January 14, 2001 In His First Days, Bush Plans Review of Clinton's Acts
By DAVID E. SANGER and FRANK BRUNI
CRAWFORD, Tex., Jan. 12 — President-elect George W. Bush said today that he planned to review and possibly roll back some of the most ambitious initiatives that President Clinton has taken in recent days, including regulations that put nearly 60 million acres of the nation's forests off limits to development.
"I understand the Western mentality, and I want the Western mentality represented in this administration," Mr. Bush said of his own land use policies. In an interview, he emphasized that "we've got lawyers looking at every single issue, every single opportunity" to reverse actions Mr. Clinton has taken in the waning weeks of his presidency.
He also described what could well become a new, tougher approach toward Russia, limiting aid for its conversion to a market economy, and he elaborated on several other foreign policy issues. Previewing one of the most closely watched decisions he will face in his first month in office, he signaled that he was inclined to use an executive order to stop the flow of American money to any international organizations that provide abortions in foreign countries.
"Organizations that promote abortions are organizations I don't want to support" with American taxpayer dollars, Mr. Bush said.
Mr. Bush's remarks came in a 75-minute interview in his renovated farmhouse here, followed by less formal conversation during a 90-minute tour of his ranch and a hike up a limestone canyon to his favorite waterfall.
Along the way — stopping at moments to admire the middle fork of the Bosque River rushing through his land or to point out a buzzard — the man who will become the 43rd president of the United States on Saturday also talked about his legislative priorities, his Inaugural Address and the diplomatic troubles he anticipates with Moscow and Beijing over his plans to deploy a national missile defense system.
Mr. Bush was dismissive of the Clinton administration's eight-year-long use of direct financial aid to Russia, part of a broad Western effort to coax the country toward a market economy. He suggested he would try to stop the money — except for that used to dismantle nuclear weapons — until Vladimir V. Putin, the Russian president, cleaned up corruption and enacted far-reaching economic and legal reforms.
"It's hard for America to fashion Russia," Mr. Bush said. "It just seems like to me that we don't want to be lending money and/or encourage the lending of money into a system in which the intention of the capital is never fulfilled," he said. "The intent of the capital was to encourage entrepreneurship and growth and markets."
According to the General Accounting Office, the United States has spent roughly $2.3 billion since 1992 promoting democracy, the rule of law and market reforms in Russia, but the annual disbursements have tailed off steeply since the Russian financial crisis of 1998. The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, institutions in which the United States is the largest single shareholder, have issued loans to Russia over the same period worth approximately $30 billion.
Taken together, Mr. Bush's comments amounted to a sketchy road map for his first 100 days in office. By making it clear that he would rigorously review Mr. Clinton's environmental orders and suggesting he might reverse the Clinton administration's position on aid to family planning groups working overseas, he was embracing some favorite causes of his conservative base, especially the Western states he called "that big swath of red on the map" — a region of contiguous states he swept as he took the presidency in the narrowest of victories.
In the case of reversing President Clinton's forest policy, which was made final this month, after years of painstaking review and public comment, Mr. Bush would face many legal restraints. He acknowledged that his lawyers would have to look carefully at what options were open.
His comments on Russia, if converted into policy, could lead to a fundamental change in the way the United States seeks to influence the behavior of a nation that was once its chief superpower rival — and it risks heightening suspicions in Russia of how America is leveraging its economic and military power.
In the interview, Mr. Bush also made the following points:
¶He said his Inaugural Address, which he hopes to keep to a short 12 minutes, would carry the message that "we can be a unified America." But he insisted that this theme was not the product of his slim victory in the Electoral College and loss in the popular vote.
¶Mr. Bush said he planned to quickly introduce his plan to cut taxes by an amount now estimated at $1.6 trillion over the next 10 years as a single bill, perhaps modifying it to deepen the tax cuts in the next few years so that it could spur a slowing economy. Asked if he was willing to negotiate the size of his proposed tax cut with a sharply divided Congress, he shot back: "The answer is no. I think it's the right number."
