Jimmy Carter photo

Interview With the President Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session With Editors and News Directors.

January 26, 1979

THE PRESIDENT. First of all, let me thank you all for coming to the White House. Some of you are coming back for a second visit. This has been one of the most interesting, I think, and productive policies that we've adopted, is having key news leaders throughout the Nation come in every 2 weeks, as a matter of fact, 30 to 40 at the time, to meet primarily with my staff and key advisers and also to meet briefly with me.

It's helped us to understand the attitude and the concerns around the Nation. And I hope it's been helpful in letting the people of the different communities understand how our White House operated and what the key issues were at a particular moment.

ADMINISTRATION POLICIES

We've addressed the major domestic issues recently in a fairly complete form in the presentation of the budget. In addition to that, we have some key foreign policy concerns coming up very shortly. One would be the visit of Vice Premier Deng, who will arrive here Monday. I'll spend this weekend at Camp David reviewing all the briefing notebooks and getting ready for his visit.

Equally important to me, however, and to our country will be the forthcoming visit that I will pay to Mexico. The first head of state who came to visit me officially was President Lopez Portillo. And my wife went to Mexico for his inauguration, and his wife came to my inauguration. And both the Vice President and Secretary of State have been to Mexico since I've been President to pursue the wide range of agenda items which are so crucial to us and to our very key and friendly neighbor in the south.

I'll be well prepared to spend as much time as possible with Lopez Portillo on a broad range of subjects of very great importance to us, not only bilateral issues but also the growing beneficial influence of Mexico on regional and international questions. They've been one of the key movers, for instance, in trying to control the arms traffic throughout this hemisphere. They've been a key spokesman for the developing nations of the world in key areas. They've been helpful in trying to resolve the Belize question with Guatemala, have been very good advisers for us as we dealt with Nicaragua and other questions, and I look forward to this visit as well.

Later on, we anticipate Crown Prince Fahd will come here, along with Prime Minister Kriangsak from Thailand. So, in the next few weeks I've got a broad combination of both domestic issues to address with the Congress, primarily, and foreign affairs visits, which will help to cement our ties with very important people in other nations.

I think perhaps the best way to spend our time outside of this opening statement would be to turn the questions over to you. I'll try to be brief and, obviously, try to be accurate.

QUESTIONS

RADIOACTIVITY EXPOSURE IN UTAH AND NEVADA

Q. Mr. President, the citizens of Utah, my State, are quite concerned about recent discoveries of extremely high cancer death rates in the southern part of the State due, it appears, to atmospheric nuclear testing in the 1950's and 60's in Nevada. Regarding the Federal Government's role, and your administration, where do we stand now? What can or will the administration do for the victims in southern Utah and Nevada?

THE PRESIDENT. When I was in Utah recently, I discussed this with your Governor, and also with some of the church officials there, and have directed that the Department of Energy and also the Department of HEW proceed with an analysis of the statistics available to see what patterns do exist and what we can do to have an equitable solution of problems that have already occurred there, and obviously to prevent any future recurrences.

No one knows the outcome of these discussions. But I think it's accurate to say that we are working very harmoniously with the Utah officials, and they agreed with my assessment when I was there. But I hope that you will relate—if there is any problem with cooperation as I've outlined, I would like to hear from you directly after you return to Utah, or let the Governor call me directly.

MEXICAN ENERGY SUPPLIES

Q. Mr. President, I'm sure there will be interest here in the Deng visit, but before you get to that, could you talk a little bit about our relationship with Mexico and how it may change in light of the increasing Mexican economic leverage because of their oil discoveries? What kind of a longer range relationship do you see between two countries that are so close together, cheek by jowl along the border, and with Mexico growing so fast?

THE PRESIDENT. I'd say that there are three brief things. First of all, the control of Mexico's natural resources, obviously including oil and gas, is completely up to them. Mexico is highly independent in their resolution of how to proceed with exploration and production, and of course, they have wide options on customers to be served and, also, the prices to be charged. We understand that. We sympathize with it. We certainly have no quarrel with it.

Secondly, we look upon Mexico as a very valuable, present and future source of needed energy supplies for our country. We want to negotiate with them in good faith and provide for ourselves this very valuable source of oil and natural gas in the future. That'll be done by private and official negotiations over a long period of time. I'm not going down to Mexico to negotiate the price, the spot price of natural gas and so forth.

