mitted to the nuclear testing treaty safeguards that were submitted to the Senate in 1987, which are essential to the national security and to the maintenance of a credible nuclear deterrent.

The Protocols represent the successful culmination of several years of effort to provide for effective verification of compliance with the Treaties. Negotiations to develop new Protocols to verify compliance with limits established by the Treaties began in November 1987 and continued until May 1990, when the Protocols were completed. The Protocols provide for a variety of activities related to verification, including the use of the hydrodynamic yield measurement method. Operational changes in the U.S. nuclear test program, including changes at the Nevada Test Site, which implementation of the verification measures will entail were considered carefully and have been judged manageable and therefore acceptable in the interests of effective verification.

I believe these Treaties are in the nation

al interest. Therefore, I urge the Senate to give early and favorable consideration to the Treaties including their Protocols and to give its advice and consent to their ratification.

The White House, June 28, 1990.

George Bush

torney, 1985-1986; and Chief of the Criminal Division, 1982-1985. In addition, Mr. Mueller served in the Office of the United States Attorney, Northern District of California, in several capacities: Interim Chief of the Criminal Division, 1981-1982; Chief of Special Prosecutions Unit, 1980-1981; Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Criminal Division, 1978-1980; and Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Civil Division, 1976-1977.

Mr. Mueller graduated from Princeton University (B.A., 1966) and the University of Virginia (J.D., 1973). He served in the U.S. Marine Corps, 1967-1970, and was awarded the Bronze Star, two Navy Commendation Medals, and the Purple Heart. He was born August 7, 1944, in New York, NY. Mr. Mueller is married, has two children, and currently resides in Weston, MA.

The President's News Conference

June 29, 1990

Foreign and Domestic Issues

The President. Good morning, everybody. I'm leaving in a few hours and will be gone from Washington for several days. Congress is about to close up shop for the Fourth of July holidays. And so, I thought it would be a good idea to bring you up to date on a wide array of current topics and respond to your questions.

During the next 2 weeks, the U.S. will

Be an Assistant Attorney General
June 28, 1990

The President today announced his intention to nominate Robert S. Mueller III to be an Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division at the Department of Justice. He would succeed Edward S.G. Dennis, Jr.

Since 1988 Mr. Mueller has served as a partner with the law firm of Hill and Barlow in Boston, MA. Prior to this, he served in the Office of the U.S. Attorney, District of Massachusetts, in several capacities: Deputy U.S. Attorney, 1987-1988; U.S. Attorney, 1986-1987; First Assistant U.S. At

crucial political, security, and international economic issues. And seldom in the last 40 years have such questions had such direct impact on the lives of all Americans. Today in the U.S., we are carefully examining the historic changes in Eastern Europe, size of our military forces, our ability to compete in world markets, the assistance that we provide to help emerging democracies, and the size and priorities of our own budget, and how to continue the 90 months of economic expansion that we've enjoyed. These issues are not abstract. Every American has a stake in how we as a nation address these very complex questions. On July 5th and 6th in London, the NATO alliance will

gather to forge a new direction for the future. And at the Houston economic summit, we will press for progress in the Uruguay round of trade negotiations, discuss economic support for various countries, and review progress on the environment.

These international concerns are reflected in many of the decisions I made just this week. First, we're doing what is necessary to assure continuation of the economic expansion, now in its 90th month, and we want to keep it going.

We now estimate a deficit of over $150 billion in fiscal 1991, not counting the costs of the savings and loan cleanup. And this means that unless Congress acts there will be a cutoff in October of nearly $100 billion in government services under the sequester provisions of the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings. The potential results: draconian cuts in defense, student grants, and a wide array of other necessary domestic services.

To avoid this, tough decisions must be made. Leadership is needed, and that is exactly what administration officials are seeking to provide and, indeed, in these talks, I believe, are providing. The budget negotiations now underway are a make-or-break effort at responsible government. The congressional budgeting process must succeed. The negotiators are facing tough questions about where to make cuts and where to raise the revenues.

These are not decisions that anyone relishes. They are decisions that Democrats and Republicans alike have got to face with candor and courage. Frankly, I believe that ultimately good politics is rooted in good government. I'm optimistic that we can get a budget agreement legislated which not only tells the world that America puts its fiscal house in order but also will garner the full support of the American people.

Secondly, this week we reached an agreement with the Japanese on a structural impediments initiative that's going to help to open markets and create new opportunities for business and commerce.

Next, we took an important step toward increasing jobs, opportunity, and economic prosperity throughout our own hemi

sphere-Enterprise for the Americas-and innovative and, I think, visionary plan for increased trade and investment with Latin America and the Caribbean. The response

from south of our border has been overwhelmingly positive. This included a new proposal on official debt in the hemisphere which will help our neighbors in Latin America and the Caribbean resume the process of growth.

We developed a plan for protecting our coastal resources, this OCS [outer continental shelf oil and gas development] decision, while also endeavoring to protect energy independence.

