-
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/files/original/9c3a56d741dc38ca764c2468aee145c9.pdf
276fe5dddc8b477ef0f20b5d8ac28540
PDF Text
Text
FOIA Number: 2006-0462-F
FOIA
MAR~~[R
This is not a textual record. This is used .as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting
Series/Staff Member:
Terry Edmonds
Subseries:
10986
OA/ID Number:
FolderiD:
Folder Title:
Summit on Ainerica's Future Philadelphia, PA [2]
Stack:
s .
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
0
0
0
0
�Guidance
for
The Today Show
Interview
April27, 1997
�THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 27, 1997
DATE:
TIME:
FROM:
April 27, 1997
1:35 TO 1:45PM EDT
Mike McCurry & Stuart Schear
I. PURPOSE
This 10-minute taped interview will provide you with the opportunity to articulate your
philosophy of national service in the context of the service summit in Philadelphia. The TODAY
SHOW's audience will the largest one you address during the course of the summit.
While the primary focus of the interview will be on the summit, it will provide you with the
opportunity to address other issues besides national service, including your commitment to a
balanced budget and campaign finance reform as well as your efforts to curtail teenagers' access
to tobacco.
II. BACKGROUND
TheTODAY SHOW is America's most popular morning show, and its audience often exceeds
seven million viewers. Laudably, NBC is covering the summit with unrivaled intensity among
the television networks. The TODAY SHOW and other NBC news broadcasts will feature
interviews with you, Gen. Powell and other prominent Americans participating in the summit.
Moreover, NBC shows including MEET THE PRESS, THE TODAY SHOW and NIGHTLY
NEWS will broadcast from Philadelphia.
Katie Couric last interviewed you just before your second inauguration.
III. QUESTIONS
Co uric will devote a good portion of the interview to the summit and the proper role of national
service and volunteerism in American society. However, you can count on Couric to ask at least
one or two tough questions on other issues. Couric consistently tries to make news with
unexpected questions. As a reminder, she asked Mrs. Clinton about the Web Hubbel situation in
a recent interview on child development. During the campaign, Couric made news by scoring
points against Senator Dole on the question of tobacco and addiction.
Co uric is likely to ask at least one follow-up questimi:' from your interview on FACE THE
NATION.
The following are some of the questions which Co uric may pose:
�-------------------------:-------------------------
NATIONAL SERVICE SUMMIT
Critics charge that your emphasis on national service and others' focus on volunteerism
is a "cop-out." They describe it as an effort to avoid traditional responsibilities of the federal
government to care for low income and other vulnerable Americans. Is there any validity to this
critique?
What is your message to church leaders and others who are protesting the summit?
Some say there has been significant friction between the White House and some of the summit's
Republican supporters. Is that true?
GEN. POWELL
Are you concerned that the summit is being used as a spring board by Gen. Powell for a
presidential race in the year 2,000?
Given your deeply held convictions on racial healing, don't you see the appeal of a Powell
presidency?
TOBACCO
Why have you given tacit approval to negotiations for a settlement with tobacco companies,
when many anti-tobacco activists view these negotiations as tantamount to a surrender of
principle?
Isn't there an appearance of a conflict of interest to have the First Lady's brother involved as
counsel forthe tobacco companies in these negotiations?
HEALTH CARE FOR CHILDREN
Yesterday on FACE THE NATION you spoke favorably of proposals before congress to extend
health care to millions of uninsured American children. Do you support the 43 cent cigarette tax
hike proposed by Sen. Kennedy and Sen. Hatch to pay for expanded access to care?
BUDGET
On FACE THE NATION you noted that you might have some news on a balanced budget
agreement in a few days. Do you have any progress to report on budget negotiations?
On FACE THE NATION, you noted your willingness to consider a change in consumer price
index. Aren't you playing with the security of America's seniors by even suggesting such a
adjustment?
�Do you have the political will to take the lead on this issue?
HOT BUTTON ISSUES
Kenneth Starr, the Whitewater Special Prosecutor, asked this week for a six month extension of
the grand jury based on evidence of possible obstruction of justice regarding Web Hubbel. Can
you state with certainty that the White House was not involved in obstructing justice in the
Hubbel case?
On Friday, news reports indicated that White House attorneys were arguing in a Little Rock
courthouse against requests for new subpoenas for the First Lady and the President. What kind of
information and documents are these subpoenas seeking? Why are White House lawyers
involved?
On Larry King Live earlier this week, James McDougal said that he was tired of covering up the
truth to protect you. Does Mr. McDougal have any credibility?
According to some reports, the Chinese government may be trying to influence American
politics. Isn't this an outrage and shouldn't the President of the United States denounce such
efforts?
III. PARTICIPANTS
The President
Sylvia Matthews
Barry Toiv
Stuart Schear
Katie Couric, NBC News
Elliot Sparkman Walker, NBC News
IV. PRESS PLAN
Your interview will air over NBC on Monday morning on the TODAY SHOW. On Monday
morning, NBC News will release a transcript of the interview to the news wires. NBC will also
make short portions of the interview available to other news organizations, after the interview
airs on Monday morning.
V. SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
12:35 PM TO 1:35PM EDT Pre-Brief, Marcus Foster Stadium
1:35 PM TO 1:45PM EDT Interview, Marcus Foster Stadium
�--
----
---~-------------------------------.
VI. REMARKS
None
VII. ATTACHMENT
Talking points on:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Service Summit
Independent Counsel Starr
Tobacco
Politics
Budget
Health Care
Campaign Finance Reform .
Welfare
NSC
�GUIDANCE FOR TELEVISION INTERVIEWS
APRIL 27, 1997
SERVICE SUMMIT
TABA
COUNSEL'S ISSUES
Independent Counsel Starr
TABB
TOBACCO
Tobacco & FDA Qs &As
Tobacco Settlement Talks
TABC
POLITICS
TABD
BUDGET
TABE
HEALTH CARE
Medicare Trust Fund
Memorandum on Children's Health Bill
Q&A on Children's Health Bill
. Additional Children's Health Q&A's
Additional Medicare Qs&As
TABF
CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM
TABG
WELFARE
Welfare Reform Legislative Proposals
Florida Legal Immigrants Lawsuit
Texas Welfare Plan
Federal Government Hiring
TABH
NSC GUIDANCE
China- Woodward Story
Middle East Peace Process
TAB I
�..
SERVICE SUMMIT
Q:
A:
What will the Summit accomplish?
· The Summit is a great opportunity for all Americans to make a commitment to citizen
service, artd a chance for all sectors of our society to come together around what matters
most -- our obligation to one another, especially our children.
Government has a critical role in solving our nation's problems and I am proud to lead the
efforts of the federal government. But clearly we can accomplish more if all our citizens
pull together to solve our problems. Already the Summit has prompted an outpouring of
commitments by corporations and non-profits across the country to help in our mutual
endeavor. And I know the organizers of the Summit are committed to making sure that
all this good work doesn't end at the Summit, but that it continues in communities·across
our country.
Q:
Isn't the Summit one big photo opportunity?
A:
I think it's both exciting and tremendously encouraging that the Summit has captured the
public imagination the way it has. Starting with the inspiration of the late Gov. George
Romney, continuing with the enthusiastic support of all the former Presidents, and with
the dynamic contributions of Gen. Colin Powell, this endeavor has really sparked the
interest of the American people. The media; which is so often accused of cynicism, has
responded so positively to this event. We would be foolish not to take advantage of this
great opportunity to focus the attention of the American people on citizen service and the
goals of the Summit.
In addition, the real work to be done at the Summit is probably the least glamorous part -the work by the 140 communities attending the Summit. They are working on plans to
bring the Summit's goals to life in their own communities.
Q:
Isn't this Summit really ~he first round of the Presidential race in the year 2000,
between Powell's involvement and reports that the White House insisted that the
Summit drop Bill Bradley?
A:
One of the things I like most about the way General Powell talks about this Summit is his
emphasis that it's not bipartisan-- it's non-partisan. These themes of service and children
transcend politics. That's why you see all the former Presidents coming together, people
from all walks of life and political persuasion, agreeing that citizen action can make a
di ffcrcncc.
�'I
;·.
Q:
Doesn't the Summit downplay the role of government in solving our problems, and
argue that volunteers can do it alone?
A:
Government has a critical role in solving our nation's problems, and I am proud of what
we have accomplished for this nation's young people, in education, health care, making
our communities safer, and offering young people a chance to serve. But as I have said
many times, the era of big government may be over, but the era of big challenges for our
nation is not. Clearly we can accomplish more ifall.our citizens pull together to solve O\,lf
problems. That's why It is so important for us to harness the power of citizen service to
accomplish our goals. And it's the theory behind AmeriCorps, a program of which I am
. especially proud.
Members of my Cabinet along with other federal officials are attending the Summit to lend
their expertise to this effort, along with scores of officials from state and local
government. What you will see at the summit is communities, non-profits, corporations,
government, and many others working side by side to solve problems.
I am also proud that federal agencies have made over 40 commitments to the Summit -- to
tutor and mentor students, to create afterschool programs, and to create opportunities for
young peopie to serve. For example, the Department of the Navy has committed to tutor
or mentor 700,000 young people. Federal agencies have agreed to expand from 1,500 to
2,000 the number of schools they have adopted or have partnerships with.
Q:
Isn't the Summit is an effort to paper over the government's withdrawal of
assistance from needy children and families, exemplified by the new welfare law?
A:
I ani proud to have signed the welfare law and given millions of families throughout this
country a chance to move from welfare to work. Communities, governments, churches,
business, and welfare recipients themselves are now· working together to make this law a
success. The Summit complements our efforts to create partnerships between government
and the private and nonprofit sectors to accomplish our goals.
Q:
Doesn't the Summit reveal a rift between your approach of service and AmeriCorps
and the volunteer approach championed by former President Bush through his
Points of Light program?
A:
Voluntary action is a vibrant part of American landscape. It is something we should all
take pride in. Showing that the service model and the voluntarism model actually work
well together is what this Summit is all about.
.
.......
-·-
�..
•I
}.'•
Talking Points
April24, 1997
Independent Counsel Starr
Q:
Yesterday Independent Counsel Starr requested a six month extension of the Whitewater
Grand Jury. In his pleadings. Mr. Starr indicates that he is looking at a number of issues.
including obstruction of justice. Are you concerned about these developments?