¶He suggested he might be willing to pick up on Mr. Clinton's framework for a deal with North Korea to control its production and export of missiles but said it must include provisions to "verify that they are upholding their end of the agreement." If North Korea no longer threatens its neighbors, he said, he would "take a look" at reducing American troops on the Korean Peninsula, but only in consultation with South Korea and other Asian allies.
¶Mr. Bush acknowledged that the economic sanctions imposed on Iraq since the Persian Gulf war have so collapsed that "they resemble Swiss cheese." But while he was critical of Mr. Clinton's handling of Iraq, he declined to say what tools he might use to pressure Saddam Hussein.
¶Mr. Bush said he may have erred in commenting on the Federal Reserve's action early this month to cut interest rates, and suggested that to preserve the Fed's independence he would not publicly evaluate its actions as president. "I kind of read the feedback and tended to agree with it, frankly," he said of the criticism he received for enthusiastically backing the half-point cut in short-term rates.
From Ranch to Frying Pan
Throughout the conversation Mr. Bush looked relaxed. He was clearly enjoying a day off puttering around his ranch, brewing coffee for visitors and interrupting the conversation repeatedly to admonish his two friendly but occasionally disobedient dogs, Spot and Barney. But he leaned forward and turned intent when the subject turned to his choice for attorney general, former Senator John Ashcroft, a religious conservative who he said he knew "could end up being a lightning rod" for criticism.
He said he expected that Mr. Ashcroft's confirmation hearings, which begin on Tuesday, would be focused on the designee's comments on civil rights, his fierce opposition to abortion and comments he made supporting leaders of the Southern side of the Civil War. "They are going to dig up every word the guy uttered," Mr. Bush said. "He's going to get to explain them. He explained many of the words he uttered to me."
The president-elect professed to be unfazed by the withdrawal this week of his choice for labor secretary, Linda Chavez, who had failed to tell the Bush transition team that she had once had an illegal immigrant live in her home and perform occasional house chores. Mr. Bush would not say that he had been misled by Ms. Chavez, but noted, "She said she made mistakes," and he seemed to agree with that assessment.
Mr. Bush described his cabinet as "a very strong group of folks," made stronger by their extensive experience in government.
"I'm always mindful of what Sam Rayburn told Lyndon Johnson when he first saw the Kennedy administration," he said, referring to the famously gruff former speaker of the House. "He said, `Gosh, I just wish one of them had run for sheriff.' " And that's why I'm very comfortable with an Ashcroft or a Norton. They not only ran for sheriff, they ran for statewide offices."
Talking like a professor of management at Harvard Business School — which he attended decades ago — he said he was working hard to turn his cabinet choices into a cohesive team that is accustomed to his own style. In his two visits to Washington in recent weeks, he noted, he was "spending time with the folks, just watching everybody interact and letting them see how I respond and my style. I want them to see the decision-making process and how it works." He wanted, he insisted, no yes-men or yes-women.
"Here's loyalty," he said. "Loyalty is somebody who walked into my office and says, `Here is my opinion,' or `I hear you are thinking this way. I don't agree with you.' " He made it clear, however, that once he had chosen his path, he expected his cabinet members to voice unanimous support for his decisions in public.
At one point Mr. Bush said that he had cautioned his press secretary, Ari Fleischer, that at times he would withhold information so that Mr. Fleischer could truthfully profess ignorance to reporters — hardly a new strategy for occupants of the White House. Mr. Bush recalled telling Mr. Fleischer recently, "When I tell you you are not going to know something, you say, `Yes, sir.' "
`I Love Land'
Mr. Bush made little effort to hide his interest in reversing some of Mr. Clinton's recent executive orders and rules. But he cautioned that his aides were still researching whether reversals would be legally or politically possible, noting at one point that some of his actions would require legislation and "it doesn't take much to block action in the United States Senate," where there are now 50 Republicans and 50 Democrats.
Mr. Bush's views on the administration's recently completed effort to block the development of roadless areas of federal lands, essentially putting those areas off limits to loggers and oil drillers, was complex. Mr. Bush himself clearly treasures his natural surroundings — "I love land," he said while driving around the 1,600 acres he acquired in 1999 — but he instinctively bridles at the thought that the federal government would trump local officials or private landholders in deciding how that land should be used.
