Interview With European Journalists
Q.
Let me first thank you, Mr. President, for giving us this interview on the eve
of this historic and first trip to
The President. Well, I thank you for
doing it.
Soviet
General Secretary Gorbachev
Q.
I'm asked to ask you the first questions. My name is Fritz Wirth of the journal
Die Welt, and everybody else will introduce himself when he asks his first
question.
In
another interview a few days ago in
The President. Well, I think he's very
forthright. We can get into discussions where perhaps we're disagreeing quite
firmly, and yet there is no personal animus in that with him. I think he
solidly represents his country. I have suspected sometimes that he, having been
raised in that particular country from childhood, believes some of their
propaganda about us. But as I say, we can debate and discuss, and I think he's
very sincere about the progressive ideas that he is introducing there and the
changes that he thinks should be made. But as I say, even if the discussion
gets, well, pretty meaningful, there is no animus. When it's over, I think that
there's actually a degree of friendship between us.
Human
Rights in the
Q.
Mr. President, I am Francis Unwin of Le Soir,
The President. I'm hopeful that it
can. I think that some of these things with regard to human rights is not just trying to interfere with their internal affairs
at all. But in view of the fact that our country is made up of people from all
over the world -- and I have used the term myself previously in discussing with
them that when a man takes a wife, he doesn't stop loving his mother -- and you
perhaps are aware that Americans all retain a feeling of their heritage, even
those whose grandparents or great-grandparents first came to this country. I
think when Americans get acquainted with each other the first thing they
inquire is, you know, what is your background. And Americans are accustomed to
saying well, I'm this or that. And as time has gone on, most of us have to name
three or four countries in our heritage if our ancestors came a few generations
back. And the result of that is that in becoming closer and developing a
relationship between the two countries we are affected by public opinion and by
people in our country who resent if they think that in the land of their
heritage people are being treated unfairly.
So,
this is one of the reasons why I'm trying to impress upon the General Secretary
that if we are to develop relationships, and better relationships in trade and
so forth, that can be done better if there aren't elements in our country that
believe that somehow the country of their heritage is -- the government is
being unfair to the people, because they still consider they have a
relationship there. And so, it isn't a case of just wanting to impose our rules
on them. It is to try and impress them with the need to eliminate some of the
things that have grown with their system and that are unfair treatment, that
are denying human rights to their own people.
Strategic
Nuclear Arms Agreement
Q.
Mr. President, I'm Christopher Thomas of the London Times. Could you please
assess the prospects for a strategic arms treaty with the
The President. Well, I won't rule it
out. I won't say it's impossible because it does look as if a START agreement
-- I don't think there's any way now that the START agreement could come to a
signing point in this summit. It is a far more complex treaty than the INF
treaty that we did agree upon. Now, with ratification of that, I think that
this summit will advance us further in the START discussions,
and those people of ours and theirs that have been negotiating in
President's
Political Philosophy
Q.
My name is Alberto Pasolini Zanelli,
Il Giornale,
The President. Well, I didn't set out
to be a prophet, but I just believe strongly that government can become too
domineering and when -- well, I thought in our own country that we had drifted
to a point where government was, in a sense, at an adversarial relationship
with its own business and private sector. And so, we set out to reduce regulations
that we thought were unnecessary, to return authority to our States. We are
unique in the world in that we were created as a federation of sovereign
States. And much of our law and so forth was left with the States and the local
communities nearest to the people, and then certain things that had to be done
by the Federal Government.
But
this was not new with me in feeling that the central government had gone too
far in imposing itself on these other elements. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, when
he ran for election in 1932 -- one of his platform planks was that he would
restore authority and autonomy to the States and local communities that he said
had been unjustly seized by the Federal Government. So, this wasn't -- and he
was of the opposite party. But this we have done. And I think it has been
responsible for the longest economic expansion in our nation's history, which
we're in right now.
And
so, I could obviously see that, well, I disagreed with the whole theory of
socialism and its advanced partner, communism, because that was a total
imposition on the people. We set out, Vice President Bush was put in -- I put
him in charge of a task force to investigate how many regulations we could
eliminate that had been imposed on the people and on local governments and so
forth. And that commission was so successful that we estimate that we have
eliminated 600 million man-hours a year of complying with government paperwork
throughout the country. So, I'm still critical of that system, but again I
think that's not too far away from what the General Secretary is trying to do.
He has found and is advocating changes. He's getting resistance from some of
the bureaucracy, but he is suggesting changes that are obviously based on
improving the economic situation in his country.
NATO
Defense Spending
Q.
