THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
PRESS BRIEFING BY MIKE MCCURRY
The Briefing Room
1:24 P.M. EDT
MR. MCCURRY: In the customary way that we do things at this White House, we will now announce some things that you already know. President Clinton announced today that he's appointing Paul Begala as Assistant to the President and Counsellor to the President, a role he will assume in August. Mr. Begala will work on a wide range of issues including strategy and communications. We are simultaneously putting this paper in the bins for you. That will spare you the very impressive --
Q Will he be your boss?
MR. MCCURRY: I hope so -- the very impressive background information on him. President Clinton today named Sidney Blumenthal an Assistant to the President as part of the Communications team, a position he will take up in August. He'll be working on communications strategies, special projects, developing themes and major presentations in a newly created position.
Q Do you think you're not communicating properly?
MR. MCCURRY: Probably not. I am with you, though.
Q Do you need help?
MR. MCCURRY: I think you and I always -- we always communicate well, Helen.
Q But not often enough. (Laughter.)
MR. MCCURRY: President Clinton today announced that he is promoting Michael Waldman to be Assistant to the President and Director of Speechwriting. This is a great promotion for Mike Waldman, who is really, I think since December of '95 has been Deputy Assistant to the President and has been the Director of Speechwriting -- for all practical purposes -- and he will serve as the President's chief speechwriter and supervise presidential speechwriting collectively. So much of the President's work in recent months has reflected his very articulate presentation of our policies, both foreign and domestic, and Mike will continue in that capacity.
The President of the United States today promoted J. Terry Edmonds to the position of Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy Director of Speechwriting, which will be a newly created position. Terry has taken the lead on a lot of the President's presentations, especially with respect to race, and this will be, I think, a very welcome addition to that team.
And last, but certainly not least, the President today promoted Stephanie Street to be Assistant to the President and Director of Presidential Scheduling. She has been Deputy Assistant to the President and was the co-director of Presidential Scheduling prior to that. And she promises more press conferences, more interviews.
Q How about when we're leaving for Madrid?
MR. MCCURRY: She's working on that right now. Promotion.
Q What does that bring the staff to, 3,000?
MR. MCCURRY: Large, but necessary in the post-Cold War era, as we manage all the issues adjacent to and including the building of the bridge to the 21st century.
Q Does the President think his message isn't getting through? Is that why he's bringing in Begala and Blumenthal?
MR. MCCURRY: I think his message is strong and rings clear as a bell across this great land of ours, and now he'll have these aides to assist him in ringing the ding-dong. (Laughter.) Or something like that.
Q Mike, who is leaving to make room for some of these people?
MR. MCCURRY: There are some people who will be leaving here in the course of the summer, and we will celebrate their new opportunities with great fanfare.
Q Are you throwing in the towel?
MR. MCCURRY: Because they deserve it.
Q So who is --
MR. MCCURRY: I'm not going to announce that until it's announceable.
Q Do you want to take a serious shot at why he's bringing on Blumenthal and Begala?
MR. MCCURRY: I did the other day. I think the President always has new blood that comes in and adds to a White House staff, particularly a White House staff that's going through some transition. This White House staff is still going through the transition that's normal as we go into a second term. A lot of people agreed after the election to stay on for a duration of time while the President set his second-term agenda and begin working on his second-term priorities, and the second term is now well underway and the President's confident that we're making great progress on a range of issues. And I think some people on the staff who are currently on the staff feel that they've rendered good service, they've got the President well into his second term and they're looking for opportunities to move on. It's a very natural part of a transition that occurs on a White House staff.
Q Does it reflect the view of the President that he's not getting his message through adequately?
MR. MCCURRY: Absolutely not. I think the President feels his message is not only well received by the American people, but is helping forge some consensus about the direction we want this country to go. And those coming on to the team are all expert, and many of them are well known to you and they'll be a part of continuing the President's work. But, ultimately, particularly in the area of communications, it's what in the heart and soul of the President he has communicated. And if communications are only effective when the person who actually has to do the speaking and do the decision-making is -- got that kind of relationship with the American people in which they understand his priorities. And I think that this President feels he's got that relationship with the American people.
Q Why does he pick people -- one of them, anyway, who has been pretty antipress?
MR. MCCURRY: I don't know who has been antipress, but in the Mike McCurry administration, no one can be antipress. That's my rule, and they have to live by that rule.