A:
I am not concerned. I am not going to comment on the Independent CoWISel's activities.
I will say that I have answered all of Mr. Starr's questions, that other entities that have .
looked at this have found that we did nothing wrong, and that I hope this Will get
wrapped up soon. ·
Q:
Mr. McDougal said on Larry King Live on Monday night that you lied when you denied
having attended a meeting with David Hale and Mr. McDougal about the Susan .
McDougal loan; Who should the public believe in light of both Mr. Hale's and now Mr...
McDougal's statements?
A:
I have testified truthfully on these matters.
Q: ·
Independent Counsel Starr also indicates that certain witnesses have asserted privileges
which have obstructed their search for the truth. Have you personallv. or has the White
House. asserted any privileges to withhold infonnation from Mr. Starr?
· A:
As you know, I'm not going to comment on Mr. Starr and his investigation other than to
say Hillary and I have answered all of his questions.
Tobacco Litigation
Q:
Today's New York Times questions Hugh Rodham's role in the tobacco settlement
discussions. Have you discussed the settlement negotiations with your brother-in-law?
A:
Hugh has been working for over a year on tobacco litigation issues. From time to time he
has updated me on tJie status of the discussions. If a settlement among the parties is
reached, I of course will evaluate it based upon what's in the public's interest.
Q:
What has been the White House's role in the settlement negotiations. and in particular.
what is Bruce Lindsey's role?
A:
Bruce has had discussions with the various interests in the talks to ensure those matters
about which we care-- namely, the FDA rules-- are protected. He has monitored the
negotiations, but no one from the White; House has attended any of the negotiation
sessions. And, other than Hugh, l have 'not discussed this matter with alfy of the parties.
[Check with POTUS].
�. 7!.
Tobacco Q&As
April 25, 1997
COURT DECISION
Background.
The President announced the FDA rule to protect children from tobacco in August 1996; the rule
was immediately challenged by the industry in U.S. District Court in North Carolina.
The Decision
The court ruled that FDA has jurisdiction and that the access and labeling provisions are still in
effect, but that the advertising and promotion portions of the rule are invalid.
Statement
This is a landmark and historic day for the nation's public health and our children. With this
ruling, we can regulate nicotine-containing tobacco products and take important steps to protect
our children from a lifetime of addiction and the prospect of having their lives .cut short by
tobacco-related diseases. We have taken a monumental first step down the long, hard road we
knew we had to go to protect our children.
Q:
What are you going to do about the provision of the rule the court struck down?
A:
The bottom line is that we are going to protect our. children. Today we won an historic
victory in court, and we're going forward with the provisions the court upheld. A
statement on what next legal steps the Administration will take will come shortly.
Q:
Doesn't this mean the FDA will have to do something more drastic in terms of access
to protect children -- !ike mak~ these prescription products?
A:
We have taken a common sense approach to protect our children by restricting access and
we have proposed a common sense approach to limiting appeal. We still believe that is
the right way to approach this terrible public health crisis threatening our children.
Q:
Doesn't this mean more dch1y'!
A:
The access provisions that went into effect in February have been upheld, remain in place
and we are working with states to ensure compliance.
�,,
}.'·
Q:
Why not seck a legislative settlement?
A:
From the beginning, we have said that if Congress wants to put forth a legislative
package as strong as our FDA rule with appropriate oversight and enforcement, we
remain prepared to work with Congress.
Q:
What does this mean in everyday terms?
A:·
It means that provisions that went into effect in February making it harder for children to
buy cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products will stay in effect, and we are working
with states to begin checking for compliance. And it means that FDA has authority to
regulate nicotine-containing tobacco products.
Q:
If you appeal, do you think an appeal will be successful?
A:
This is an historic decision by the court on the Agency's authority over tobacco products.
We believe we have a very strong case and we will ultimately prevail on all parts of the
rule to protect our children.
Q:
Isn't it time to seek legislation?
A:
We have been open to a legislative solution that is as strong as the FDA rule with
appropriate oversight and enforcement since the President announced the proposal in
August 1995. We are still open to a legislative solution if it accomplishes our goal of
protecting our children.
SETTLEMENT TALKS
Q.
How does the judge's decision affect the Administration's interest in a settlement?
A.
I have no idea. Today,_ we should focus on this ruling. [Go to statement on ruling
above].
Q.
Isn't the Administration deeply involved in settlement talks?
A.
Like other parties interested in this issue, we have been monitoring the talks. We have a
deep interest in protecting kids and the public health.
�7..'.
Follow-up
Q.
But papers have reported that Bruce Lindsey is intimately involved in the settlement
talks.
A.
My staff are staying informed of the talks, but we are not a party in the talks. My only
interest is in protecting kids and the public health.
Q:
Would you support a settlement that gives tobacco companies immunity?
A:
I'm not in any position to judge any settlement. As I've said, my only interest is in
protecting kids and the public's health. We have to do right by them.
Follow-up
Q:
Then, what form of immunity would you support?
A:
I'm not going to speculate on what the participants in the negotiations might agree to. My
Administration proposed the toughest measures ever to protect children from tobacco,
and I am going to fight to see that those restrictions take effect. I'm not going to agree to
anything with respect to tobacco that jeopardizes the public health. Our focus will stay
on protecting kids and the public health.
Follow-up
Q:
Anti-tobacco advocates-- including former FDA Commissioner David Kessler-- held a
press conference yesterday saying immunity should be off the table altogether. Do you
disagree?
A:
I have tremendous respect for Dr. Kessler on this issue. Again, I'm not going to support
anything that jeopardizes the public health.
�----~ ................~~........
,
--
....""""X<rol'o........... ~.............\o........ ,........ .; ...·-.· ..............
k
•••
·~.
.].!.
,.
Questions on Tobacco Settlement Talks
,:,·,
·.·
Q.
How does the judge's decision affect the Administration's interest in a settlement?
A.
I have no idea. Today, we_ should focus on this ruling. [Go to statement on ruling].
Q.
Isn't the Administration deeply involved in settlement talks?
A.
Like other parties interested in this issue, we have been monitoring the talks; We have a
deep interest in protecting kids and the public health.
Follow-up
Q.
But papers have reported that Bruce Lindsey is intimately. involved in the settlement
talks.
A.
My staff are staying informed of the talks, but we are not a party in the talks. My only
interest is in protecting kids and the public health.
Q:
Would you support a settlement that gives tobacco companies immunity?
A:
I'm not in any position to judge any settlement. But, I'll say this: everybody. agrees that
blanket immunity is out of the question. As I've said, my only interest is in protecting
kids and the public's health.. We have to do right by them.
Follow-up
Q:
Then, what form of immunity would you support?
A:
I'm not going to speeulate on what the participants in the negotiations might agree to. My
Administration proposed the toughest measures ever to protect children from tobacco,
and I am going to fight to see that those restrictions take effect. I'm not going to agree to
anything with resp~ct to tobacco that jeopardizes the public health. Our focus will stay
on protecting kids and the public health.
Follow-up
Q:
A:
Anti-tobaCco advocates .__ including former FDA Commissioner David Kessler - held a
press conference yesterday sayjng immunity shOuld be off the table altogether. Do you
disagree?
I have tremendous respect for Dr. Kes'~ier on this issue. Again, I'm:ndtgoing to support - -·
anything that jeopardizes the public health.
�7/
POLITICS
Q:
The Democratic National Committee is $15 million in debt. The committee is
holding a major fundraising event next week but the proceeds from that event
will not begin to put the Committee in the black. What is the future of the
national Democratic Party? Will it be financially able to play a role in the 1997
and 1998 elections and beyond?
A:
I believe in my party and I have made and will continue to make myself available to
help Taise funds for it. A Party's real strength is measured in the quality of its ideas
and its candidates. By that standard, the Democratic Party is wealthy.
Q:
Will you or do you support the Vice President for president in 2000?
A:
The next election is too far away. We don't need to start that campaign today. But,
as you lmow, the Vice President is an integral part of this team, and I can think of no
one who would be better prepared or more capable of doing the job of President than
AI Gore.
Q:
Do you think the manner in whjch the Democratic National Committee engaged
in fundraising and the allegations of hnproprieties have made Asian Americans
feel under siege? Do you think it has increased the level of xenophobia in this
country?
A:·
Many allegations have been made, some of them unfairly. Everyone --especially those
in the Congress and in the media, because they have so much power --needs to be
very careful when making allegations because they can potentially hurt an innocent
person or group of people. Sometimes in the hurly burly of politics people forget that
their words or their actions can have a huge impact on a person's life or the lives of
an entire ethnic group.
�0& A ON BUDGET NEGOTIATIONS
Q;
HAS THERE BEEN ANY PROGRESS ON THE BUDGET TALKS?
Q:
ARE YOU CLOSE TO A DEAL?
A:
I am encouraged by the progress that has been made and hopeful that we are going
to reach a bipartisan budget agreement and it its important that we do so.
•
The deficit has fallen dramatically from $290 billion in 1992 to $107 billion in 1996.
It is time to finish the job. At the outset this year, I met the Republicans half-way on
Medicare. I have put a detailed and serious balanced budget on the table.
•
I then instructed my economic team to work with members of Congress in a
cooperative spirit. Sensing an opportunity to move us forward, I invited Congressional
budget leaders to the White House before my trip to Helsinki. Since then, budget talks
have entered a new phase and I remain optimistic that an agreement can be reached.
•
I am determined to reach a balanced budget agreement that can win the majority
support of both parties in Congress and that is consistent with the priorities of the
American people. A good agreement must include, at a minimum, that our children will
have the best education from the first days of life through college to prepare for the 21st
century; that more children will have access to quality health care; that our environment
will be protected; that the most vulnerable among us will be protected; and that Medicare
and Medicaid will be strengthened and modernized.
Q: .
IT HAS BEEN REPORTED THAT YOUR NEGOTIATORS AND THE
REPUBLICAN NEGOTIATORS HAVE COME TO A TENTATIVE
AGREEMENT THAT WOULD COMPRISE A NETT AX CUT OF AROUND $80
BILLION AND MEDICARE SAVINGS OF AROUND $110 TO $120 BILLION.
ARE THESE REPORTS ACCURATE?