And thirdly, I think we have to distinguish between immediate needs and longrange needs. My understanding of the Mexican recent oil and gas discoveries is that they are the type of deposits which would necessitate a fairly long-range program for exploration and development. And I think the long-range supplies are what we have as a greater need.

At this point, because of various factors, the impact of new energy legislation and enhanced discoveries in our own Nation, we have a surplus at this particular moment of natural gas—a very valuable result, by the way, of the new energy legislation. So, for the immediate next few months or maybe couple of years, there is no high need for us to escalate the acquisition of natural gas.

So, those three basic factors are fairly well correlated, sometimes a little bit anomalous, but I think that they are ones that I'll be discussing in detail with Lopez Portillo.

AIR POLLUTION STANDARDS

Q. Mr. President, outside of inflation, which I am sure is the number one problem with most everybody around the country, in my city of Denver, it's air pollution. It's viewed as a crisis in this city. I'm wondering if you view air pollution as a problem of crisis proportion in some of the major cities of the Nation, and if so, if you have any new program to espouse in the next several months to control it or help out the situation?

THE PRESIDENT. When I was in Denver last year, it became obvious to me that perhaps more than for any other city in the Nation, air pollution has become the key problem in the quality of life of your people. I think also, there's a dramatic difference in air quality now in Denver than what it was in years gone by. The deterioration there has been much more rapid and far-reaching than any place in the country that I know.

We have allocated special funds of an awfully small nature, a few million dollars at the time, to help Denver and State officials with your air pollution efforts. But I think it's primarily a local responsibility.

The standards that we have now established by EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, according to the law, are very stringent. They are so stringent that very few of the major communities can meet them. And today, the EPA will announce very stringent standards still, but that can be enforced, particularly ozone levels, which is one of the measurements of air quality.

Our administration, since I've been in office, has taken several steps to enhance the quality of air pollution by increasing the severity of the standards and also by controlling automobile emissions. But I would say the effectiveness with which automobile emissions are controlled is an area that needs further exploration in Denver and other parts of the country.

And when you have a special problem, as does your city, then I think a high concentration of local and State effort on ensuring that all automobiles do comply would be one of the major elements involved. We are eager to cooperate, particularly with a city like Denver that has a special problem. I'd say your problem is perhaps the worst with which I'm familiar in our country.

UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS

Q. I am Rowland Nethaway from the American-Statesman in Austin. Texas, somehow or other, just elected its first Republican Governor in more than a hundred years, and—

THE PRESIDENT. I heard about that. [Laughter]

Q. —-one of his first responses was to fly down to Mexico, ahead of your trip, and discuss some international problems with President Lopez Portillo. And he reported that they agreed that the proposed "tortilla curtain" fence was a bad idea. And is the administration going to go ahead with that fence?

THE PRESIDENT. Well, as you know, the fence has existed for years. And the recent proposals to repair it, I think, were excessive and aggravating, and I called a halt to that immediately.

One of the obvious items that will be on the agenda for discussion between me and President Lopez Portillo will be border problems, including the undocumented aliens who come into our country. The long-range solution, obviously, is a better economic prospect for employment and for prosperity in Mexico, which I think is inevitable now. The good administration there and the discovery of higher quality natural resources will contribute to that.

But we certainly don't want to do anything to aggravate the good relations between ourselves and Mexico. And I think, as I said earlier, the plans for the repair of that fence were unnecessarily aggravating, ill-advised, and I called a halt to them.

ARMS SALES TO CHINA

Q. Mr. President, in regard to Mr. Brezhnev's warning to the West against sale of sophisticated arms to China, as 1 understand it, the U.S. is not planning to make any such sales. West Germany says it will sell only to its allies, but the attitude is very different in Paris and London. The question is, what is the U.S. attitude toward sale of such weapons by its allies, and secondly, what, if anything, are we doing in support of that attitude?

THE PRESIDENT. We have responded very clearly to President Brezhnev, who contacted me directly about these sales. We will not sell weapons to either China or Russia.