Q New subject. It may have not been monumental, but the Board of Governors of the Postal Commission voted to raise stamp prices another penny.
MR. MCCURRY: I'm sorry, have they taken that action?
Q They have.
MR. MCCURRY: I don't know that the administration presented any views on that subject. Do any of you know? It's an independent action by the Postal Commission, and I don't know if the administration has a formal review on that. I'll have to check into that for you.
Q Mike, how important is the training of that all-African peacekeeping force that's being dispatched next month?
MR. MCCURRY: Well, there are -- we're going to be continuing to do the work of building support for an African -- an indigenous African crisis response mechanism. You recall, back in Denver the leaders at 8 agreed to embrace efforts to enhance African peacekeeping and crisis response mechanisms. That's been an ongoing part of the U.S. -- it's been an ongoing feature of the U.S. foreign policy since last year when we set up our own independent U.S. initiative to support crisis response mechanisms in Africa.
They'll be doing things like joint exercises, looking for common directions on peacekeeping, looking for what we call interoperability -- the ability of militaries from different countries, particularly within Africa, to work with each other as they respond to both conflict management situations and also humanitarian crises. So the international community by and large has been very supportive of coming together to enhance and support the militaries of Africa that are in a position to respond to these crises, and we will continue to do that type of work.
Q Mike, what is the concern about the White House regarding the Lithuanians who were arrested in Florida for selling -- or for trying to sell surface-to-air missiles, and possibly even tactical nuclear weapons?
MR. MCCURRY: Well, I don't want to comment on the specifics of that case or the degree to which those who were alleged to have attempted these transactions may have had access to materials they purported to sell. I will say that watching the illicit arms trafficking that occurs around the world, particularly former Warsaw Pact nations, and their arsenals has been something that our proliferation policy is aimed at. And we've spent a great deal of time and effort and personnel resources devoted to the tracking through both law enforcement means and other means of that type of arms trafficking. But this specific case, since it's now before -- now in a legal proceeding, I'd really refrain from commenting on.
Q Mike, this case aside, what is the latest analysis that you can share about the safety and security of nuclear holdings in the former Soviet Union?
MR. MCCURRY: Well, we share the assessments we can share publicly from time to time. We still believe there's effective command and control over the nuclear materials of the former Soviet Union states. We work hard to make sure that that is the case. We've provided U.S. assistance to countries -- you all know of the Nunn-Lugar program, among others designed to assure that there is safety in the arsenals that are maintained and in the material that used to be part of the force posture of the Warsaw Pact nations themselves.
Q Does the President broach this subject with Yeltsin every time they -- each time they get together?
MR. MCCURRY: As you know, it's -- I'm not sure that they, at that level, raise it every time, but it's been a regular and constant feature of our bilateral dialogue with Russia and it was raised and discussed just recently in Denver by all eight of the leaders. They talked about nuclear safety issues, they talked about smuggling issues -- those are part of the things reflected in the communique in Denver, as you know.
Q When was the President -- just one other question -- when was the President advised, and how closely did he follow this case?
MR. MCCURRY: This case? I'd have to check and see. My suspicion is he's probably had it as part of his daily briefing, but I'd have to double-check that.
Q What does the President expect to get out of his visit to Denmark?
MR. MCCURRY: I think the President is looking forward with this close friend and European ally an opportunity to enhance our bilateral relations; also to work on issues that are broadly developing in the North Atlantic, both with respect to regional security issues, environmental issues and some of the economic issues that we have in common. He's looking forward to the visit very much, obviously looks forward to the hospitality of the Queen, and is excited by the opportunity to visit Denmark.
Q Is he going to make any speeches while he's in Denmark, or is this pretty --
MR. MCCURRY: We'll do a trip briefing tomorrow at 10:30 a.m. and I'll do more on that. I'm not prepared to do that right now.
Q Mike, on the Internet event coming up, a lot of cities are concerned about -- you've said that the President's hands-off on tax and federal taxation; there's a lot of local and state taxation. Is the President concerned about that and is he going to say anything to that effect?
MR. MCCURRY: You'll see in the directive that he issues that, to summarize it, we believe that taxation at the state and local level should be technology-neutral; that is that there shouldn't be any efforts to target any new taxes on the Internet or on electronic commerce broadly defined. But we do understand that the tens of thousands of tax jurisdictions in America, some of them have different approaches to how they charge sales taxes, and we respect the autonomy of state and local governments in revenue jurisdictions to raise income.