A:
We are in the middle of serious discussions on the best way to achieve a balanced budget
that wins the support of a majority of both Democrats and Republicans. These
discussions, 1 believe, have been going well and it would not serve this process very well
to comment on specifics at this point
�.
Q:
'I
}.'•
WHAT IS YOUR REACTION TO THE LETTER SENT TO SEN. LOTT FROM A
GROUP OF SENATE REPUBLICANS OUTLINING CERTAIN DEMANDS
BEFORE ANY BUDGETDEAL CAN BE COMPLETED. DOES THIS HURT
CHANCES FOR GETTING IT DONE?
A:
Q:
(1)
As I have said before, we all need to be flexible and be willing to compromise.
(2)
Each of us must be willing to compromise our sense of the perfect, to reach
an agreement that advances the greater good. And we can do so without
compromising our deeply-held values.
(3)
It is critical that any budget deal contain important investments in our
priorities, such as extending health care coverage to 5 million children, providing
greater educational opportunity and protecting the environment.
(4)
We can achieve a mainstream balanced budget agreement that garners the
support of a majority of Democrats and Republicans as well as the overwhelming
majority of the American people.
SENATOR LOTT HAS STATED THAT HE WILL RECEIVE SOME CRITICISM
FROM SOME IN HIS PARTY FOR SUPPORTING THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS
CONVENTION. HE SAYS THAT IT IS NOW YOUR TURN TO MAKE SOME
BUDGET CONCESSIONS AND SHOW SOME LEADERSHIP. DO YOU PLAN
TO DO THAT?
A:
(1)
As I have said before, we all need to be flexible and be willing to compromise.
(2)
Each of us must be willing to compromise our sense of the perfect, to reach
an agreement that advances the greater good. And we can do so without
compromising our deeply-held values.
(3)
It is critical that any budget deal contain important investments in our
priorities, such as extending health care coverage to 5 million children, providing
greater educational opportunity and protecting the environment.
(4)
We can achieve a mainstream balanced budget agreement that garners the
support of a majority of Democrats and Republicans as well as the overwhelming
�'I
-}.'•
majority of the American people.
�. ]!.
MEDICARE TRUST FUND TALKING POINTS
April 24, 1997
THE MEDICARE TRUSTEES REPORT CONFIRMS WHAT THE PRESIDENT HAS
CONSISTENTLY STATED-- THAT REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS SHOULD
COME TOGETHER AND ENACT MEDICARE REFORM THIS YEAR.
The 1997 Trustees Report estimates that the Medicare Trust Fund will remain solvent
until2001.
WE WELCOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE TRUST FUND. PRESIDENT CLINTON
HAS BEEN ACTING TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM SINCE HE TOOK OFFICE.
The President's 1993 Economic Plan extended the life of the Trust Fund by three years.
· In 1994, the reforms included in the Health Security Act would have strengthened the
Trust Fund by five years.
In 1995 and 1996, the Presidentproposed Medicare reforms in the context ofhis balanced ·
budget that would have extended the life of the Trust Fund for at least a decade.
THIS YEAR THE PRESIDENT'S BALANCED BUDGET GUARANTEES THE LIFE
OF THE TRUST FUND AT LEAST A DECADE.
HCFA's Chief Actuary confirms that, under the President's proposals, the life of the
Trust Fund would be extended at least a decade.
ACTION IS NEEDED- REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS SHOULD USE TIDS
OPPORTUNITY TO COME TOGETHER IN A BIPARTISAN MANNER TO ADDRESS
THE NEED FOR REAL MEDICARE REFORM.
.
The need for responsible intervention to improve the Trust Fund is real. The
President has a proposal that addresses this need in a responsible way, without imposing
devastating provider cuts, increasing beneficiary costs, or enacting structural changes that
devastate the program and the people it serves.
This report should not be used irresponsibly. The upcoming Trust Fund report should
not be used to recklessly frighten the 38 million Medicare beneficiaries and their families
into thinking that their benefits are in imminent danger. They simply are not.
We have time to act this year. Over $120 billion remains in the Trust Fund (as of
March 1997). While incoming revenues are somewhat less than outgoing payments, the
current balance in the Trust Fund means that there is no danger that claims will not be
paid.
·..'·
.--.
IT IS TIME TO PUT PARTISAN DIFFERENCES ASIDE AND AGREE ON MEDICARE
REFORMS THAT WILL EXTEND. THE LIFE OF THE TRUST FUND AND
STRENGTHEN THE MEDICARE PROGRAM.
�,,
].'·
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April23, 1997
MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
Chris Jennings
cc:
Bruce Reed, Gene Sperling,John Hilley, Melanne Verveer
SUBJECT:
Introduction of a New Bipartisan Children's Health Bill
Tomorrow afternoon, Senator Chafee and Senator Rockefeller will lead a bipartisan group of
· at least 13 Senators (Hatch, Snowe, Collins, Jeffords, Breaux, Kerrey, Bingaman, Dodd, Kerry,
D' Amato, and Kennedy) in introducing a new $15 billion, Medicaid-based children's health coverage
bill. They will suggest that their plan "targets" 5 million uninsured children, but their staffs are nervous
about overpromising because estimates given to them by the Congressional Budget Office yesterday
have, on a preliminary basis, projected a much lower number. Perhaps because of this, the sponsors will
say that this legislation "complements," but does not replace the need for the Hatch:Kennedy grant
program.
The Chafee/Rockefeller legislation includes: (1) your 12 month continuous coverage initiative; (2) an
enhanced Federal match for children between 100 and 150 percent of poverty for those states that
immediately cover all children up to age 18 to 100 percent of poverty (who are currently being phased-in
over the next 5 years); and (3) a $25 million a year state outreach grant. There will be no specific
fmancing mechanism; apparently the sponsors agree with our current position that the more than $120
billion in Medicare and Medicaid reductions that we are currently proposing is more than adequate to
finance the $15 billion investment. (As a reminder, we are currently carrying about $19 billion for our
new health coverage expansions.) The introduction of yet another bipartisan children's. health coverage bill clearly strengthens your hand in
the balanced budget negotiations. It is particularly worth noting that a Chafee-Rockefeller type initiative
can now easily be envisioned passing out of the Finance Committee since four of the Republican
cosponsors sit on the Committee. This bill also helps respond,t() the Republican Budget Committee
Chair's stated desire to avoid the establishment of new programs to address Presidential priorities.
We believe that the Chafee/Rockefeller bill still requirel)'a good deal of work to most.OO.ciently cover a
greater number of uninsured children. It also seems likely that we will probably still need some type of
grant program to build onto Medicaid improvements to get the most children for the least amount of
money. Having said this, the introduction of this legislation undoubtably enhances the likelihood that a
substantive children's coverage bill can emerge from the Congress.
-
-o..
�--~-~-~,~-~----~---~--------.
-.-------------------------------------------.
.
'I
]!•
Q&A on Chafee-Rockefeller Children's Health Bill
Question:
Does the President support the new children's health bill being introduced by
a bipartisan group of Senators led by Senators Chafee and Rockefeller?
Answer:
The President is extremely encouraged by the emergence of yet another bipartisan
children's health care proposal. Making a significant Federal investment in
children's health care continues to be a top priority for this Administration.
We are currently reviewing the details of the Chafee-Rockefeller bill. The
President is extremely supportive of expanding health coverage to more children
by building on the Medicaid program. The Chafee-Rockefeller bill offers
matching rates for states which expand Medicaid coverage to children above the
mandatory level.
Cosponsors are discussing this bill as a complement to the Hatch-Kennedy block
grant proposal to address the pockets of uninsured children in the middle class.
The President too, believes that a multi-tiered approach to expanding coverage
may be the best way to more uninsured children.
We look forward to working with Chafee, Rockefeller and a host of other
Democrats and Republicans on the Hill interested in this issue to ensure that any
balanced budget deal inCludes a significant investment in children's health
coverage.
Background: On Thursday, April22, Senators Chafee and Rockefeller are introducing a
bipartisan children's health coverage bill which offers states higher Medicaid
matching rates if they expand coverage to children above the mandatory levels.
This expansion is contingent on states' choosing to extend 12 month continuous
coverage to all children.
Cosponsors ofthis bill-- including Hatch, Kennedy, Chafee, Kerrey, Kerry,
Snowe, Bingaman, Dodd, Collins, D' Amato, Breaux, and Rockefeller-- believe
that this bill could complement the Hatch-Kennedy bill which provides block
grants to states to cover uninsured children. This potentially increases the
investment in children's health to $25-$35 billion.
Some Republicans like the Chafee-Rockefelier option because it builds on the
current Medicaid program, rather than 'starting a new program.
.
:
-
-:.__
�,,
].'·
Additional Children's Heath Q&As
Question:
Does the President support the Hatch-Kennedy children's health care bill
which finances children's health care expansions by increasing the tobacco
tax?
Answer:
First of all, the President is delighted that there is so much bipartisan interest in
expanding health coverage to children, and he will continue to work with Senators
Hatch and Kennedy and others in Congress to pass a balanced budget this year
that extends health care coverage to more uninsured children.
While the Hatch-Kennedy bill pays for new expansions by increasing the tobacco
tax, the President has a proposal which would expand coverage to millions of
additional children and that is paid for in the context of his balanced budget plan.
Regardless of the source of financing, assuring a significant commitment for
children's health care will continue to be~ top priority for the President.
Question:
Didn't the President propose to increase tobacco taxes in his own health care
reform bill?
Answer:
Yes. However, the President's current proposal illustrates how children's health
coverage can be financed without this mechanism. Again, regardless of the
source of financing, children's health coverage is a top priority for the President.
We can no longer tolerate a nation that has 10 million uninsured children. As we
develop bipartisan legislation to address this unacceptable problem, we must
assume a certain financing source that helps pay for children's health insurance.
Additional Medicare Q&As
Question:
Democrats are saying that the Administration has gone far enough with
Medicare savings. Are you concerned that your base Democrats will
withdraw their support?.
Answer:
The President has put forth a strong Medicare proposal that extends the life of the
Trust Fund to 2007 while modernizing and strengthening the program. The
President has always been and always will be opposed to excessive Medicare cuts.
