The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer; Interview with Bill Clinton

MR. LEHRER: Good evening. I'm Jim Lehrer. On the NewsHour tonight, an extended campaign 96 interview with President Clinton, a heart doctor's perspective on the Yeltsin health problem, and a look at Dorothy Lamour in the "Road to Bali," plus at the end of the program the other news of this day. NEWSMAKER

MR. LEHRER: A major part of the NewsHour tonight will be an interview with President Clinton about his campaign for reelection. I spoke with the President this afternoon in the Roosevelt Room at the White House.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. President, welcome.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Thank you.

MR. LEHRER: Do you expected to be reelected in November?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Well, I hope I'll be reelected in November, and I'm going to do everything I can between now and November to assure that. But I'm almost superstitious about not predicting. I do believe that our country is on the right track. I think by any measure we're better off than we were four years ago, and I believe that the idea, the vision I've laid before the American people on the specific plans are better for our future than those that Sen. Dole and this Republican Party, Mr. Gingrich, have laid out, so I believe I'll be successful, but you know I've learned not to predict these things.

MR. LEHRER: Does it make you nervous to be so far ahead in the polls?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: No. I don't take that entirely seriously. I think that we have to run as if we are dead even, a little behind. We have to remember the weight of history is against us, and, again, I think if we can just keep trying to engage people in a serious debate about what they want our country to be like when we enter the 21st century, what they want America to be like when their children are their age, that's the test I keep asking people to apply to this election, and I try not to even think about the polls, except to just to--it's better to be ahead than behind, but the important thing is to work like crazy till the end.

MR. LEHRER: What did you mean when you said that the weight of history is against you?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Well, it's been a long time since a Democrat's been reelected. That's what I meant. I think in terms of being on the right side of history, in terms of our vision and program for the future, I think we're--history is with us in that sense, but it's been a long time since a Democrat has been reelected.

MR. LEHRER: How important is it to you personally to be reelected? Is it something that you've got things you want to do these next four years that you're burning to do, or you just don't want to be humiliated at being a one-term President?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: No. I have a lot of things I want to do. As a matter of fact, I've thought a lot about second term presidencies, and some of them haven't worked out so well, and I believe that they haven't worked out so well because the Presidents ran for reelection and got reelected just because people were satisfied with the job they'd done, but they didn't have an agenda, which is why I went to the trouble to write a book about what I wanted to do in my next term, to lay out a lot of very specific things at my speech at the Democratic convention. When I go around the country, I talk about how we're going to balance the budget, how we're going to make college available to all, how we're going to build on the anti-crime efforts, and how we're going to implement welfare reform. I have awhole lot of things I really want to do in the next four years to complete this transformation of our nation into the 21st century.

MR. LEHRER: And that's what's driving you to get reelected.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Absolutely.

MR. LEHRER: One of the wraps, of course, that's put on you, Mr. President, is that you want to get reelected so badly that, that kind of sometimes you tailor what you do as President. For instance, Sen. Moynihan said specifically that if this were not an election year, you would never have signed that welfare reform bill. Is he right about that?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: No. I think before--and let me just say that I think we all have a tendency to believe that other people think like we do, so when they do something we don't agree with, we think that they come out compromising themselves, but one of the things I've learned in dealing with Sen. Dole and Speaker Gingrich and Mr. Armey, for example, is that we don't all think alike. Sometimes we think differently. And in this case, the reason I signed a welfare reform bill, even though I admitted it's flawed in terms of the way it treats legal immigrants and in one or two other ways, it gives us the chance to do everywhere what we've been doing a lot of for the last four years, that is, for four years I have given 43 states waivers to get out from under the federal rules, to try new ways to move people from welfare to work. We've reduced the welfare rolls by nearly 2 million. The welfare reform bill says on welfare we'll continue the national guarantee of health care and nutrition to poor families, and we will give more for child care if they go to work. But what used to be the welfare check, the federal portion of that, will now go to the states, and the states will have the responsibility to take that money with their money and not only continue to support people but to--by the system, by the system to move the able-bodied ones from welfare to work within two years. And I believe it can be done. I was in Kansas City the other day at a meeting with their Full Employment Council, with the business people, the welfare workers, the adult educators, all these folks. It's very exciting. All we have to do to revolutionize welfare now is to get the states to spend that money in ways that make it attractive for employers to hire people as extra employees, and we will revolutionize the way welfare works.