At the same time, we think as a broad policy with respect to international taxation, i.e. tariffs, the Internet should be a duty-free zone and we've been negotiating with other countries to make it so. With respect to federal taxation, the President obviously will declare a policy of hands-off and then as I say, we would urge as much as we can urge local jurisdictions to adopt a policy of no new taxes when it comes to electronic commerce.
Q Will he encourage tax reduction in addition to no new taxes?
MR. MCCURRY: I think he'll say, as I said, it should be technology-neutral, that we shouldn't, as we see an expansion of this activity and the capacity of the Internet to handle electronic transactions, we should not see new taxation developed.
Q Mike, what will the President say today about the issue of encryption and what do you -- what is your response to those within the electronics manufacturing field who say that policy needs to be loosened up or they can't compete on a worldwide basis?
MR. MCCURRY: They have argued that for some time and we argue back to them that they should sit with our law enforcement personnel who have got very real concerns related to security, national security and also our ability to deal with organized crime at an international level, and we think our policy is one that has struck exactly the right balance. But we've acknowledged the need to continue to review the effectiveness of that policy as we go along. That's another area in which the technology moves as quickly as the ability of policy-making to adapt rational and common-sense policies.
Q I don't know if this is stepping on the President's toes, but can you explain how privacy in commerce concerns -- privacy and the children's issues on the Internet can coexist with -- commerce?
MR. MCCURRY: That's asking me to give a philosophical treatise on privacy doctrine. We believe -- the President believes you can find the right way to protect kids from indecency and obscenity and pornography on the Internet. You can empower parents to help protect their children from indecency and pornography and smut on the Internet. And he believes you can do so consistent with the policy that minimizes the intrusion of federal regulation in the marketplace.
I mean, there's a thing called common sense and I think that the President believes, working with the industry, common sense can prevail here and we can find a way to protect kids and empower parents.
Q Will you generate any tax revenue regulations, anything beyond jaw-boning to give parents the authority or technological power to screen out stuff?
MR. MCCURRY: Well, we have got several ideas in development. That's not the purpose of today's event, although the President will briefly reference this issue today in light of the Supreme Court's decision. He'll point toward some work we're going to do later this month with the industry, with representatives of parents and with other concerned parties when we bring them together here at the White House for fuller discussion of the issue.
Q Today is the deadline for the states to come up with welfare programs. What is the White House view of the state of play and the cooperation and --
MR. MCCURRY: Well, the President's delighted with the extraordinary progress we're making towards reforming welfare as we know it. There were many who felt at the time he signed the welfare reform law that it would be a failure; it has, so far, been a success. There are all but two states now who have got approved plans for welfare reform; the final two states we expect to have approved plans by the end of the day today. And people are moving from welfare dependency to work; jobs are being created; training programs are being developed. States that have enjoyed some a surplus of funding are using that funding in many cases to help make the transition easier by providing day care opportunities or training opportunities or assisting with transportation needs in some cases.
So it's hard work, but so far it's going well. The President is satisfied with the progress and knows that we're going to have to stay at it.
Q Do you really think you can declare a victory right now --
MR. MCCURRY: I didn't.
Q -- when it hasn't even started? These people haven't been dropped yet.
MR. MCCURRY: I didn't. I said that we've made progress and it's good progress so far, and the jobs are being created and the transition is occurring. And the President will continue to work hard on it to make it a success.
Q Let me follow up, if I may. What's your view of the various kinds of compliance that the states have come up with?
MR. MCCURRY: Well, each of the state proposals for how they will implement welfare reform are worked through in discussion with the Department of Health and Human Services, and it's been a good process. You might want to check further with them, but my understand is that they've worked through a lot of issues.
They've developed a lot of expertise on how to handle welfare reform because of the waivers. Remember, just about every state one way or another had been conducting some welfare reform experimentation, and that put federal officials in direct contact with state welfare agencies and officials at the state level. So there was a body of expertise that had developed already within government at the state and federal level. And I think that's been very conducive to making the implementation of the federal act smoother.
But by no means, Helen, do we declare victory at this point. It's going to be hard work. We are creating jobs, especially in the private sector for people to move from welfare situations to work, but this will not be a snap decision. This will be a very ongoing and probably longstanding effort to change the culture of the workplace and change the culture of dependency away from dependency into work. That's going to take time.