He is working with the Democratic Leadership to ensure.that any Medicare
proposal is based on strong policy rationale and does not excessively or unfairly
burden Medicare beneficiaries or the p~oviders who serve them. Democrats have
always been responsible stewards ofthe Medicare Trust Fund, and the President is
confident that there will be broad Dc;mocratic support for any necessary reforms
to the program.
·'
:----
�. ]_!,
Question:
Do you plan to eliminate any of the new benefit improvements in your
Medicare plan?
Answer:
While everything will clearly be "on the table" in our budget discussions, we are
extremely sensitive about making any changes to the important beneficiary
improvements in our Medicare plan. Over three quarters of Medicare
beneficiaries earn less than $25,000 per year. Improving benefits and fixing flaws
in the program which place undue costs on this vulnerable population is a high
priority for "this Administration. The President's proposal to cover preventive
services is recognized by Republicans and Democrats alike as a sound, costeffective investment.
Question:
How do you respond to the Republican criticism that your Medicare plan
does nothing but preserve the status quo?
Answer:
That is absolutely not true. The President's budget takes important steps to
modernize Medicare and bring it into the 21st century through a number of
structural reforms including:·
•
Establishing new private plans including Preferred Provider
Organizations and Provider Sponsored Organizations -- available to
seniors and people With disabilities.
•
Establishing market-oriented purchasing for Medicare including the
new ·prospective payment systems for horne health care, nursing horne
care, and outpatient hospital services, as well as competitive bidding
authority and the use of centers of excellence to improve quality and cut
back on costs.
•
Adding new Medigap protections making it possible for beneficiaries
to switch back from a managed care plan to traditional Medicare without
being underwritten by insurers for private supplemental insurance
coverage. This should encourage more beneficiaries to opt for managed
care because it addresses the fear that such a choice would lock them in
forever.
•
•
Expanding coverage for preventive services including expanding
services for mammographies and eolorectal screening, improving selfmanagement of diseases like diabetes, and extending respite benefits that
are increasingly important to our older Americans.
Empowering America's seniors to make educated choices about their
health care by providing beneficiaries with comparative information on
all managed care and Medigap plans in the area where tliey live. To help
make those comparisons meaningful, the budget would create standardized
packages for additional benefits.
�.
]}.
GENERAL CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM
Q:
There are now 57 separate proposals for campaign finance reform. Isn't the
legislation dead for this Congress?
A:
As has often been said, in Congress there are 535 "experts" on campaign reform.
That's certainly true. But there is only one broad-based proposal that is supported
by Democrats and Republicans -the legislation introduced by McCain and Feingold
and by Shays and Meehan. I think that when the matter is proposed to Members of
Congress, and they are forced to vote yes or no on this legislation, they will have a
very hard time explaining to their constituents why they voted no. As for people who
say "there won't be reform this year''- on an issue like this, popular sentiment can
crystallize very quickly. Legislation that didn't look like it had a chance of passing,
. a month later, can be on its way to the President's desk. That's what happened, for
example, on the lobbying reformlegislati<:>n and the gift ban in 1995.
Q:
·Some people say that the McCain~Feingold approach will require as much
fundraising as today. Senators John ·Kerry, Paul Wellstone, and John Glenn
have proposed legislation to provide complete public financing for congressional
elections. If candidates accepted the public funding, they wouldn't be able to
raise private money. What is your view of this approach?
A:
I believe that the basic test .for campaign finance reform must be that it ·be
comprehensive, that it be fair to both parties, that it level the playing fields, and that
it curb the amount of money in elections. I welcome any effort that works to build
consensus toward these goals. I believe that McCain Feingo~d- which doesn't have
public financing, but instead gives candidates free TV time provided by broadcasters
-is the most realistic way to achieve these goals .. Of course, Sens. Kerry, Wellstone
and Glenn also support-McCain Feingold.
As for public financing, my 1993 campaign finance reform legislation provided partial
public financing for congressional candidates~ and I think that states who are
experimenting with public funding should be able to do so. But we have a rare chance
to enact broad an~ bipartisan reform- reform that does not include public funding and we can't lose sight of that mission .
. ·..
�~~~~~~--~~~--~~~==~------------------------------------------------------------
·~
>>
.
WELFARE REFORM LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS
Q:
A:
...
·
More and more Republicans seem to be br~king ranks with their leadership to
support some changes to the immigration parts of the welfare law. Do you think
you have a chance in your negotiations with Congress to make real changes in
this.area?
I think that members of Congress and Governors and state legislators and county
officials and mayors are gaining a new realization of the impact of some parts of the
new law that I had a problem with froin the beginning _.:. those parts not related to
putting people to work Many state and local officials are now looking mote carefully
at their budgets and the potential eosts of assisting disabled legal immigrants, many
in nursing homes, Without federal help. We are now .about 100 days away from
August 1st, when many disabled individuals will lose their SSI and Medicaid benefits. ·
I think that, over time, more and more people. will come to see the harm that these
provisions could. do and will support my proposal to provide medical and other vital
assistance to legal immigrants who work hard, pay taxes and contribute to American
society and fall on hard times through no fault of their own.
·)
. :·
FLORIDA LEGAL IMl\fiGRANTS LAWSUIT
Q:
The state of Florida has sued the federal government to overturn the part of the
welfare law that eliminates benefits for most legal immigrants. Governor Chiles
says the welfare law will leave state and local governments in Florida holding the
bag for billions of lost benefits. What is your position on this?
A:
I believe legal immigrants who work hard, pay taxes and contribute to American
society and fall on hard times through no fault of their own should get medical and
other vital assistance when they need it. That's why my budget provides $14.6 billion
in assistance for those legal immigrants- children and individuals with disabilities-who, through no fault of their own, are unable to work.
As you indicated, the state of Florida filed a lawsuit Wednesday. The lawyers at the
Department of Justice have just begun to look at it, and I do not have an indication
from the Department about their plans. Generally, however, the role of the
Department of Justice is to defend the constitutionality of federal laws when they are
challenged in suits like this one.
�·f~il!l"'?Nh3N"'?f''"'>iY»~>>>''>
~~,~-,~~··~~'"""'~- ......--~--~-·
.- ~~--------------~~-
·:··.·~:
TEXAS WELFARE PLAN
Q:
The Associated Press reported Tuesday that the "Texas Welfare Plan is stalled
at -the White House." Is it the usual procedure for you to personally consider
state welfare reform requests?
A:
The state of Texas is asking for far-reaching changes in Medicaid and Food Stamp
laws which.involve several agencies. The agencies are working as hard as they can
to examine all of the relevant issues, and we hope to get the State of Texas an answer
· soon. The agencies have kept us informed of their decision.making process- as they
should, given the significance of what Texas is requesting.
As you know, the Administration gets a lot of waiver requests from the states. The
agencies conduct a review process for each of them. Because .this is a complicated
issue involving several different agencies, the review has been lengthy, probably a little
more than we expected. But the agencies are working to provide Texas with a
response as soon as possible.
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HllUNG
Q:
A:
Earlier this month, you announced that the federal government plans to hire
10,000 welfare recipients. Do you think that federal hiring is the answer to
welfare reform?
The federal government hiring initiative I announced April 1Oth is only one part of our
larger strategy to make welfare reform a reality. First, I have been visiting state
legislatures to share the country's best welfare to work practices and to encourage
every state to rise to the challenge. Second, I have enlisted key members of the
business commuriity in this effort, soliciting pledges of help from major CEOs and
working to build a larger network of business people who will hire welfare recipients.
I plan to meet with a large group ofcorporate CEOs next month to discuss their
specific commitments to make welfare reform a success. Third, I continue to reach
out to nonprofits and the faith community, similarly urging them to meet his challenge
and offering them information and expertise on how to do so.
Finally, I have .proposed $3.6 billion in my FY 1998 budget for several welfare to
work initiatives including tax credits and other incentives for businesses that hire
people off welfare; incentives for states and communities to create more jobs for
welfare recipients; and transportation and child care to help people go to work.
.'
~.
.
:
__;<.. ·.:. ..
·..
�,,
}.'·
CHINA-- WOODWARD STORY
Did top Chinese officials approve plans to buy influence/is it continuing?
• Number of allegations have appeared in the newspapers. As you know, on-going
investigation; because issue is law enforcement matter, dissemination of
information limited to protect the investigation. Under the circumstances, not
appropriate for me to comment.
What affect on US policy/will you raise with Qian?
• I have said in the past, should allegations of illegal activity/ funneling campaign
contributions prove true, would be a serious matter and take appropriate action.
• Both the Vice President and the Secretary of State have communicated that
message to senior Chinese officials. Since the investigation is on-going, it would
premature to speculate on just what response would be appropriate .
. Does this change plans for summit meeting/would it change your plans if ·
proven true?
• Planning to go forward with exchange of state visits; not going to speculate on
hypotheticals.
Should AG share more information with you
• As have said in the past, difficult balancing question between national security
and law enforcement concerns.
How come FBI briefing intelligence committee and not you?
• Not aware of the content of any briefing to the Hill, so inappropriate for me to
contrast information provided to Hill, White House.
·..
('
�•J
/.'·
MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS
Some commentators have accused the Administration of not taking on the
responsibility it should to save the Middle East peace process, even if
that means putting some pressure on Israel to compromise. What are
you doing?
•
I have made it clear since the beginning of my Administration that I am
committed to helping the parties to make peace after five decades of war and
violence. That's why we've remained actively, deeply engaged in the
process through the tough times as well as the good ones.
•
Secretary Albright and I are in regular and constant contact with Arab and
Israeli leaders in order to do everything we can to get the negotiations back
on track. The talks we have had over the past two months, including two
meetings with Prime Minister Netanyahu, have been for the purpose of
developing an approach which will move the process closer to our goal of a
comprehensive peace.
•
For these efforts to succeed, two things are necessary: Zero tolerance for
terror, including a 100% effort to prevent it, and a readiness by both sides to
take steps that build confidence in the integrity of the negotiating process.
Will the decision not to indict Netanyahu help with your efforts to revive the
MEPP?
•
We are continuing our efforts to get the process back on track. I'm not going
to speculate how Israeli internal ~atters might influence that.
Are you satisfied with the level of Palestinian security cooperation with the
Israelis?
• We expect a 100% effort in the fight against terror. Amb. Ross had a positive
meeting with senior Palestinian and Israeli security officials last week. Security
cooperation serves the interest of both 'sides.