"What I would seek to do is to make sure that our bureaucracies were not trampling the interest of the people — and the president himself would work with local stakeholders before takings — such as what the president has done with the roadless areas, for example." The word "takings" is used to describe government action to limit the use of land, with minimal or no compensation.
"The concept of the federal government taking people's property without compensation is something I agree with Gale Norton on," he said. "It should not. There ought to be a balance between obviously the public interest and private property. And a lot of people in my state and in the Western states feel that balance is not there."
He reiterated his determination to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and said: "People shouldn't be shocked that I'm picking somebody who agrees with me. That's what a president does."
But he stopped short of saying that he would reverse the forest policy wholesale, suggesting he would consult with "governors and senators and local folks" to determine which lands should remain off limits and which should be developed. "There's going to be some property in these giant chunks of land that we can use and not damage the environment," he said. "There are some in this country that have wanted zero exploration or zero activity. And I just don't think it's in our national interest to take that approach."
He was more definitive about his opposition to federal aid for family planning groups that promote or perform abortions abroad. One of Mr. Clinton's very first acts, two days into his presidency in 1993, was to sign an executive order scuttling a Reagan-era policy that prohibited these private organizations from receiving public funds.
Under a compromise reached in October to avoid a confrontation between Congressional Republicans and Mr. Clinton, Congress allocated $425 million for such family planning activities — but said it could not be spent until Feb. 15. That clears the way for Mr. Bush to return to the Reagan policy, and while he said that he had not yet thoroughly reviewed the matter, he suggested he was inclined to head in that direction.
He also gave a sense of his other priorities, suggesting that in addition to education reform legislation and his tax bill, "we may be able to move a little faster on Medicare" reforms, including prescription drug coverage for elderly Americans. But he tacitly conceded that an overhaul of Social Security, a major subject of debate in the campaign, would take time.
Looking Abroad
In discussing foreign policy, Mr. Bush again said he would not allow American military forces to engage in what he called "nation-building" — converting countries to stable democracies — because it was a distraction from their main mission. That was a critical difference with Vice President Al Gore, who repeatedly cited the experience of American forces in helping remake Japan and Germany after World War II.
He said allies in Europe were "very aware" of his desire to gradually reduce America's presence in Kosovo and Bosnia, and said Secretary of State-designate Colin L. Powell would make it clear that Washington wanted Europe "to be the peacekeepers." (In fact, the United States provides less than 20 percent of the peacekeeping forces in the Balkans.) But, Mr. Bush said, "I don't have deadlines in mind" and "I honor the agreements that the president has — that our country has made."
"It's going to take a while" to pull back, he said.
He endorsed much of Mr. Clinton's core strategy toward China, using economic engagement to promote more freedom, but he seemed unable to decide whether China posed more of a threat to the United States because of its growing military strength or its internal weaknesses.
"I'm trying to figure out if your question is a trick question," he said with a smile. After a digression on the chaos brought about by the Cultural Revolution, he concluded, "To me, particularly as China develops as the military power, a chaotic China would be something that should cause great concern to people in the region and to us."
He said he was prepared for objections from Moscow and Beijing to his plan to build a national missile defense, but he insisted it should not be seen by either capital as a threat.
"We've just got to explain why we are doing what we are doing," he said. "The Chinese know and the Russians know that there will be no system developed in the immediate future or the foreseeable future, is a better word, that can conceivably intercept a multiple launch" of missiles at the United States.
"You know that. They know that," he said. His real intent, he said, was to intercept an accidental launching of one or two nuclear weapons, or to deprive "some nation like Iran to eventually say to us, `And we've got one aimed at Israel.' " He would not discuss what kind of incentive he might offer China or Russia to accept the system, other than decreasing the size of America's own nuclear missile fleet. And how many warheads could he eliminate from America's arsenal?
"That's what we are going to find out," he said.
Copyright 2001 The New York Times CompanyAll copyrighted material reproduced on pages of American Russian Law Institute
site is intended for non- commercial educational and research purposes only