MR. LEHRER: Welfare, some other adjustments I guess would be the word that you've made in the last three or four years, or I mean, let's say the last year, when the election really took place, and compared with your position three or four years before that, is that--the suggestion has been made that you have decided to go where the majority of the American people are, rather than try to bring them where you are. Is that legit?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: No. No. If you look at what I've done as President, it's remarkably consistent with what I did as governor and very consistent with what I said I would do when I ran for President. There's been study after study after study saying that I have either done or worked very hard to do 80 percent of what I outlined in 1992. One book just came out and said it was over 90 percent. One scholar said I kept a higher percentage of my commitments than the last five presidents. There is a remarkable consistency here. But what I do is different from what traditionally people have thought of as Democratic politics or Republican politics. I've tried to break some new ground, to take a new approach, to say we have to change the way government works to create opportunity, demand responsibility, and then build a stronger sense of community. But let's just take some issues here. Let's take three issues: the economy, crime, and welfare. When we had a Democratic Congress in 93 and 94, we had an economic program that reduced the deficit for all four years of a President's term for the first time since the 1840's. We reduced the government by more than any administration ever has to its smallest size since Kennedy was President. On welfare, we immediately began to give the states more authority, and, as I said, those decisions had a major role in reducing the welfare rolls by 1.8 million. This welfare reform bill has played no role in that. On crime, we passed the crime bill in the Democratic Congress and the Brady bill to put 100,000 police on the street, banned assault weapons, required the reg--the waiting period for handguns, had the death penalties for drug kingpins, three strikes and you're out, as well as prevention programs for young people. Now that is a consistent pattern that we have followed. We broke new ground. We did things that I thought would work, and I think we did the right thing. And if you look at the future, I've laid out the plan to go on and balance the budget but protect Medicare, Medicaid, education, and the environment, to make education universal, to create jobs for people on welfare, so we could actually move em to work, and to finish the business of putting 100,000 police on the street, to expand the Brady bill to people who beat up their spouses and kids, and we've got a lot of plans in this area that are quite consistent. So--and I just think, you know, when you do things that don't fit into people's little boxes, they always want to say you don't have convictions about them, but you also could look at all the tough decisions I've made- -Bosnia and Haiti--taken on the tobacco companies, taken on the gun lobby for the first time, a lot of other things that I think just kind of put the lie to those attacks.

MR. LEHRER: These polls that have come out recently, not only do they show you ahead of Bob Dole by--in double digits--all of them- -they also show consistently another interesting thing that I want to ask you about. For instance, the Pew Research Center poll that came out a couple of weeks ago said, these people that overwhelmingly support you for reelection, only 30 percent of those polled found you "honest and truthful." Only 35 percent believe you keep your promises. What's that all about?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Well, there's been a very long and very well financed effort to attack me personally, you know, it goes all the way back to 1991, and people can't help being influenced by that, but now they've seen me be President for three and a half years, and they've seen me get up and fight for them and their interests and their families and their futures in the face of daily withering, highly partisan attacks by Senator D'Amato, who's Sen. Dole's campaign co-chairman, for example, and others, and we keep producing results for the American people. I think that explains the polls. But you can't expect people when all they hear is negative things on one person not to process any of it. But I think the way their voting indicates, that they know that it doesn't amount to much. Down deep inside they know that. And, you know, I can't worry about that. Other people can damage your reputation, but they can't have anything to do with your character. They can't tear it down, and the sure can't build it up. And, uh, the final judge of that is God Almighty, notthe people who spend all their time trying to tear it down. So I'm going to keep fighting for the American people. I'm going to keep trying to talk about what we've accomplished and what we're going to do, and point out that there still has not been a single, solitary, shred of evidence of anything dishonest that I have done in my public life, not only as governor--not as governor and as President. And, uh, they spent tens of millions of dollars trying to do it. So I think the people will get this right. They normally always get it right, and I think they'll get it right this time.

MR. LEHRER: Some people have suggested that what this means is that the standard by which people judge political figures, including Presidents of the United States, has changed, that politicians are expected to be different than other people. They're expected to do things in order to get elected, and the public has accepted that now. Is that--do you buy that?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Oh, there might be a little bit of that, but I think people also know that, that we have lived in a time when the quality of our public life has been severely altered by the relentless negativism of the coverage, and that some elements, some political elements have become so well organized and so well financed that they stroke that, they feed that, they work that, so I think there's a little discount factor there too. I think people may not believe that politicians are worse than they used to be or that the standards have been lowered. In fact, I think as someone who's been around this town a long time, I bet if I were doing the interview and I asked you if politicians, on balance, are more honest and better behaved today than thirty years ago, you'd probably have to say that it's probably true.

MR. LEHRER: I would.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: And so I think the fact that people have the reverse impression has more to do with the way we talk about each other, the way campaigns are conducted, the way they're covered, the way politics is conducted, and the way it's covered. The rhetoric is so much more harsh, so much more personal, so much more negative. I think it's bad for our country. But I think people have adjusted to that, and they have discounted, therefore, some of the, of the things they hear thrown on public figures.