·-- ·
-
_..__
�Guidance
for
Good Morning America
Interview
April27, 1997
�THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April27, 1997
INTERVIEW WITH CHARLIE GIBSON OF ABC's GOOD MORNING AMERICA
DATE:
TIME:
FROM:
April 27, 1997
1:45 TO 1:55 PM EDT
Mike McCurry & Stuart Schear
I. PURPOSE
This 10-minute taped interview will provide you with the opportunity to articulate your
philosophy of national service in the context of the service summit in Philadelphia. While the
primary focus of the interview will be on the summit, it will provide you with the opportunity to
address other issues besides national service, including your commitment to a balanced budget
and campaign finance reform as well as your efforts to curtail teenagers' access to tobacco ..
II. BACKGROUND
GOOD MORNING AMERICA is America's second most popular morning show. Charlie
Gibson, the show's anchor, is considerably less flashy than TODAY's Katie Couric, and Gibson
is far less likely to pop very tough questions on extraneous topics. ABC is making a great effort
to cover the summit, and both GOOD MORNING AMERICA and WORLD NEWS TONIGHT ·
are being anchored from Philadelphia.
III. QUESTIONS
Gibson will devote the majority ofthe interview to the summit and the proper role of national
service and volunteerism in American society. Gibson may ask questions on other stories, but he
is unlikely to ambush you. Gibson is likely to ask at least one follow-up question from your
interview on FACE THE NATION.
The following are some of the questions which Gibson may pose:
NATIONAL SERVICE SUMMIT
Critics charge that your emphasis on national service and others' focus on volunteerism
is a cop-out. They describe it as an effort to avoid .traditional responsibilities of the federal
. government to care for low income and other vulnerable Americans. Is there any validity to this
critique?
What is your message to church leaders and others who are protesting the summit?
Some say there has been significant friction between the White House and some of the summit's
�Republican supporters. Is that true?
GEN. POWELL
Are you concerned that the summit is being used as a spring board by Gen. Powell for a
presidential race in the year 2,000?
Given your deeply held convictions on racial healing, don't you see the appeal of a Powell
presidency?
TOBACCO
Why have you given tacit approval to negotiations for a settlement with tobacco companies,
when many anti-tobacco activists view these negotiations as tantamount to a surrender of
principle?
Isn't there an appearance of a conflict of interest to have the First Lady's brother involved as
counsel for the tobacco companies in these negotiations?
HEALTH CARE FOR CHILDREN
Yesterday on FACE THE NATION you spoke favorably of proposals before congress to extend
health care to millions of uninsured American children. Do you support the 43 cent cigarette tax
hike proposed by Sen. Kennedy and Sen. Hatch to pay for expanded access to care?
BUDGET
On FACE THE NATION you noted that you might have some news on a balanced budget
agreement in a few days. Do you have any progress to report on budget negotiations?
On FACE THE NATION, you noted your willingness to consider a change in consumer price
index. Aren't you playing with the security of America's seniors by even suggesting such a
adjustment?
Do you have the will to take the lead on this issue?
HOT BUTTON ISSUES
Kenneth Starr, the Whitewater Special Prosecutor, asked this week for a six month extension of
the grand jury based on evidence of possible obstruction of justice regarding Web Hub bel. Can
you state with certainty that the White House was not involved in obstructing justice in the
·'
· ;·
Hubbel ca.Se?
�On Friday, news reports indicated that White House attorneys were arguing in a Little Rock
courthouse against requests for new subpoenas for the First Lady and the President. What kind of.
information and documents are these subpoenas seeking? Why are White House lawyers
involved?
On Larry King Live earlier this week, James McDougal said that he was tired of covering up the
truth to protect you. Does Mr. McDougal have any credibility?
According to some reports, the Chinese government may be trying to influence American
politics. Isn't this an outrage and shouldn't the President of the United States denounce such
efforts?
III. PARTICIPANTS
The President
Sylvia Matthews
Barry Toiv
Stuart Schear
Charlie Gibson, ABC News
Bob Wheelock, ABC News
Ricki Goldberg, ABC News
IV. PRESS PLAN
Your interview will air over ABC on Monday morning on the GOOD MORNING AMERICA.
On Monday morning, ABC News will release a transcript of the interview to the news wires.
ABC will also make short portions of the interview available to other news organizations, after
the interview airs on Monday morning.
V. SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
12:35 PM TO 1:35PM EDT Pre-Brief, Marcus Foster Stadium
1:35 PM TO 1:45 PM EDT NBC Interview, Marcus Foster Stadium
1:45 PM TO 1:55 PM EDT ABC Interview, Marcus Foster Stadium
VI. REMARKS
None
VII. ATTACHMENT
Talking points on:
•
•
•
Service Summit
Independent Counsel Starr
Tobacco
.'
�•
•
•
•
•
•
Politics
Budget
Health Care
Campaign Finance Reform
Welfare
NSC
�GUIDANCE FOR TELEVISION INTERVIEWS
APRIL 27, 1997
SERVICE SUMMIT
TABA
COUNSEL'S ISSUES
Independent Counsel Starr
TABB
TOBACCO
Tobacco & FDA Qs &As
Tobacco Settlement Talks
TABC
POLITICS
TABD
BUDGET
TABE
HEALTH CARE
Medicare Trust Fund
Memorandum on Children's Health Bill
Q&A on Children's Health Bill
Additional Children's Health Q&A's
Additional Medicare Qs&As
TABF
CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM
TABG
WELFARE
Welfare Reform Legislative Proposals
Florida Legal Immigrants Lawsuit
Texas Welfare Plan
Federal Government Hiring
TABH
NSC GUIDANCE
China- Woodward Story
Middle East Peace Process
TABI
�· ..
'I
SERVICE SUMMIT
Q:
A:
What will the Summit accomplish?
· The Summit is a great opportunity for all Americans to make a commitment to citizen
service, and a chance for all sectors of our society to come together around what matters
most -- our obligation to one another, especially our children.
Government has a critical role in solving our nation's problems and I am proud ·to lead the
efforts of the federal government. But clearly we can accomplish more if all our citizens
pull together to solve our problems. Already the Sulllllllt has prompted an outpouring of
commitments by corporations and non-profits across the country to help in our mutual
endeavor. And I know the organizers of the Summit are committed to making sure that
all this good work doesn't end at the Summit, but that it continues in communities-across
our country.
Q:
Isn't the Summit one big photo opportunity?
A:
I think it's both exciting and tremendously encouraging that the Summit has captured the
public imagination the way it has. Starting with the inspiration of the late Gov. George
Romney, continuing with the enthusiastic support of all the former Presidents, and with
the dynamic contributions of Gen. Colin Powell, this endeavor has really sparked the
interest of the American people. The media, which is so often accused of cynicism, has
responded so positively to this event. We would be foolish not to take advantage of this
great opportunity to focus the attention of the American people on citizen service and the
goals of the Summit.
In addition, the real work to be done at the Summit is probably the least glamorous part -the work by the 140 communities attending the Summit. They are working on plans to
bring the Summit's goals to life in their own communities.
Q:
Isn't this Summit really the first .round of the Presidential race in the year 2000,
between Powell's involvement and reports that the White House insisted that the
Summit drop Bill Bradley?
A:
One of the things I like most about the way General Powell talks about this Summit is his
emphasis that it's not bipartisan-- it's non-partisan. These themes of service and children
transcend politics. That's why you see all the former Presidents coming together, people
from all walks of life and political persuasion, agreeing that citizen action can make a
difference.
�,,'•.
Doesn't the Summit downplay the role of government in solving our problems, and
Q:
argue that volunteers can do it alone?
A:
Government has a critical role in solving our nation's problems, and 1 am proud of what
we have accomplished for this nation's young people, in education, health care, making
our communities safer, and offering young people a chance to serve. But as I have said
many times, the era ofbig government may be over, but the era ofbig challenges for our
nation is not. Clearly we can accomplish more if all our citizens pull together to solve ol,lr
problems. That's why it is so important for us to harness the power of citizen service to '
accomplish our goals. And it's the theory behind AmeriCorps, a program of which I am
. especially proud.
Members of my Cabinet along with other federal officials are attending the Summit to lend
their expertise to this effort, along with scores of officials from state and local
government. What you will see at the suiiU.Tii.t is communities, non-profits, corporations,
government, and many others working side by side to solve problems.
I am also proud that federal agencies have made over 40 commitments to the Summit -- to
tutor. and mentor students, to create afterschool programs, and to create opportunities for
young people to serve. For example, the Department of the Navy has committed to tutor
or mentor 700,000 young people. Federal agencies have agreed to expand from 1,500 to
2,000 the number of schools they have adopted or have partnerships with.
Q:
Isn't the Summit is an effort to paper over the government's withdrawal of
assistance from needy children and families, exemplified by the new welfare law?
A:
I am proud to have signed the welfare law and given millions of families throughout this
country a chance to move from welfare to work. Communities, governments, churches,
business, and welfare recipients themselves are now· working together to make this law a
success. The Summit complements our efforts to create partnerships between government
and the private and nonprofit sectors to accomplish our goals.
Q:
Doesn't the Summit reveal a rift between your approach of service and AmeriCorps
and the volunteer approach championed by former President Bush through his
. Points of Light program?
A:
Voluntary action is a vibrant part of American landscape. It is something we should all
take pride in. Showing that the service model and the voluntarism model actually work
well together is what this Summit is all about.
'·
�Talking Points
April 24, 1997
Independent Counsel Starr
Q:
Yesterday Independent Counsel Starr requested a six month extension of the Whitewater
Grand Jury. Inhis pleadings. Mr. Starr indicates that he is looking at a number of issues.
including obstruction of justice. Are you concerned about these developments?
A:
I am not concerned. I am not going to comment on the Independent Counsel's activities.
I will say that I have answered all of Mr. Starr's questions, that other entities that have
looked at this have found that we did nothing wrong, and that I hope this will get
wrapped up soon. ·
Q:
Mr. McDougal said on Larry King Live on Monday night that you lied when you denied
having attended a meeting with David Hale and Mr. McDougal about the Susan .
McDougal loan~ Who should the public believe in light of both Mr. Hale's and now Mr..
McDougal's statements?