Mr. President, I am Boudouin Ballaert
from the French paper, Le Figaro. And the question of whether the NATO allies
of the United States are bearing their fair share of the Western defense burden
has triggered an important foreign policy debate here in Washington and was
raised recently in Brussels by Mr. William Taft. Mr. President, what's your
view about the burden-sharing problem?
The President. Well, there is no
question but that if we take it on a percentage of our gross national income we
are perhaps having a higher figure in our defense spending than our trading
partners are in NATO. And we have believed that since our Congress is making it
more difficult for us to continue our rate of spending in defense that maybe
our allies could increase their share somewhat. I don't think it is a problem
that should cause any ill will between us, but we have in our meetings with our
NATO partners suggested that it could be most helpful if they would assume a little
bit more of the burden.
Changes
in
Q.
May I come back, Mr. President, to
The President. Well, I think that is
possible that the -- the most recent one -- I think we can't rule out the fact
that there was an age problem, that one man had been there quite a long time.
And this is a younger man. I don't know exactly what his beliefs and policies
are, but they seem to be somewhat, well, let's say, in the same mold as the
General Secretary of the
Advice
to the President's Successor
Q.
Mr. President, if, as it is currently expected, the dialog continues between
Mr. Gorbachev and the next President of the United States, what piece of advice
will you give to your successor, depending on his name -- Mr. Bush or Mr.
Dukakis, presumably?
The President. The advice that I would
give to my successor with regard to relationship with -- --
Q.
Yes, in regard to his name -- I mean -- --
The President. Well, I would certainly
try to inform him fully of all that had been accomplished in these last few
years, now with this relatively new head of state. And I think I would try to
convince him that this progress should continue. As I said in the first
meeting, one-on-one with the General Secretary, I pointed out to him that it
was rather unique that there we were in a room in Geneva, Switzerland, probably
the two men in the world that had within our power to maintain the peace or to
start a third world war, and neither one of us seemed to want a third world
war. And there can be no denying that there is something of the ``superstate'' about our two nations, and we can have a
bearing on the peace and prosperity of the world, depending on how we get
along. And so, I suggested to him that we didn't mistrust each other because of
our weapons, we had our weapons because we mistrusted each other, and that
maybe what we should do is not just deal with arms and numbers of weapons but
see if we could not get at the things that made us mistrust each other. And I
think we've been doing quite a bit of that. And so, I would try to pass that on
as a chore that the next President should continue.
General
Manuel Noriega of
Q.
Mr. President, your
The President. Well, he and I disagree
on that. I recognize how it looks to some people with regard to that as a part
of our effort. And I think he's aligned with this -- that the goal must be the
removal of Noriega from power. He is a military dictator. Here is a man who is
able to actually drive the President of Panama into hiding for, literally, fear
of his life. And he is an absolute dictator. Now that is the goal, and we tried
to do that with economic measures. They didn't succeed. We are still in a
position of negotiating. Our representatives are down there right now. I have
to say the process is still going on. There had been no decision reached.
The
disagreement, however, over whether we were doing business with a drug dealer
or not was based on a rather unusual thing. And that is when lawyers in this
country got an indictment against Noriega on the basis of dealing with the drug
dealers, they overlooked -- you know, when I say it's unusual, it's unusual
that you indict literally the head of another state -- but they overlooked the
fact that the Panamanian Constitution makes it impossible to extradite this man
in response to the indictment. Well, then you have to say the alternative is
that he stays there in power and able to continue his drug trafficking. And if it
means quashing an indictment that cannot be enforced, I would suggest that
that's not too high a price to pay for getting rid of him.
Q.
Mr. President, will you explain some secret of the American mind that is about
economy. It is flourishing. It is booming -- this 65 or 66th month [of]
uninterrupted expansion, full employment, low inflation, everything looks fine.
Why are still so many people talking gloom in the middle of a boom?
The President. I made some remarks
about that to an audience just a few days ago in a speech of mine. It's amazing
how even much of our media can -- well, I described it like being in a hall of
mirrors and coming up with a false image. We announce a figure that we had the
highest amount of exports in our history just last week. And how do they get at
that? They somehow say, well that, oh, we think inflation is coming back.
They'll find some -- I described it as their ability to see the dark cloud
behind the silver lining. And I think the silver lining is very definitely
real.
We
took some practical steps in addition to those regulations that I mentioned. We
had a complete overhaul of our tax system. Now, I'm not a genius that thought
of this all at once by myself, but I know that if you
look back through our history invariably tax reductions have resulted in an
increase of revenue for the Government. As a matter of fact, centuries ago
there was a man named ibn-Khaldun who said in the
beginning of the empire, the rates were low, and the revenue was high. At the
end of the empire, the rates were high, and the revenue was low.