Secondly, our allies are independent, sovereign nations, and they would resent any intrusion by us into their weapons sales policies. We have a very clear understanding among ourselves, particularly Germany, Great Britain, France, and the United States. We discussed this in some depth at Guadeloupe. Our publicly expressed and privately expressed advice to the other nations is that the sale of any weapons should be constricted to defensive weapons—and of course, President Giscard d'Estaing, Prime Minister Callaghan, Chancellor Schmidt would decide with their advisers on what is or is not a defensive weapons sale.

The Soviets need not be concerned about this, in my opinion. They've expressed their opinion to the foreign leaders as well as to myself. And I think my response was basically cast in the posture of reassurance to the Soviets. We certainly have no intention to sell weapons to the Soviet Union or China.

The technologically advanced equipment, computers and so forth, would have to be assessed on the basis of each individual item and whether it could contribute in a substantial way to enhancement of the military capabilities of both the Soviet Union and China. And, in general, we will apply the same restraints of that kind of sale to both countries.

MEXICAN ENERGY SUPPLIES

Q. Mr. President, getting back to your trip to Mexico, you said, of course, that the purpose of your trip was not to go down there and negotiate about oil and gas prices. But is Secretary Schlesinger scheduled to make the trip with you, or could you say at this point?

THE PRESIDENT. I don't believe so. I haven't discussed it with 'him. My present plans are not to take the Cabinet members along, except perhaps the Secretary of State. But I may change my mind. I really haven't gone into that, exactly who will be in my entourage.

Q. Do you accept Mr. Schlesinger's position that the United States is not willing to pay the world price for oil to Mexico and ties it in with Canada?

THE PRESIDENT. You mean gas?

Q. Yes.

THE PRESIDENT. Yes. I think at this time Mexico is charging at least a dollar more than the world price on oil. But on natural gas, at this time we don't need to bid a very high price for Mexican gas. That's why I said it's so important to distinguish between short-term needs, which are being met by domestic supplies, and long-term needs, looking several years into the future, when we probably will not have adequate supplies in our own country.

We've had an additional complication created by the passage by Congress, the signing of an agreement between myself and the Prime Minister of Canada in constructing a natural gas pipeline to bring our own gas from Alaska down to this country. And the construction of that pipeline and the quantity of gas that's brought through it obviously is dependent upon the price that we can afford to pay. And we cannot afford to pay, any time in the near future, a much higher price for Mexican gas than we pay for our own domestic gas or that gas that's brought from Alaska down here. That's just the facts of the matter.

But I don't want to get involved in deciding exactly what the price levels shall be. It's obviously a factor to be considered. And as the supplies of natural gas become more stringent in the future, we'll have a completely different perspective than we have for the immediate next 24 months or 36 months. But they are interrelated. And I don't think Secretary Kissinger [Schlesinger] insinuated that on a long-term basis we wouldn't need and value the right to negotiate with Mexico on buying natural gas from them. But the immediate price for Mexican gas is affected, from our point of view, by domestic prices, and also by the price of natural gas projected for the Alaskan sources.

UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS

Q. Mr. President, are you going to resubmit your proposals for dealing with the problem of undocumented aliens, including the amnesty provisions?

THE PRESIDENT. Well, the proposal is in the Congress, in the Judiciary Committees of the House and Senate. And we've not modified those proposals since we sent them up. But I've told several of my advisers that I will refresh my own memory about the details of those proposals, which I helped draft personally, before I go to Mexico. That'll be one of the items that I will discuss with President Lopez Portillo. And there'll be parallel discussions at the Cabinet level that'll be more definitive in nature.

And then if, after that visit to Mexico, we see that some of our recommendations ought to be modified to accommodate Mexican interests without violating the laws of our own country, then we'll certainly recommend those changes to the Congress.

I might say that I'm constrained by my oath, as are all other officials in the Government, to enforce United States law. And we cannot condone a violation of United States law. And the legality or illegality of those who come into our country has to be addressed in those terms. But we want to be humane about it, want to be consistent about it, if possible. We want to meet the subject of real value that we have from Mexican immigrants who come into our country either temporarily or permanently. But we want to make their entry and their egress from our country be consistent, understandable, and legal.

And in some instances, we'll be modifying American law to comply with existing practices. In others, we'll be trying to bring order out of chaos. And we're trying to get the cooperation of the Mexican authorities as well.