MR. LEHRER: It just doesn't matter that much anymore.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: No. I think it matters, but I think that it matters because people want to believe in people who are in office, but if you--if you look--again, I will say--if you look at what I said I'd do in 1992, if you look at the results we've achieved, if you look at the fact that the results were achieved by doing what we said we'd do in 92, and I can make that case in the debates, for example, and to the American people, I think that they see their lives are better and we're moving in the right direction. We're addressing these problems that are concerns to people, their families, their kids. That's all you can do. You cannot worry about the static in the atmosphere or the negative things. You know, if I spent all my time worrying about that, I would never do anything good for the American people.

MR. LEHRER: One of the--one of the negatives, of course, is the Whitewater thing. I want to ask you one question about that. Susan McDougal told a federal judge in Little Rock the other day that the reason she was refusing to testify before a grand jury is that she believed Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel, was "out to get the Clintons." Do you agree with her?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Well, I think the facts speak for themselves. All we know about her is she said what she said, and then her lawyer said that he felt they did not want her to tell the truth; they wanted her to say something bad about us, whether it was the truth or not, and if it was false, it would still be perfectly all right, and if she told the truth and it wasn't bad about us, she'd simply be punished for it. That's what her lawyer said.

MR. LEHRER: Do you believe him?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: I think that the facts speak for themselves. I think there's a lot of evidence to support that.

MR. LEHRER: But do you personally believe that that's what this is all about, is to get you and Mrs. Clinton?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Isn't it obvious?

MR. LEHRER: You obviously believe that, right?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Isn't it obvious?

MR. LEHRER: It's obvious to you.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: I mean, you know, look at the D'Amato hearings. Uh, what did the D'Amato hearings reveal, witness after witness after witness testifying that as governor, I--every time I was given a chance to do something unethical or ethical, I chose the ethical path, witness after witness after witness. And they still--so whenever a question was answered, they'd just go ask a bunch of questions. But the American people will figure that out. They'll get that. I'm not worried. I trust the people, and I think that's what we should be doing.

MR. LEHRER: If you're reelected, would you consider pardoning the McDougals and Jim Guy Tucker in a second term?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: I've given no consideration to that, and you know their cases are still on appeal. And they--I would--my position would be that their cases should be handled like others; they should go through--that there's a regular process for that, and I have regular meetings on that. And I review those cases as they come up and after there's an evaluation done by the Justice Department, and that's how I think it should be handled.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. President, what's the fundamental difference between you and Bob Dole?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: I think there are perhaps two or three. One is you could see in our convention speeches I want to build a bridge to the future, and he said he wanted to build a bridge back to the past. I believe we're better off when we work together to create the conditions that give people the tools to make the most of their own lives. I think he believes normally you're better off when you're on your own. He said specifically at the convention-- he took my wife's and her book on when he said it doesn't take a village. Well, I think it does take a village. I think his life is evidence that it takes a village. I think that the whole story of his life is the support system that goes beyond individual and family endeavor and has other people coming in to help make the most of your own life. And I think that's Bob Dole's story, and I know it's mine. I mean, I know all of us politicians, we'd like for people to believe we were born in a log cabin we built ourselves, but it's just not true. It's not true. You know, if you look at--so let me just give you an example.

MR. LEHRER: Sure.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: I guess the clearest example was the first bill I signed as President, the family and medical leave law. Sen. Dole tried to kill that bill with a filibuster in the Senate. He led the opposition to it, he and Newt Gingrich, and then after it passed, he said he still thought we'd made a mistake. Well, 12 million times families have used that family and medical leave law to take a little time off because of the birth of a baby or the illness of a parent or the serious illness of a child, and they didn't lose their jobs. And that was 93 when I signed the law. Here it is 96. We've got 10 + million new jobs. Every year we set a new record for small business formation. So I believe we did the right thing there. The crime bill--Sen. Dole filibustered, led the fight against the crime bill which imposed the death penalty on drug kingpins and had three strikes and you're out because they didn't agree with a hundred thousand police on the street because the NRA didn't want the assault weapons ban, and because they didn't want any prevention programs trying keep these kids out of trouble in the first place. I just disagree with that. So those are just two examples of how our world view is different. I believe my job here as President is to give those families, those working people, those aspiring students, those DARE officers trying to keep kids off drugs in the first place, those communities trying to make their streets safer, or people trying to make their environment cleaner, if it is an appropriate thing for the national government, I think we should, should give them the tools they need to make the most of their own lives.