Well,
it happened. When we got our tax reform, that brought the top bracket in our
income tax, for example, down from 70 percent on the people who could earn in
that bracket. When we brought that down to -- well, now it's
28 percent. But first, our first move was to bring it down to 50
percent. Well, even that resulted in a great increase in the revenues from that
same segment of people. Well, now, this has to mean that those people were so
busy at that 70-percent rate in tax shelters that they were seeking, or in just
simply not earning any more beyond a certain point because how much was taken
away from them, once you made an incentive that they could keep almost
three-quarters of every dollar they earned, they started earning more dollars
and stopped looking for tax shelters. And the same has been through all of the
brackets. That was one of the great features, I think, of our recovery. And
then the other was getting government out of the way of the private sector.
Our
country, I think, probably leads the world in entrepreneurship. We have created
in the last 5 years 16 million new jobs. Now, most of those jobs have been
created by new or small businesses -- not the great corporations with their
thousands and thousands of employees, but the individual with an idea that goes
into business for himself or the individual that's got a few employees and then
suddenly he's got 200. Let us say that the bulk of the new jobs were in those
industries that employed less than 500 people.
Well,
all of this is what has resulted in what the leaders of your countries in our
meetings have called the American miracle. And as a matter of fact, many of
those leaders have been very frank in saying to me that they would like to be
able to remove some of the restrictions and restraints on the private sector,
private enterprise in your countries. And we talk about that a great deal, and
maybe we're going to see some results elsewhere.
Q.
The last one?
The President. Sorry.
Administration
Accomplishments
Q.
Mr. President, I know you are still very much in charge, of course, but next
January you will leave the White House. And how would you like to be
remembered, and what about the Reagan legacy?
The President. Well, I would like to
feel that what I had left will be continued -- the economic policies and the
restraints on government. And one other thing, when we came into office, our
defense capacity had been so reduced that on any given day 50 percent of our
military aircraft could not fly for lack of spare parts, 50 percent of our
naval vessels couldn't leave harbor for the same reason or for lack of crew.
So, at the same time that I was trying to reduce the spending of government and
the share that it was taking in the private sector, I had promised in the
campaign I was going to restore our military.
Well,
we not only did that, but at that time, there was a great wave of feeling
across our country that, well, that things weren't the way they used to be, and
there was a lack of patriotism. I likened it to the fact that I said I thought
the people were ready for a spiritual revival. And I'm pleased to tell you that
that has happened, and I get more mail and more people stopping me, if I'm out
on a public appearance or something, to tell me that the thing they're grateful
for is the renewal of patriotism and feeling about our country.
So,
I don't know. Maybe I ought to just be happy to be remembered at all, but I'd
kind of like it if those were the things they remembered. [Laughter]
Q.
Thank you very much.
The President. That's it? Well -- --
President's
Future Plans
Q.
May I just give you a suggestion?
The President. Yes.
Q.
When you leave office, please go on doing your Saturday message. [Laughter]
The President. Well, whether I do that
or not, I can assure you, I am -- I've always described it this way: that you
know the business that I used to be in, and I've always described that in
When
I was making those speeches in those days in
And
as a matter of fact, I've already picked out one topic I'm going to speak on.
You know that an amendment to the Constitution came about a few years ago that
limited the President of the
Q.
Mr. President, may I, on behalf of my colleagues,
thank you very much for this interview. We wish you a pleasant trip to
The President. Well, thank you very
much.
Note:
The interview began at
Proclamation
5827 -- Take Pride in
By
the President of the
of
A
Proclamation
Our
beautiful land is blessed from sea to shining sea with bountiful natural and
cultural resources on Federal, State, and local lands. We are also blessed that
the American people possess a unique volunteer spirit rooted in our frontier
tradition.
It
is truly fitting that we take a special period of time to recognize our
Nation's recreational and cultural resources and how they contribute to the
economic and social well-being of our communities and our country. Through our
stewardship of these natural wonders and great monuments to history, we can
express our love for our country, our pride in
The
Take Pride in
The
Congress, by House Joint Resolution 530, has designated May 1988 as ``Take
Pride in America Month'' and authorized and requested the President to issue a
proclamation in observance of this event.
Now,
Therefore, I, Ronald Reagan, President of the
In
Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-fifth day of May, in
the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and eighty-eight, and of the
Ronald
Reagan
[Filed with the Office
of the Federal Register,
Note: The proclamation
was released by the Office of the Press Secretary on May 26.