Q Even though you're not declaring victory, there are others who are declaring defeat already.
MR. MCCURRY: There were pessimists at the time the President signed the bill. And so far, their pessimism has not been well-founded. The funding has gone towards projects that enhance the opportunities available for those who are welfare-dependent. The states have been responsive in trying to move resources to where they're needed. The private sector has responded to the President's challenge to create jobs specifically targeted on welfare-dependent mothers, so we are confident we are moving in the right direction, but we by no means suggest we're at the destination.
Q A related topic, since we're talking about jobs --NAFTA -- you've got the anniversary. You have people complaining they've lost jobs because of NAFTA. Do you have an assessment on how many jobs have been lost, how many --
MR. MCCURRY: We have a report that will go up to Capitol Hill next week. It's been late because the dog ate the homework, I guess. I mean, they've been working on it and the deadline was missed. But we expect to send a report to the Hill early next week, and it essentially will say that there have been net benefits that are positive for the American people because of this.
Yes, there have been some people that have been displaced, but on balance there have been more jobs created, the jobs that are being created are higher-paying jobs, particularly in the manufacturing sectors, and that if you look at the performance and success of the U.S. economy, at least some part of the success that we've seen is due to the commitment to free trade and to engagement in global markets. Without that, we wouldn't be creating the kind of higher-paying jobs that we are creating in our economy and we wouldn't be seeing the kind of success across the board in reducing unemployment and creating more economic opportunity for the American people.
Q What's the mechanism for people who have been displaced who can't move having to --
MR. MCCURRY: I think there are problems that exist. There is trade adjustment assistance, there are Labor Department programs that exist to try to help train those people for opportunities that do exist, but on balance, it appears to be true that free trade creates more economic opportunity for all those participating within the free trade environment. That's been true of NAFTA, it's been true of the other 200 free trade agreements we've reached around the world that they've enhanced economic competitiveness for the United States, created more economic opportunity and it's one of the reasons why the U.S. economy is performing so strongly.
Q Is there anything substantive about that report that's brought the delay, or it's just been hard to pull this together?
MR. MCCURRY: No. My understanding is it's been a combination of things. There are no surprises expected. It will be pretty straightforward. It just isn't done yet.
Q Whose office is that, Mike, who generate the report?
MR. MCCURRY: I think USTR has the lead. It's an interagency report and it's overseen here by the NEC.
Q Getting back to the welfare issue, you're saying that you're not declaring victory, but a lot -- getting back to what Bill said, too -- a lot of people are claiming defeat because there was a recent study that said over 70 percent of American businesses were saying no, that they would not hire welfare recipients; and especially there was an independent report that the Labor Secretary, Alexis Herman, she knew about it and she kind of commented on it, as well as --
MR. MCCURRY: I'm not familiar with that report. I think we've been very satisfied with the response we're getting from the private sector, many have stepped forward. There's an independent effort within the private sector now to challenge business leaders to respond by hiring more welfare dependent individuals into job situations and that work has to continue.
But there are people who have never liked this bill, never will like this bill, will continue to criticize the President because he wants to reform welfare. But the President's commitment is clear and his commitment includes continuing the hard work necessary to make welfare reform a success.
Q How will you monitor that, the private sector effort that the President has called on? I mean, is this like a quarterly -- he'll talk about how many jobs --
MR. MCCURRY: Well, remember, we put together a private sector group under Eli Segal's -- I guess through his effort and then they organized themselves. They are continuing to look at what the commitments have been and who's being responsive and how we can accelerate the response in the private sector. I don't know what --
Q But does the White House have any plans to monitor the number of hires made?
MR. MCCURRY: We'll continue to work with that group and others that gather data on this, just to see what the progress is going to be. And we'll continue to be after them on the subject, too. I don't think an occasion goes by where the President has an opportunity to talk to, you know, executives in the business community where he doesn't implore them once again to see this as a challenge is worthy of very intense effort at the senior levels of management in corporate America.
