and we have some options that we're
pursuing. But is our security relationship with Japan important? Of
course it is. Is our larger economic relationship important? Of course
it is. Is this whaling issue a big deal? I think it is.
So I'm trying to leave this situation in the best possible light for
my successor to look at all available options and go forward. That's
what I'm trying to do.
Q. How can you impose sanctions when the deadline has already
passed?
The President. Well, there are lots of other things that can be done
on this, though, in the future, and I did what I thought was right,
given all the factors involved. But I still think this whaling issue is
an important issue, and I think that--I understand the role it has in
Japanese culture and the political impact of the interests that are
involved in it. But I think they are going to have to modify their
practices.
Q. Are you going to sign the World Criminal Court Treaty?
[[Page 3208]]
The President. I haven't decided that. I have a couple of days, and
I'm getting a last paper on it, and then I'm going to discuss it with
our people.
Middle East Peace Process
Q. Back to the Middle East. Have you given the Palestinians any sort
of deadline to give you an answer, or are they going to be given an
unlimited amount of time to decide? And also, do you expect them to come
here? Do you need to talk to them again before you can see if they are
making headway?
The President. Well, first of all, I think it is obvious we are all
operating under a deadline. We're all operating under a deadline; it's
just some of us know what our deadline is.
What I have said to them is, there is no point in our talking
further unless both sides agree to accept the parameters that I've laid
out--not because I am trying to dictate this, but because I have
listened to them for months and months and months--indeed for 8 years--
and this is the most difficult of all the issues I've dealt with. If
there is a peace agreement here, I'm convinced it's within the four
corners I laid out.
And then there are still--they both have legitimately a lot of
questions, and they ought to ask those questions and get answers to
them. But there is no point in even doing that unless we've got a basic
framework so we can close. The time has come to close here. And the last
several months have shown us this is not going to get any easier, and
prolonging it is only going to make it worse. So I'm doing my best to
facilitate what I think is what they want, which is to try to resolve
this.
Q. Do you really think you can resolve it in the remaining--are you
really optimistic that you can resolve it in the remaining 3 weeks? And,
if you cannot, would you keep at it after you leave office?
The President. Well, the answer to your first question is, I think
that if it can be resolved at all, it can be resolved in the next 3
weeks. I don't think the circumstances are going to get better. I think,
in all probability, they'll get more difficult.
In terms of what I do when I leave office in the way of official
work like that, that will be up to the next administration and any
parties there or anywhere else in the world. That would not be for me to
say.
One of the things I am determined to do when I leave--I'm going to
work until the last day, because I'm drawing a paycheck, and I'm going
to work to the last day. After that, I'm going to observe strictly what
I think is the proper role of a former President. And we will have a new
President, and he has to make the calls, and I will support that
entirely. Around the world, I think that's very, very important. So
anything I might ever do, indeed, for the whole rest of my life, not
just in the first few years I'm out of office, will be determined by
what whoever happens to be the President does or doesn't want me to do,
and whatever parties in other parts of the world do or don't want me to
do. That's just the only appropriate thing, and I will rigorously adhere
to that.
Q. Have both sides asked you to, sir? Have both sides asked you to
keep at it?
The President. No, I didn't say that. It depends upon--I think that
it is--first of all, in this context, I believe that is exceedingly
unlikely. That is, I honestly believe, given the pendency of the Israeli
election and the developments within the Palestinian community and the
larger Arab world, that the best chance they have to make an agreement
is in the next 3 weeks.
Now, none of us who long for peace in the Middle East would ever
give up on it. But I think that is both a theoretical question and an
unlikely one, because if you look at where the forces are today, they
have a better chance to do it now, if they're ever going to do it. It's
just--it's really hard. If it weren't hard, they would have done it
before this. I mean, they signed the Oslo agreement in '93 and put all
this stuff off to the end because they knew it was hard, and it's still
hard.
But if you look at where we've been the last few months, it's not
going to get any easier. And I just hope that--I've said this before, I
said it earlier--we had a confluence of Christmas, Hanukkah, and the end
of Ramadan and the beginning of the Eid, and maybe there's something in
the stars that will give them the divine strength and inspiration to do
it. I don't think it's going to get easier.
[[Page 3209]]
Q. Well, are your terms negotiable, or are they just parameters?
The President. No, they're the parameters. The negotiations, in
other words, have to occur within them.
Q. So East Jerusalem could be negotiated more?
The President. No. I do not want to talk more about this. They
understand exactly what I mean. Both sides know exactly what I mean, and
they know exactly what they still have to do, and that's enough right
now.
Thank you.
Note: The President spoke at 12:37 p.m. in the James S. Brady Press
Briefing Room at the White House. In his remarks, he referred to Prime
Minister Ehud Barak of Israel; Chairman Yasser Arafat of the Palestinian
Authority; President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt; President Kim Dae-jung of
South Korea; President-elect George W. Bush; and Gen. Colin Powell, USA
(Ret.), and Condoleeza Rice, incoming Bush administratioin nominees for
Secretary of State and National Security Adviser, respectively. A tape
was not available for verification of the content of these remarks.