A:
I have testified truthfully on these matters.
Q:
Independent Counsel Starr also indicates that certain witnesses have asserted privileges
which have obstructed their search for the truth. Have you personally. or has the White
House. asserted any privileges to withhold information from Mr. Starr?
·A:
As you know, I'm not going to comment on Mr. Starr and his investigation other than to
say Hillary and I have answered all of his questions.
Tobacco Litigation
Q:
Today's New York Times questions Hugh Rodham's role in the tobacco settlement
discussions. Have you discussed the settlement negotiations with your brother-in-law?
A:
Hugh has been working for over a year on tobacco litigation issues. From time to time he
has updated me on f!ie status of the discussions. If a settlement among the parties is
reached, I of course will evaluate it based upon what's in the public's interest.
Q:
What has been the White House's role in the settlement negotiations. and in particular.
what is Bruce Lindsey's role?
A:
Bruce has had discussions with the various interests in the talks to ensure those matters
about which we care-- namely, the FDA rules-- are protected. He,has monitored the
negotiations, but no one from the Whit~ House has attended any of the negotiation
sessions. And, other than Hugh, I have'not discussed this matter with
of the parties.
[Check with POTUS].
iify
�Tobacco Q&As
April 25, 1997
COURT DECISION
Background
The President announced the FDA rule to protect children from tobacco in August 1996; the rule
was immediately challenged by the industry in U.S. District Court in North Carolina.
The Decision
The court ruled that FDA has jurisdiction and that the access and labeling provisions are still in
effect, but that the advertising and promotion portions of the rule are invalid.
Statement
This is a landmark and historic day for the nation's public health and our children. With tllis
ruling, we can regulate nicotine-containing tobacco products and take important steps to protect
our children from a lifetime of addiction and the prospect of having their lives .cut short by .
tobacco-related diseases. We have taken a monumental first step down the long, hard road we
knew we had to go to protect our children.
Q:
What are you going to do about the provision of the rule the court struck down?
A:
The bottom line is that we are going to protect our children. Today we won an historic
victory in court, and we're going forward with the provisions the court upheld. A
statement on what next legal steps the Administration will take will come shortly.
Q:
Doesn't this mean the FDA will have to do something more drastic in terms of access
to protect children -- ~ike make these prescription products?
A:
We have taken a common sense approach to protect our children by restricting access and
we have proposed a common sense approach to limiting appeal. We still believe that is
the right way to approach this terrible public health crisis threatening our children.
Q:
Doesn't this mean more delay?
A:
The access provisions that went into effect in February have been upheld, remain in place
and we are working with states to ensure compliance.
�,,
. I-'·
Q:
Why not seck a legislative settlement'?
A:
From the beginning, we have said that if Congress wants to put forth a legislative
package as strong as our FDA rule with appropriate oversight and enforcement, we
remain prepared to work with Congress.
Q:
What does this mean in everyday terms?
A:
It means that provisions that went into effect in February making it harder for children to
buy cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products will stay in effect, and we are working
with states to begin checking for compliance. And it means that FDA has authority to
regulate nicotine-containing tobacco products.
Q:
If you appeal, do you think an appeal will be successful?
A:
This is an historic decision by the court on the Agency's authority over tobacco products.
We believe we have a very strong case and we will ultimately prevail on all parts of the
rule to protect our children.
Q:
Isn't it time to seek legislation?
A:
We have been open to a legislative solution that is as strong as the FDA rule with
appropriate oversight and enforcement since the President announced the proposal in
August 1995. We are still open to a legislative solution if it accomplishes our goal of
protecting our children.
SETTLEMENT TALKS
Q.
How does the judge's decision affect the Administration's interest in a settlement?
A.
I have no idea. Today,_ we should focus on this ruling. [Go to statement on ruling
above].
Q.
Isn't the Administration deeply involved in settlement talks?
A.
Like other parties interested in this issue, we have been monitoring the talks. We have a
deep interest in protecting kids and the public health.
�. J.!.
Follow-up
Q.
But papers have reported that Bruce Lindsey is intimately involved in the settlement
talks.
A.
My staff are staying informed of the talks, but we are not a party in the talks. My only
interest is in protecting kids and the public health.
Q:
Would you support a settlement that gives tobacco companies immunity?
A:
I'm not in any position to judge any settlement. As I've said, my only interest is in
protecting kids and the public's health. We have to do right by them.
Follow-up
Q:
Then, what form of immunity would you support? .
A:
I'm not going to speculate on what the participants in the negotiations might agree to. My
Administration proposed the toughest measures ever to protect children from tobacco,
and I am going to fight to see that those restrictions take effect. I'm not going to agree to
anything with respect to tobacco that jeopardizes the public health. Our focus will stay
on protecting kids and the public health.
Follow-up
Q:
Anti-tobacco advocates -- including former FDA Commissioner David Kessler -- held a
press conference yesterday saying immunity should be off the table altogether. Do you
disagree?
A:
I have tremendous respect for Dr. Kessler on this issue. Again, I'm not going to support
anything that jeopardizes the public health.
�I'
Questions on Tobacco Settlement Talks
.;~·;
·.·
Q.
How does the judge's decision affect the Administration's interest in a settlement?
A.
I have no idea. Today, we should focus on thjs ruling. [Go to statement on ruling] .
Q.
Isn't the Administration deeply involved in settlement talks?
A.
Like other parties interested in this issue, we have been monitoring the talks; We have a
deep interest in protecting kids and the public health.
Follow-up
. ·:
~
1.?~
Q.
But papers have reported that Broce Lindsey is intimately involved in the settlement
talks.
A.
My staff are staying informed of the talks, but we are not a party in the talks. My only
interest is in protecting kids and the public health.
Q:
Would you support a settlement that gives tobacco companies immunity?
A:
I'm not in any position to judge any settlement. But, I'll say this: everybody. agrees that
blanket immunity is out of the question. As I've said, my only interest is in protecting
kids and the public's health.. We have to do right by them.
Follow-up
Q:
Then, what form of immunity would you support?
A:
I'm not going to speeulate on what the participants in the negotiations might agree to. My
Administration proposed the toughest measures ever to protect children from tobacco,
and I am going to fight to see that those restrictions take effect. I'm not going to agree to
anything with resp~ct to tobacco that jeopardizes the public health. Our focus will stay
on protecting kids and the public health.
Follow-up
Q:
Anti-tobacco advocates._ including former FDA Commissioner David Kessler- held a
press conference yesterday saying immunity should be off the table altogether. Do you
disagree?
A:
I have tremendous respect for Dr. Kes'sier on this issue. Again, I'm:ndt-going to support
anything that jeopardizes the public health.
I
�,,
]!:
POLITICS
Q:
The Democratic National Committee is $15 million in debt. The committee is
holding a major fundraising event next week but the proceeds from that event
will not begin. to put the Committee in the black. What is the future of the
national Democratic Party? Will it be financially able to play a role in the 1997
and 1998 elections and beyond?
A:
I believe in my party and I have made and will continue to make myself available to
help raise funds for it. A Party's real strength is measured in the quality of its ideas
and its candidates. By that standard, the Democratic Party is wealthy.
Q:
Will you or do you support the Vice President forpresident in 2000? .
A:
The next election is too far away. We don't need to start that campaign today. But,
as you know, the Vice President is an integral part of this team, and I can think of no
one who would be better prepared or more capable of doing the job of President than
Al Gore.
Q:
Do you think the manner in which the Democratic National Committee engaged
in fundraising and the allegations of improprieties have made Asian Americans
feel under siege? Do you think it has increased the level of xenophobia in this
country?
A: ·
Many allegations have been made, some of them unfairly. Everyone --especially those
. in the Congress and in the media, because they have so much power -needs to be
very careful when making allegations because they can potentially hurt aninnocent
person or group of people. Sometimes in the hurly burly of politics people forget that
their words or their actions can have a huge impact on a person's life or the lives of
an entire ethnic group.
�,,
}.'·
0& A ON BUDGET NEGOTIATIONS
Q:
HAS THERE BEEN ANY PROGRESS ON THE BUDGET TALKS?
Q:
ARE YOU CLOSE TO A DEAL?
A:
I am encouraged by the progress that has been made and hopeful that we are going .
to reach a bipartisan budget agreement and it its important that we do so.
•
The deficit has fallen dramatically from $290 billion in 1992 to $107 billion in 1996.
It is time to finish the job. At the outset this year, I met the Republicans half-way on
Medicare. I have put a detailed and serious balanced budget on the table.
•
I then instructed my economic team to work with members of Congress in a
cooperative spirit. Sensing an opportunity to move us forward, I invited Congressional
budget leaders to the White House before my trip to Helsinki. Since then, budget talks
have entered a new phase and I remain optimistic that an agreement can be reached.
•
I am determined to reach a balanced budget agreement that can win the majority
support of both parties in Congress and that is consistent with the priorities of the
American people. A good agreement must include, at a minimum, that our children will
have the best education from the first days of life through college to prepare for the 21st
century; that more children will have access to quality health care; that our environment
. will be protected; that the most vulnerable among us will be protected; and that Medicare
and Medicaid will be strengthened and modernized.
Q:
IT HAS BEEN REPORTED THAT YOUR NEGOTIATORS AND THE
REPUBLICAN NEGOTIATORS HAVE COME TO A TENTATIVE
AGREEMENT THAT WOULD COMPRISE A NETT AX CUT OF AROUND $80
BILLION AND MEDICARE SAVINGS OF AROUND $110 TO $120 BILLION.
ARE THESE REPORTS ACCURATE?
A:
We are in the middle of serious discussions on the best way to achieve a balanced budget
that wins the support of a majority of both Democrats and Republicans. These
discussions, I believe, have been going well and it would not serve this process very well
to comment on specifics at this point
�,,
i.'·
Q:
WHAT IS YOUR REACTION TO THE LETTER SENT TO SEN. LOTT FROM A
GROUP OF SENATE REPUBLICANS OUTLINING CERTAIN DEMANDS
BEFORE ANY BUDGET DEAL CAN BE COMPLETED. DOES THIS HURT
CHANCES FOR GETTING IT DONE?
A:
Q:
(1)
As I have said before, we all need to be flexible and be willing to compromise.