As I leave for the Fourth of July holiday and then from there to the NATO summit, and then to the Houston economic summit, I just wanted to assure you that America will squarely face the challenges of leadership that are before us, both domestically and in terms of international affairs.

Tax Revenue Increases

Q. Mr. President, I'd like to ask you about your reversal on no new taxes. Do you consider that a betrayal of your promise? And what do you say to Republicans who complain that you've robbed them of the same campaign issue that helped get you elected?

The President. I think-what I consider it is a necessary step to get stalled budget negotiations moving. I am very encouraged with the approach taken now by Republicans and Democrats in these important discussions that are going on. I'm not going to discuss details-what I'll accept and what I won't accept-but things are moving, and I think that much more important today is getting this deficit down, continuing economic expansion, and employment in this country. So, that's the way I'd respond to it.

Q. Can people trust politicians if they make statements and are willing to break them?

The President. You know, I recall a previous flurry when I was Vice President, and there was some economic plans proposed back in '82 that caused a furor-something like we're hearing now. And the President, in my view, did what was right. And so, I think that we're on the right track. I think that the arrows have been flying-front, back, sideways-but that's what I get paid for. I think we're on the right track now. I think we'll have strong support from both sides of the aisle.

Q. Mr. President, but do you believe it will hurt your credibility?

The President. No, not in the long run. Q. Why not? People are already questioning

The President. Because what people are interested in are jobs, economic growth. People know this deficit is bad. People know that we're going to have to take some action. And that's why I think not.

Q. What will you say to American people who said you made a promise, no new taxes, now you've

The President. I'd say I take a look at a new situation. I see an enormous deficit. I see a savings and loan problem out there that has to be resolved. And like Abraham Lincoln said, I'll think anew. I'm not violating or getting away from my fundamental conviction on taxes, anything of that nature, not in the least. But what I've said is on the table, and let's see where we go. But we've got a very important national problem, and I think the President owes the people his judgment at the moment he has to address that problem. And that's exactly what I'm trying to do.

Look, I knew I'd catch some flak on this decision-just those two words-but I've got to do what I think is right, and then I'll ask the people for support. But more important than posturing now or even negotiating is the result. Do we continue to provide jobs for the American people, and do we continue to provide economic growth, and do we try to stop saddling the generations on the way up, the young people, with absolutely unacceptable deficits?

Savings and Loan Crisis

Q. What will you do with the savings and loan situation? Is there any way to do a budget with that still coming out of general revenue, or do you have to push the whole issue off to the side?

The President. We can't push it off to the side: we've got to solve the problem. My interest on that one, incidentally, is to protect the depositor, put the people that broke the law in jail. And that is exactly what the policy that we proposed did. We came in here and 18 days after taking office initiated a very important savings and loan policy. And the size of the savings and loan problem is terrible. And we're trying very

hard to go after the criminals and to have in place rules and regulations so that this will never happen again and to protect the depositors. Those are the three key elements of what I'm trying to do.

Q. But where do you pay for it? Is it out of the taxes the Government takes in every year from the American taxpayer?

The President. Well, we have to. People are going to have to pay for it. And it goes as a part of all our expenditures I'm talking about. There has got to be a remedy.

Middle East Peace Process

Q. Mr. President, on another subject. Prime Minister Shamir [of Israel] has sent you

The President. Good, Michael [Michael Gelb, Reuters]. I was hoping we'd get to another one. [Laughter]

Q. We can go back and do taxes later. Prime Minister Shamir has sent you what appears to be a pretty tough letter ruling out flatly talks with any Palestinians with any sort of authority. Do you feel the peace process is deadlocked, and are you concerned that the hardliners, the voices of extremism, now have the upper hand throughout the region?

The President. I'm concerned about a deadlock in the peace process. We have received the Shamir letter; came over to me late last night. The analysis process between NSC [National Security Council] and State has just started, so I can't give you or provide the American people with a response to that letter. But, yes, I am very concerned about a high centering of the peace process.

And we've had a plan, and it is a sound plan, and I want to see it go forward. So, we will be analyzing the Shamir response very, very carefully and, hopefully, then go back and say, Find some way; find some material in the response that permit us to get these talks going again. It is essential. The status quo is unacceptable to everybody. But I can't give you right now whether I think the letter is negative or positive or something of that nature.

Q. Well, can you see any way to get this peace process going unless the Israelis show some willingness to talk to Palestinians with some authority?

The President. I think there has got to be discussion with Palestinians, and that has to happen. And we will push and find ways to make it happen if we can. We're halfway across the world, but we are not going to give up on that kind of solution to this problem. We have to do that. But if we get totally stiff-armed on the [Secretary of State] Baker approach, or what was the Shamir plan, Mubarak's [President of Egypt] help on it-he could have his name on it-then we go back to the drawing board because we're not going to sit here and do nothing.

Federal Budget Negotiations

Q. Mr. President, I'm sorry, but I'd like to go back to taxes.

The President. Lesley [Lesley Stahl, CBS News], I thought you'd want to get back to that.

Q. I'm sorry. I know it's hard for you. I can tell it is, and it's difficult.

The President. It's not hard.