Q Mike, is the President going to let the 4th of July deadline he set for campaign finance reform pass without further notice? And if there is no consequence to the fact that this is going to be missed, does it diminish or basically render meaningless any time in the future he would set such --
MR. MCCURRY: He has already, as you know, called attention to the July 4th deadline and continued to speak to it and has done some things to try to accelerate momentum for campaign finance reform. We've pushed free television time and how we can move that forward just in the President's radio address; we indicated our intention to support efforts by the FEC to examine the question of soft money.
So even though there's been a failure to act by Congress, we have continued to try to act to move the momentum forward in reform. And we don't, by any means, believe that the issue is dead because we hear from those who are working to generate support for the legislation on Capitol Hill that they believe that they are going to create their own momentum, and that we certainly hope and expect and believe that the hearings on campaign finance issues that will open soon in Congress will generate further momentum. Because there has to -- the whole point of those hearings ought to be at the end of the day we need to have some solution to the problem. And the solution is going to be campaign finance reform.
Q Mike, that wasn't really the question. The question that he was asking was what good does it do for the President to set a deadline if when the deadline passes he'll just go, oh, well, too bad?
MR. MCCURRY: We didn't do that. We were very critical of Congress on Saturday, and we'll continue to point out the fact that they have not acted by July 4th. We'll continue to point to what we think are some of the root causes for their failure to act. And I think all of you will be equally persistent in pointing out the fact that we haven't reformed campaign finance laws.
Q But to the contrary; Congress has been critical of you for being slow on things like FEC appointments, so how do you --
MR. MCCURRY: We just made FEC appointments, so I don't know how they could be critical on that.
Q But they were criticizing you because it was delayed.
Q Mike, on the subject of Congress, will you be cooperating, the White House, that is, with Congressman Solomon in making available any of these people who knew about the briefings, the secret intelligence briefings that John Huang received? And what do you say to his contention that they were extremely serious and dangerous and could have endangered the lives of CIA informants?
MR. MCCURRY: Well, I'm not going to comment on something that involves intelligence briefings and is being properly investigated. Suffice to say, the President believes very strongly that if anyone had broken the law, they ought to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And that should be within the domain of those who would investigate those kinds of allegations.
Q Does the White House now accept that Huang was a spy, or may have been a spy?
MR. MCCURRY: I don't think the White House has made any judgment whatsoever, nor do I believe anyone else has, that I'm aware of.
Q Mike, I don't know if you announced this already, but at one point you were considering whether to make the Jane Sherburne notes public, the ones you turned over to Starr. Has there been a decision on that?
MR. MCCURRY: My understanding is counsel is looking at that, and their concern has been protecting the confidentiality of grand jury proceedings.
Q And one other question, can you tell us what other claims of attorney-client privilege are now pending before the court?
MR. MCCURRY: I can't. I don't know. I'd have to check further.
Q Are there any more?
MR. MCCURRY: I would have to check further. I don't know.
Q Mike, you mentioned that the President had talked about the deadline, the July 4th deadline, but I went back and looked and I couldn't find any time between the State of the Union message and Saturday when he specifically returned to that deadline or urged Congress to hit it. Can you --
MR. MCCURRY: Oh, that's got to be wrong, and we'll look at it. I think when we did some stuff on the FEC petition -- we'll look for it further for you.
Q Mike, is there any reason to think that -- does the White House have any reason to think that Congress will take any meaningful action on campaign finance reform before the fundraising hearings are over?
MR. MCCURRY: I don't know when they're going to be over, so I can't answer that, but I've heard from at least one of the sponsors of legislation that they do think that there could be action later this year before the committees conclude whatever procedures they have under way.
Q Could you give us a preview of what the President plans to do to try in the next coming weeks and months while these hearings are going on, to try and push for campaign finance reform while the fundraising -- the abuses hearings are going on?
MR. MCCURRY: You see all that we've done so far this year, and how we've continued to press the issue and found different ways, different avenues, barring action by Congress, where we can kind of keep the issue in front of the American people. We can continue to do things either administratively or through executive action where we can press you, and I suspect that we will continue to do those kinds of things.
Q What else administratively or by executive order could you do?
MR. MCCURRY: I'll have to check around here and see what other types of activities, but we will look to do the same kinds of things we've been doing to try to use a combination of pressure from the outside; the advisory groups that we've got work on this can continue to be active; we've got now a way that we can push for it other the free television time question -- there are ways probably to advance that. And several around here are working at how we can continue to press the issue using the different tools that we've got available.