All these factors are very complicated. Nobody's been willing, really, in the Congress yet, as you know, to address this sensitive and politically difficult issue. We have addressed it as best we could. And obviously we have an open mind about it. If we think that Mexican opinion, as expressed to me by President Lopez Portillo, would be constructive, that modifications to our proposal will make it more acceptable to the Congress and to the people of our country and to the Mexicans, then we would certainly advocate those changes.

FARM PROGRAMS

Q. Mr. President, many farmers are on their way to Washington in a tractorcade. What type of reception do you feel they will get when they arrive'?

THE PRESIDENT. I think as long as they demonstrate their support for our programs— [laughter] or displeasure with some of them legally and peacefully, they'll certainly be welcomed.

I have a background in agriculture, and I meet with many farmers when I go home, both those who register their advice and counsel and criticisms constructively, and the ones who register their advice, counsel, and criticism in a contrary way.

I think that in general, though, the 1977 farm act passed by Congress has been a very beneficial decision made for American farmers. Last year, net farm income went up about 25 percent. The only year that it's ever been that high is 1973, when there were some extraordinary circumstances. And I believe that most of the complaints that originated the American farm movement have now been answered.

We have each year record farm exports. We obviously have not had an embargo against the sale of American products overseas. But I expect farmers—being one of them—always to want better programs, higher parity payments, and so I think they'll be received well.

And I'm sure that there's not the deep sense of indignation and animosity that did exist 18 months ago, because many of those problems that were legitimately described by the American farm movement have now been resolved successfully.

VICE PREMIER DENG OF CHINA

Q. Mr. President, I wonder if you could tell us, Mr. President, what you're likely to say to Deng Xiaoping and what you would like to hear from him.

THE PRESIDENT. That would take a long time to describe all the items. As you know, this will be the end of decades of estrangement between the Chinese and the American people. And I think it's an historic change, all elements of it, for the better.

We'll be talking about how we can enhance political discussions between our two countries, to improve cultural exchange, student exchange, trade, technology, science, agriculture. We'll be demonstrating vividly to Vice Premier Deng Xiaoping, his wife, and his party—here in Washington, with meetings with me and the Congress, with the receptions that I anticipate his receiving in Atlanta, Houston, Seattle—that we, indeed, have a broad base of American friendship toward the Chinese people, that we appreciate the importance of this new move, new relationship. I think we'll be discussing how the new Chinese and American friendship can stabilize further the Western Pacific-Asian region, give a better quality of life for people who live there, enhance peace in that region and, indeed, throughout the world.

We'll be describing to the Chinese leaders and listening to their description of the world political scene from each individual perspective. We'll be exploring areas of compatibility and trying to resolve areas of disparity in approach and opinion. We'll be encouraging the Chinese to help us with some trouble spots.

One obvious item on the agenda would be to see maximum Chinese influence be exerted on North Korea, and in response, we'll exert maximum influence on South Korea to bring those two groups of leaders together to alleviate tension there.

So, I think the agenda is so broad, that's about the best I can do in a brief period of time. I look forward to it.

I've had a chance to study the verbatim transcriptions of the conversations that were conducted on some of Kissinger's trips, on Nixon's trip, Ford's trip, Vance's trip, and also Brzezinski's, and more recently the congressional delegations who've gone there. And from those discussions, I think we've gotten a fairly good picture of the attitude of Mao Zedong, Zhou Enlai, and more recently Chairman Hua Guofeng, and Deng. So, I think I'll be prepared to try to alleviate some of their concerns and to recruit them to join with us in having a more prosperous and peaceful world.

FISCAL YEAR 1980 BUDGET

Q. Mr. President, in the light of your efforts last year to close some of the tax loopholes for those in the upper brackets of wealth, I wonder if you share with Senator Kennedy the sense that it's inappropriate to reduce direct subsidies to the poor and elderly as an inflation measure without trying further to do away with some of the tax exemptions for people in the upper brackets. Do you see a relationship there, and any kind of inappropriateness?

THE PRESIDENT. There's a relationship. I'm hesitant to answer that question, because I don't really understand the particular opinion that you've described as Senator Kennedy's.

Q. Well, his statement, following your State of the Union and budget messages, that we should not, for example, be reducing school milk, school lunch, food stamp programs, until we have closed, for example, the loophole in the three-martini lunch, the other tax exemptions that are granted people of great wealth in this country.