Q. Okay, if it's not hard, could you clarify what seems to be a fuzzing up of the issues by some Republicans who are trying to say that your new statement isn't new? Are you telling the American people that this budget outcome is going to be higher taxes?

The President. I'm telling the people that there are negotiations going on right now. There are no preconditions, and everything is on the table. We will see where we come out. And when we get an agreement that is supported by Democrats and Republicans alike-and if I think it's a good agreement-I will then tell the American people clearly why they need to support it-what's at stake for them in terms of jobs, continued growth in this economy.

Q. You're not saying it. You're not saying we have to raise taxes. Why aren't you saying those words?

The President. I'll tell you-sorry I missed your point. We've agreed with the Democratic leaders that we would not discuss the details of what's going on in these discussions, and we're not going to do that. If and when we come up with a program that raises revenues-and our original budget talked about that-and if there are taxes in it, why, then I will go out there and advocate strong bipartisan support for this. But if I get into going into each kind of tax

The President. Well, I want to leave it the way I said I would so the negotiators are free to discuss a wide array of options, including tax increases. Does that help? Q. No. [Laughter]

Tax Revenue Increases

Q. Mr. President, you mentioned a couple of times that you're getting arrows from all directions. One newspaper headline that declared "Read My Lips: I Lied." Is this kind of criticism justified? Is it fair? Do you deserve it?

The President. Well, I expected it, but I think the deserving of it-the proof of the pudding is going to be in the eating and how it comes out. Because I think the American people recognize that the budget is greater than we had predicted and the Democrats had predicted. The economy has been slower. And so, we'll just wait and see how we come out. But, no, I can't say I didn't expect to hear some campaign words played back to me, and it's been fairly in

tense.

But I'll tell you, I've been more relaxed about it than I thought it would be. I went back into history and took a look at what others have had to go through in this job. So, it hasn't been as tense. You know, we

had some congressional candidates over there yesterday-people running. And they don't want to see tax increases. Some of them-I could see them: How are we going to handle this? We don't want to be rude to the President, but we feel strongly. So, one or two of them, a couple of them, spoke up. And I could totally empathize with what they were going through. We didn't have time because it was about a 45-second handshake. But if we had, I'd have said: Now, look, you've got to look at the big picture here. Stay with your position. Advocate what you believe and what you tell your constituents what you'll try to do. Then just stay a little bit openminded so when we get an agreement-and I hope we will-that is good for the country that you can say, Well, we can accept this. Because we're going to need support from Republicans and Democrats alike, to say nothing of the American people. But I think the people will support it. I think they want to see jobs and economic growth, and that is what is at stake here.

Federal Budget Negotiations

Q. But within hours after you released the statement, some of your staff members-Chief of Staff John Sununu, for onewas up on the Hill trying to assure conservative Republicans that nothing's changed. At this point, whose lips should the American people believe?

The President. I think what he was talking about is that everything is on the table. Nothing's changed. I saw a lot of interpretations of what he said, but I've not seen a statement

or anything of that nature. You've got various interpretations from various political factions. You've seen the Democratic study group has put out a mandate of what has to happen to have it just exactly their way. We have people that feel very strongly on our side. And so, this we expected. We expected Members of Congress who have strong convictions on how to approach this problem to weigh in. We expected editorial comment. We expected, as I say, some of the slings and the arrows.

But I just have a comforting feeling after 2 or 3 days now that if I do my job rightand that is to help facilitate the negotiations and then we can get a bipartisan agreement. And then I can go to the Amer

ican people and say: Look, we've all had to give or take a little on this. But this agreement is going to be good for future generations. It's going to be good for the economy. It's going to be good for jobs. Then people will say, Look, we support the President. Tax Revenue Increases

Q. Mr. President, can you walk us through your thinking just a little bit? Was there one particular moment when you realized you were going to have these campaign promises played back at you all day?

The President. The minute I decided that we would go forward on a joint statement, which I felt was necessary to get the budget process moving. But I'd had a preview of coming attractions because when we said no preconditions-maybe that wasn't the exact word-but no preconditions, arrows started flying. And I understand this. I've been in the political wars. But I am also President, and I've got to try now to look at the big picture and the welfare of this country and put it ahead of my own strongly held preferences and everything else. And that's exactly what's happening. The process has started to move forward as a result of that statement with a seriousness that I applaud.

Q. Could you talk a little bit about what led you to feel that you needed to

The President. Is this a third followup? That's unfair.

Q. No, a second. Second for me.
Q. Lesley got eight followups.

Q. But could you talk more about what led you to believe that that statement was necessary? Was there some moment of epiphany? Was there any particular bit of data that [laughter

The President. You mean, did I suddenly get hit with the lightning? No, I suddenly was presented with the fact from Democrats and Republicans and our three able negotiators, in whom I have tremendous confidence, we've got to do something to get the process going for it. But I don't recall any-because I'm not changing my view on taxes. I'm just saying everything's on the table. We may have to do something here. But if I were going to go back and, say, do it my way, we'd figure out a way