Q Mike, Hong Kong is now part of China. What is the picture of China under red flag and also, is next Taiwan?
MR. MCCURRY: I'm not sure I understood the question. What's the --
Q Some believe that next China may try to take over Taiwan.
MR. MCCURRY: The status of Taiwan is clear in the Taiwan Relations Act and in the two communiques, and we believe adherence to the communiques should be sought by all parties, should be continued by all parties.
Q As a follow to that, what's your assessment of the immediate civil liberty crackdowns that have been handed down since the turnover about police powers to break up demonstrations and the like?
MR. MCCURRY: I think they've made administrative changes that were not unexpected, given the transition that's occurring. I'm not aware of any wholesale infringement on civil liberties. I haven't seen any reports to that effect.
Q On China, just one more follow-up. If China doesn't follow what they signed on the treaty, what is the U.S. going to say?
MR. MCCURRY: I think we've made very clear our own commitment to monitoring very carefully the commitments that exist pursuant to the 1984 basic agreement, and we expect the parties to continue to adhere to the commitments that they rendered 13 years ago, and we've made it quite clear that we would not look warmly on any abrogation of the commitments that have been undertaken by the People's Republic in the basic agreement in the joint declaration.
Q Would the President consider stopping over in Hong Kong during his trip next year to see how things have progressed?
MR. MCCURRY: I'm not aware of any planning of that nature at this point.
Q On the Sherburne notes, doesn't the First Lady have the right to waive confidentiality for anything she testified to, so wouldn't it be under the White House power --
MR. MCCURRY: I'm not a lawyer; I'd have to check.
Q Mike, I know this is foreign policy-speak, but what's the practical implication of "we would not look warmly on" the Chinese abrogating some of these -- how do you put that in laymen's terms?
MR. MCCURRY: I think we've communicated in a variety of ways, diplomatically, the importance we attach to a smooth transition and one that protects the unique characteristic of Hong Kong under the two systems, one China formula.
Q -- what are the consequences?
MR. MCCURRY: Look, we have had extensive dialogue with the People's Republic on this question and the Secretary of State has for all your colleagues who were traveling with her dealt with these questions at length. I would only support what she said and what she said eloquently.
Q You might want to note that both Jiang and Tung stated that there would be elections before May of '98.
MR. MCCURRY: Right. The United States welcomed the declaration by the new administrative authority in Hong Kong that they would proceed with elections.
Q The tax conference negotiation is coming up next week. Is the President planning on pushing the added tobacco tax that he supported on the Senate floor, sponsored by Senator Kennedy? And what is his top priority --
MR. MCCURRY: Well, we'll continue -- we'll put forward in front of the conference all of those things that we identified in the tax proposal the President unveiled yesterday and press for their inclusion. And we think, given how warmly received the President's proposals were yesterday by Republicans in the Congress, they could make very swift business of the conference committee and look at the President's proposal as a good way of assembling the different measures from the House and Senate bills and enacting them into law quickly.
Q The added tobacco tax was not warmly received.
MR. MCCURRY: I doubt that will happen. We could certainly see that happening. In fact, we made some effort to look at what was clearly in the House and the Senate legislation and understand what the priorities of the Republican leadership were and address them. And I think the President made a good faith effort to do that.
Q Any update on Mir Kansi case? He's is supposed to go to trial tomorrow.
MR. MCCURRY: You'll see that -- I will refrain from comment on that case. That's one that is now before the proper authority.
Q On the Sherburne notes, for a second. You said you were concerned about protecting the confidentiality of the grand jury. Has Starr's office indicated that they would prefer those notes not be released publicly? Is there any conferring with his office?
MR. MCCURRY: You should direct the question to the Independent Counsel's office.
Q What is the President going to do in Baltimore tomorrow?
MR. MCCURRY: Say again.
Q In Baltimore? What is he going to do when he's there?
MR. MCCURRY: Yes, he's going to go to Baltimore tomorrow, enlisting the support of the Business Roundtable and others in the private sector who have come together to support the concept of better education standards in America. The President will officially launch a public service campaign that includes Major League Baseball players encouraging young people to adhere to rigorous academic standards in the classroom and in their personal lives.
Q Doesn't he have a fund-raiser in Baltimore?
MR. MCCURRY: Not that I know of. Not that I've seen on the schedule. All right.
THE PRESS: Thank you.
END 1:56 P.M. EDT