THE PRESIDENT. That's a sore subject you brought up with news people, and I wish you hadn't mentioned it. [Laughter] I don't mean the school lunch program; I mean the three-martini lunch. [Laughter]

Q. But is there a relationship and inappropriateness there?

THE PRESIDENT. That's a sore subject you brought up with news people, and I Senator Kennedy was critical, he's in error. The balanced presentation in a budget is always a challenge for a President. And I don't know that any President has ever worked harder in having a fair and equitable budget than I did on the 1980 fiscal year budget.

I think it is well balanced. And many of the program changes that are presently criticized, I think, will stand when scrutinized more thoroughly. For instance, summer youth programs—we had an excessive allocation of money for summer youth programs. The money was not used. There was no way to spend that much money on summer youth programs, because the constituency group was not great enough to use all the funds expended. But when you cut back to provide exactly what can be spent under optimum circumstances, the cutback looks as though we're trying to cheat summer youth out of potential jobs.

The same thing applies to the school lunch program, and the same thing applies, by the way, to food stamps. I don't think any administration has done more to enhance the ease with which the food stamps can be used and to serve the poor people better with the food stamp program than have we. The administration of it is going to be much more efficient, much more effective, much more broad-reaching, less paperwork, less expense for administrative purposes, and more easily used by people who formerly did not use the food stamp program.

But, obviously, there has to be a great attention given to closing loopholes for rich and powerful and influential people, as combined with making the effective delivery of services to the poor a very high priority. And this balance is a responsibility constantly on my shoulders and on that of the Congress.

I might say that controlling inflation has erroneously been equated in the past to cheating the poor. But, as I've tried to say in every possible forum, the people who suffer most from inflation are the poor and the unemployed and the minority groups and the aged who are retired on a fixed income, all those who are not well educated and not capable of moving from one job to another to find a better opportunity if they are constrained overly by inflation and can't live on what they've got as an income. And I see that the ones that benefit most from an anti-inflation program, those very constituency groups that Senator Kennedy has effectively defended.

Someone at my income level—I can very well accommodate inflation without my own family suffering. But a person with a very low income cannot. And quite often the most difficult elements of inflation to control are the elements applying directly to the necessities of life food, clothing, health care, and shelter. And we're trying to concentrate our efforts there.

So, I don't think there's any difference between me and Kennedy in the premise. I just think that I have done the best possible job in evolving a budget to balance those factors that he has described as important.

MR. WURFEL. Thank you, sir.

TAX REFORM

Q. Without a new tax bill to attach it to, will you make another try this year at closing some of those loopholes that you talked so much about last year?

THE PRESIDENT. Yes. The answer is yes, I would like very much to see them passed and will pursue it with every opportunity. But I don't want to open up the entire tax question unless I understand clearly that the Congress is not going to be retrogressive in opening up more tax loopholes than they close.

Last year we were taken aback by the attitude of the Congress. They were much more inclined to create more loopholes for the wealthy than they were to close loopholes in some instances, and I don't want to run that risk. It would put me in a posture of vetoing a bill. I almost vetoed the so-called tax reform bill last year. And only the fact that it reduced taxes overall induced me to sign it, and it was a close call. And this year I don't see any need for a general tax reduction. We need to deal with inflation first before we start talking again about tax reductions.

I've got to go, but I would like to ask you, particularly if you haven't been up here before, to come and let me get a photograph with you individually. And I want to express my thanks again, for your willingness to come.

Have you already met with Brzezinski this morning?

EDITORS. Yes.

THE PRESIDENT. I think this afternoon you'll be meeting with Bob Pastor, who is our specialist in the White House on Latin American affairs, and you can pursue additional questions with him that I was not able to answer because of the press of time. But I appreciate it very much. I understand you'll be attending the press conference this afternoon as well. That's good.

Thank you very much.

Note: The interview began at 11 a.m. in the Cabinet Room at the White House. Walter W. Wurfel is a Deputy Press Secretary.

The transcript of the interview was released on January 27.

Jimmy Carter, Interview With the President Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session With Editors and News Directors. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/node/247869

Filed Under

Categories

Location

Washington, DC

Simple Search of Our Archives