(2)
Each of us must be willing to compromise our sense of the perfect, to reach
an agreement that advances the greater good. And we can do so without
compromising our deeply-held values.
(3)
It is critical that any budget deal contain important investments in our
priorities, such as extending health care coverage to 5 million children, providing
greater educational opportunity and protecting the environment.
(4)
We can achieve a mainstream balanced budget agreement that garners the
support of a majority of Democrats and Republicans as well as the overwhelming
majority of the American people.
SENATOR LOTT HAS STATED THAT HE WILL RECEIVE SOME CRITICISM
FROM SOME IN HIS PARTY FOR SUPPORTING THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS
CONVENTION. HE SAYS THAT IT IS NOW YOUR TURN TO MAKE SOME
BUDGET CONCESSIONS AND SHOW SOME LEADERSHIP. DO YOU PLAN
TO DO THAT?
A:
(1)
As I have said before, we all need to be flexible and be willing to compromise.
(2)
Each of us must be willing to compromise our sense of the perfect, to reach
an agreement that advances the greater good. And we can do so without
compromising our deeply-held values.
(3)
It is critical that any budget deal contain important investments in our
priorities, such as extending health care coverage to 5 million children, providing
greater educational opportunity and protecting the environment.
(4)
We can achieve a mainstream balanced budget agreement that garners the
support of a majority of Democrats and Republicans as well as the overwhelming
�'I
].'•
majority of the American people.
�,,
. I!·
MEDICARE TRUST FUND TALKING POINTS
· April 24, 1997
THE MEDICARE TRUSTEES REPORT CONFIRMS WHAT THE PRESIDENT HAS
CONSISTENTLY STATED-- THAT REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS SHOULD
COME TOGETHER AND ENACT MEDICARE REFORM THIS YEAR.
The 1997 Trustees Report estimates that the Medicare Trust Fund will remain solvent
until2001.
WE WELCOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE TRUST FUND. PRESIDENT CLINTON
HAS BEEN ACTING TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM SINCE HE TOOK OFFICE.
The President's 1993 Economic Plan extended the life of the Trust Fund by three years.
In 1994, the reforms included in the Health Security Act would have strengthened the
Trust Fund by five years.
--
In 1995 and 1996, the President proposed Medicare reforms in the context of his balanced ·
budget that would have extended the life of the Trust Fund for at least a decade.
THIS YEAR THE PRESIDENT'S BALANCED BUDGET GUARANTEES THE LIFE
OF THE TRUST FUND AT LEAST A DECADE.
HCF A's Chief Actuary confirms that, under the President's proposals, the life of the
Trust Fund would be extended at least a decade .
. ACTION IS NEEDED-- REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS SHOULD USE TIDS
OPPORTUNITY TO COME TOGETHER IN A BIPARTISAN MANNER TO ADDRESS
THE NEED FOR REAL MEDICARE REFORM.
The need for responsible intervention to improve the Trust Fund is real. The
President has a proposal that addresses this need in a responsible way, without imposing
devastating provider cuts, increasing beneficiary costs, or enacting structural changes that
devastate the program and the people it serves.
This report should not be used irresponsibly. The upcoming Trust Fund report should
not be used to recklessly frighten the 38 million Medicare beneficiaries and their families
into thinking that their benefits are in imminent danger. They simply are not.
We have time to act this year. Over $120 billion remains in the Trust Fund (as of
March 1997). While incoming revenues are somewhat less than outgoing payments, the
current balance in the Trust Fund means that there is no danger that claims will not be
paid.
~
f
• --.
IT IS TIME TO PUT PARTISAN DIFFERENCES ASIDE AND AGREE ON MEDICARE
REFORMS THAT WILL EXTEND THE LIFE OF THE TRUST FUND AND
STRENGTHEN THE MEDICARE PROGRAM.
�'I
i•·
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April23, 1997
MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
Chris Jennings
cc:
Bruce Reed, Gene Sperling, John Hilley, Melanne Verveer
SUBJECT:
Introduction of a New Bipartisan Children's Health Bill ·
Tomorrow afternoon, Senator Chafee and Senator Rockefeller will lead a bipartisan group of
at least 13 Senators (Hatch, Snowe, Collins, Jeffords, Breaux, Kerrey, Bingaman, Dodd, Kerry,
D'Amato, and Kennedy) in introducing a new $15 billion, Medicaid-based children's health coverage
bill. They will suggest that their plan "targets" 5 million uninsured children, but their staffs are nervous
about overpromising because estimates given to them by the Congressional Budget Office yesterday
have, on a preliminary basis, projected a much lower number. Perhaps because of this, .the sponsors will
say that this legislation "complements," but does not replace the need for the Hatch-Kennedy grant
program.
The Chafee/Rockefeller legislation includes: (I) your 12 month continuous coverage initiative; (2) an
enhanced Federal match for children between 100 and 150 percent of poverty for those states that
immediately cover all children up to age 18 to 100 percent of poverty (who are currently being phased-in
over the next 5 years); and (3) a $25 million a year state outreach grant. There will be no specific
fmancing mechanism; apparently the sponsors agree with our current position that the more than $120
billion in Medicare and Medicaid reductions that we are currently proposing is more than adequate to
finance the $15 billion investment. (As a reminder, we are currently carrying about $19 billion for our
new health coverage expansions.) The introduction of yet another bipartisan children's health coverage bill clearly strengthens your hand in
the balanced budget negotiations. It is particularly worth noting that a Chafee-Rockefeller type initiative
can now easily be envisioned passing out of the Finance Committee since four of the Republican
cosponsors sit on the Committee. This bill also helps respondtp the Republican Budget Committee
Chair's stated desire to avoid the establishment of new programs to address Presidential priorities.
We believe that the Chafee/Rockefeller bill still requir~~·a good deal of work to most.officiently cover a
greater number of uninsured children. It also seems likely that we will probably still need some type of
grant program to build onto Medicaid improvements to get the most children for the least amount of
money. Having said this, the introduction of this legislation undoubtably enhances the likelihood that a
substantive children's coverage bill can emerge from the Congress.
~
---
�Q&A on Chafee-Rockefeller Children's Health Bill
Question:
Does the President support the new children's health bill being introduced by
a bipartisan group of Senators led by Senators Chafee and Rockefeller?
Answer:
The President is extremely encouraged by the emergence of yet another bipartisan
children's health care proposal. Making a significant Federal investment in
children's health care continues to be a top priority for this Administration.
We are currently reviewing the details of the Chafee-Rockefeller bill. The
President is extremely supportive of expanding health coverage to more children
by building on the Medicaid program. The Chafee-Rockefeller bill offers
matching rates for states which expand Medicaid coverage to children above the
mandatory level.
Cosponsors are discussing this bill as a complement to the Hatch-Kennedy block
grant proposal to address the pockets of uninsured children in the middle class.
The President too, believes that a multi-tiered approach to expanding coverage
. may be the best way to more uninsured children.
We look forward to working with Chafee, Rockefeller and a host of other
Democrats and Republicans on the Hill interested in this issue to ensure that any
balanced budget deal inCludes a significant investment in children's health
coverage.
Background: On Thursday, April22, Senators Chafee and Rockefeller are introducing a
bipartisan children's health coverage bill which offers states higher Medicaid
matching rates if they expand coverage to children above the mandatory levels.
This expansion is contingent on states' choosing to extend 12 month continuous
coverage to all children.
Cosponsors of this bill-- including Hatch, Kennedy, Chafee, Kerrey, Kerry,
Snowe, Bingaman, Dodd, Collins, D' Amato, Breaux, and Rockefeller-- believe
that this bill could complement the Hatch-Kennedy bill which provides block
grants to states to cover uninsured children. This potentially increases the
investment in children's health to $25-$35 billion.
Some Republicans like the Chafee-Rockefeller option because it builds on the
current Medicaid program, rather than starting a new program.
·.. '
�·. .7/
Additional Children's Heath Q&As
Question:
Does the President support the Hatch-Kennedy children's health care bill
which finances children's health care expansions by increasing the tobacco
tax?
Answer:
First of all, the President is delighted that there is so much bipartisan interest in
expanding health coverage to children, and he will continue to work with Senators
Hatch and Kennedy and others in Congress to pass a balanced budget this year
that extends health care coverage to more uninsured children.
While the Hatch-Kennedy bill pays for new expansions by increasing the tobacco
tax, the President has a proposal which would expand coverage to millions of
additional children and that is paid for in the context of his balanced budget plan.
Regardless of the source of financing, assuring a significant commitment for
children's health care will continue to be~ top priority for the President.
Question:
Didn't the President propose to increase tobacco taxes in his own health care
reform bill?
Answer:
Yes. However, the President's current proposal illustrates how children's health
coverage can be financed without this mechanism. Again, regardless of the
source of financing, children's health coverage is a top priority for the President.
We can no longer tolerate a nation that has 10 million uninsured children. As we
develop bipartisan legislation to address this unacceptable problem, we must
assume a certain financing source that helps pay for children's health insurance.
Additional Medicare Q&As
Question:
Democrats are saying that the Administration has gone far enough with
Medicare savings.· Are you concerned that your base Democrats will
withdraw their support?
Answer:
The President has put forth a strong Medicare proposal that extends the life of the
Trust Fund to 2007 while modernizing and strengthening the program. The
President has always been and always will be opposed to excessive Medicare cuts.
He is working with the Democratic Leadership to ensure that any Medicare
proposal is based on strong policy rationale and does not excessively or unfairly
burden Medicare beneficiaries or the providers who serve them. Democrats have
always been responsible stewards ofthe Medicare Trust Fund, and the President is
confident that there will be broad D~mocratic support for any necessary reforms
to the program.
··'
:..:-:
�. ].!,
·Question:
Do you plan to eliminate any of the new benefit improvements in your
Medicare plan?
Answer:
While everything will clearly be "on the table" in our budget discussions, we are
extremely sensitive about making any changes to the important beneficiary
improvements in our Medicare plan. Over three quarters of Medicare
beneficiaries earn less than $25,000 per year. Improving benefits and fixing flaws
in the program which place undue costs on this vulnerable population is a high
priority for this Administration. The President's proposal to cover preventive
services is recognized by Republicans and Democrats alike as a sound, costeffective investment.
Question:
How do you respond to the Republican criticism that your Medicare plan
does nothing but preserve the status quo?
Answer:
That is absolutely not true. The President's budget takes important steps to
modernize Medicare and bring it into the 21st century through a number of
structural reforms including:·
•
Establishing new private plans including Preferred Provider
Organizations and Provider Sponsored Organizations -- available to
seniors and people With disabilities.
•
Establishing market-oriented purchasing for Medicare including the
new prospective payment systems for home health care, nursing home
care, and outpatient hospital services, as well as competitive bidding
authority and the use of centers of excellence to improve quality and cut
back on costs.
•
Adding new Medigap protections making it possible for beneficiaries
to switch back from a managed care plan to traditional Medicare without
being underwritten by insurers for private supplemental insurance
. coverage. This should encourage more beneficiaries to opt for· managed
care because it addresses the fear that such a choice would lock them in
forever.
•
•
Expanding coverage for preventive services including expanding
services for mammographies and colorectal screening, improving selfmanagement of diseases like diabetes, and extending respite benefitS that
are increasingly important to our older Americans.
Empowering America's seniors to make educated choices about their
health care by providing beneficiaries with comparative information on
all managed care and Medigap plans in the area where tlief live. To help
make those comparisons meaningful, the budget would create standardized
packages for additional benefits.
�GENERAL CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM
Q:
· There are now 57 separate proposals for campaign finance reform. Isn't the
legislation dead for this Congress?
A:
As has often been said, in Congress there are 535 "experts" on campaign reform.
That's certainly true. But there is only one broad-based proposal that is supported
by Democrats and Republicans- the legislation introduced by McCain and Feingold
and by Shays and Meehan. I think that when the matter is proposed to Members of
Congress, and they are forced to vote yes or no on this legislation, they will have a
very hard time explaining to their constituents why they voted no. As for people who
say "there won't be reform this year"- on an issue like this, popular sentiment can
.crystallize very quickly. Legislation that didn't look like it had a chance of passing,
. a month later, can be on its way to the President's desk. That's what happened, for
example, on the lobbying reformlegislati<?n and the gift ban in 1995.
Q:
·Some people say that the McCain~Feingold approach will require as much
fund raising as today. Senators John ·Kerry, Paul Wellstone, and John Glenn
have proposed legislation to provide complete public financing for congressional
elections. If candidates accepted the public funding, they wouldn't be able to
raise private money. What is your view of this approach?
A:
I believe that the basic test for campaign finance reform must be that it be
comprehensive, that it be fair to both parties, that it level the playing fields, and that
it curb the amount of money in elections. I welcome any effort that works to build
consensus toward these goals. ·I believe that McCain Feingo~d- which doesn't have
public financing, but instead gives candidates free TV time provided by broadcasters
-:-is the most realistic way to achieve these goals. · Of course, Sens. Kerry, Wellstone
. and Glenn also support-McCain Feingold.
As for public financing, my 1993 campaig;n finance reform legislation provided partial
public financing for· congressional candidates; and I think that states who are
experimenting with public funding should be able to do so. But we have a rare chance
to enact broad an~ bipartisan reform - reform that does not include public funding - .
and we can't lose sight of that mission.
-- ::.:-·-·-
�...
'I
WELFARE REFORM LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS
Q:
More and more Republicans seem to be breaking ranks with their leadership to
support some changes to the immigration parts of the welfare law. Do you think
you have a chance in your. negotiations with Congress to make real changes in
this area?
A:
...
·
I think that members of Congress and Governors and state legislators and county
officials and mayors are gaining a new realization of the impact of some parts of the
new law that I had a problem with from the beginning _.:. those parts not related to
putting people to work. Many state and local officials are now looking more carefully
at their budgets and the potential costs· of assisting disabled legal immigrants, many
in nursing homes, without federal help. We are now .about 100 days away from
August 1st, when many disabled individuals will lose their SSI and Medicaid benefits. ·
I think that, over time, more and more people. Will come to see the harm ihat these
provisions could. do and will support my proposal to provide medical and other vital
assistance to legal immigrants who work hard, pay taxes and contribute to American
society and fall on hard times through no fault of their own.
. ;.
FLORIDA LEGAL IMMlGRANTS LAWSUIT
Q:
The state of Florida has sued the federal government to overturn the part of the
welfare law that eliminates benefits for most legal immigrants. Governor Chiles
says the welfare law will leave state and local governments in Florida holding the
bag for billions of lost benefits.. What is your position on this?
A:
I believe legal immigrants who work hard, pay taxes and contribute to American
society and fall onhard times through no fault of their own should get medical and
other vital assistance when they need it. That's why my budget provides $14.6 billion
·in assistance for those legal immigrants - children and individuals with disabilities who, through no fault of their own, are unable to work.
As you indicated, the state of Florida filed a lawsuit Wednesday. The lawyers at the
Department of 1ustice have just begun to look at it, and I do not have an indication
from. the Department about their plans. Generally, however, the role of the
Department of Justice is to defend the constitutionality of federal laws when they are
challenged in suits like this one.
�.-,
•I
].':
TEXAS WELFARE PLAN
Q:
The Associated Press reported Tuesday that the "Texas Welfare Plan is stalled
at the White House." Is it the usual procedure for you to personally consider
·state welfare reform requests?
A:
The state of Texas is asking for far-reaching changes in Medicaid and Food Stamp
laws which involve several agencies. The agencies are working as hard as they can
to examine all of the relevant issues, and we hope to get the State of Texas an answer
soon. The agencies have kept us informed of their decision.making process- as they
should, given the significance of what Texas is requesting.
As you know, the Administration gets a lot of waiver requests from the states. The
agencies conduct a review process for each of them. Because .this is a complicated
issue mvolving several different agencies, the review has been lengthy, probably a little
more than we expected. But the agencies are working to provide Texas with a .
response as soon as possible.
.•:·
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HlRING
~·:
~:v
·~
.'1':'
Q:
A:
Earlier this month, you announced that the federal government plans to hire
10,000 welfare recipients. Do you think that federal hiring is the answer to
welfare reform?
The federal government hiring initiative I announced April 1Oth is only one part of our
larger strategy to make welfare reform a reality. First, I have been visiting state
legislatures to share the country's best welfare to work practices and to encourage
every state to rise to the challenge. Second, I have enlisted key members of the
business community in this effort, soliciting pledges of help from major CEOs and
working to build a larger network of business people who will hire welfare recipients.
I plan to meet with a large group of corporate CEOs next month to discuss their
specific commitments to make welfare reform a success. Third, I continue to reach
out to nonprofits and the faith community, similarly urging them to meet his challenge
and offering them information and expertise on how to do so.
Finally, I have proposed $3.6 billion in my FY 1998 budget for several welfare to
work initiatives -including tax credits and other incentives for businesses that hire
people off welfare; incentives for states and communities to create more jobs for
welfare recipients; and transportation and child care to help people go to work.
• ~t. .
·~
.. '
�,,
. J.··
CHINA--WOODWARD STORY
Did top Chinese officials approve plans to buy influence/is it continuing?
• Number of allegations have appeared in the newspapers. As you know, on-going
investigation; because issue is law enforcement matter, dissemination of
information limited to protect the investigation. Under the circumstances, not
appropriate for me to comment.
What affect ori US policy/will you raise with Qian?
• I have said in the past, should allegations of illegal activity/ funneling campaign
contributions prove true, would be a serious matter and take appropriate action.
• Both the Vice·President and the Secretary of State have communicated that
message to senior Chinese officials. Since the investigation is on-going, it would
premature to speculate on just what response would be appropriate. ·
Does this change plans for slllrimit meeting/would it change your plans if
proven true?
• Planning to go forward with exchange of state visits; not going to speculate on .
hypotheticals.
Should AG share more information with you
•
As have· said in the past, difficult balancing question between national security
and law enforcement concerns.
How come FBI briefing intelligence committee and not you?
• Not aware of the content of any briefing to the Hill, so inappropriate for me to
contrast information provided to Hill, White House.
·..
('
�,,
i.'·
MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS
Some commentators have accused the Administration of not taking on the
responsibility it should to save the Middle East peace process, even if
that means putting some pressure on Israel to compromise. What are
you doing?
•
I have made it clear since the beginning of my Administration that I am
committed to helping the parties to make peace after five decades of war and
violence. That's why we've remained actively, deeply engaged in the
process through the tough times as well as the good ones.
•
Secretary Albright and I are in regular and constant contact with Arab and
Israeli leaders in order to do everything we can to get the negotiations back
on track. The talks we have had over the past two months, including two
meetings with Prime Minister Netanyahu, have been for the purpose of
developing an approach which will move the process closer to our goal of a
comprehensive peace.
•
For these efforts to succeed, two things are necessary: Zero tolerance for
terror, including a 100% effort to prevent it, and a readiness by both sides to
take steps that build confidence in the integrity of the negotiating process.
Will the decision not to indict Netanyahu help with your efforts to revive the
MEPP?
•
We are continuing our efforts to get the process back on track. I'm not going
to speculate how Israeli internal matters might influence that.
Are you satisfied with the level of Palestinian security cooperation with the
Israelis?
• We expect a 100% effort in the fight against terror. Amb. Ross had a positive
meeting with senior Palestinian and Israeli security officials last week. Security
cooperation serves the interest of both 'sides.
··--
-
.--__ .
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Terry Edmonds
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Office of Speechwriting
James (Terry) Edmonds
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1995-2001
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
<a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/36090" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7763294" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0462-F
Description
An account of the resource
Terry Edmonds worked as a speechwriter from 1995-2001. He became the Assistant to the President and Director of Speechwriting in 1999. His speechwriting focused on domestic topics such as race relations, veterans issues, education, paralympics, gun control, youth, and senior citizens. He also contributed to the President’s State of the Union speeches, radio addresses, commencement speeches, and special dinners and events. The records include speeches, letters, memorandum, schedules, reports, articles, and clippings.
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
William J. Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
635 folders in 52 boxes
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Summit on America’s Future Philadelphia, PA [2]
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Office of Speechwriting
James (Terry) Edmonds
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0462-F
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Box 31
<a href="http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/assets/Documents/Finding-Aids/2006/2006-0462-F.pdf" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7763294" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
William J. Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Reproduction-Reference
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
12/9/2014
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
42-t-7763294-20060462F-031-001-2014
7763294