MR. LEHRER: Now he said Saturday, he said this before, he repeated it Saturday, that he saw the major difference between the two of you as your government, that you believed--to use your term- -the national government has a role--he believes that you believe the national government has more to do in people's lives than he does.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: I think that's right, different things, but, but keep in mind the Republicans, they always have condemned the national government, they make a living condemning the national government, but they can't bear to be without it. I mean, they spend their whole time, you know, trying to take it over. They've got these vast think tanks and this whole array here of people who are perfectly miserable when they're not in the national government, even though they don't think it ought to do anything. And let me just give you an example, though, of, again, I say look at the family leave law. Look at the Brady bill. Sen. Dole and Mr. Gingrich led the fight against the Brady bill, a simple five-day waiting period to see if you've got a criminal record. Well, 60,000 felons, fugitives, and stalkers couldn't get handguns because of the Brady bill. I think it ought to be extended to people who beat up their spouses and kids. And all these hunters still have their weapons, all the sportsmen still have their weapons. Now, was I right, or was he right? But we reduced the government more than they did. We reduced the government more than it was reduced by President Reagan or President Bush, 250,000 fewer people, 16,000 fewer pieces of legislation, hundreds of programs eliminated. I don't like loaded, big government. I'm not here defending government. My job is not to defend government. It's to advance the cause of the American people, but I believe there is- -at critical junctures there is a critical role for government to play in helping people to make the most of their own lives. And I've guaranteed those opportunities. I also think that when it's appropriate, the government should impose more responsibility, whether it's tougher punishment, tougher child support collection. You know, we've increased child support collections by 40 percent by going after people who've crossed state lines to evade their child support. 35 percent of all the child support cases where there are delinquent payments are across state lines. Should the federal government be involved in that? I think so. I think it's been a good thing.

MR. LEHRER: Do you really want a Democratic Congress elected with you in November?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Well, I want--yes, I want a Congress that agrees with me. I don't want to go back through the Congress, the Dole-Gingrich Congress, that, that passed that budget I vetoed that shut the government down. I don't want to go back through that again. I want people who believe that we should balance the budget and protect Medicare, Medicaid, education, and the environment. I want people who are committed to putting 100,000 police on the street, not still, still trying to stop us from doing something that is clearly bringing the crime rate down. I want people who are committed to making welfare reform work by giving the communities and businesses the tools they need to create jobs that these people will require and go to work. So yes, there--and I want people who will vote for a targeted tax cut that will help people educate the children and themselves and raise their kids instead of this huge tax cut that can't be paid for and will undermine the economy. That's what I want. I want people who are committed to that new direction I'm trying to take the country in.

MR. LEHRER: But if the Democrats take control of the Congress, the liberal Democrats will retake charge of all the major committee assignments and all of that. Won't you have to, in order to get something done, move back to--in that direction, to the left from where you are now?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: No.

MR. LEHRER: No.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: No. For one thing, again, I would say in 93 and 94, that Congress, that Democratic Congress, passed the biggest deficit reduction package in history, gave us the only four years where the deficit went down in all four years since the 1840's, reduced the size of government by 250,000, passed the toughest crime bill in history, and passed things like the family leave law, the national service law, and a lot of education reform. I do not believe those are wildly liberal measures. Secondly, I think the Democratic Party was sobered by what happened in 95- 4 in the election, and I believe that we have a high degree of focus on the future, and I have laid out a road map to the future. I believe that the Congress would work with me to implement the agenda that I'm running on. I know it's convenient for the Republicans to raise the flag of, oh, these people will be so liberal if you let em in and Clinton will be liberal in his second term. The problem with that argument is it doesn't fit with what I've done was as President, doesn't fit with what I did as governor, and doesn't fit with what I'm committing to do in my second term. It just doesn't fit. What I want are like-minded people. I hope in my second term I'll be able to get more Republicans to work with me. Even now, you know, since Sen. Dole left the Senate, when the Republicans have worked with us, we've gotten a Pesticide Protection Act, we've gotten other legislation through that I consider to be very important. We've got the minimum wage through with small business tax breaks in it, the adoption of tax credit in it, we've got the Kennedy-Kassebaum bill passed. So we're moving in the right direction now; we've got this country I think moving that way. But I think the reason the Republicans have worked with us in the last few months is they were sobered up by what the American people were saying last year. We didn't like it when you shut the government down; we didn't like it when you passed that radical budget; we didn't like it when you tried to wreck the 25 years of bipartisan commitment to the environment--so now we're all working together. I hope after this election, whatever happens in the congressional elections, we'll be working together more, but would I like to have a Congress committed to the direction that I outlined in my book that I outlined in my convention speech, that I outlined in every speech I give? Of course, I would like to have people who agree with me that we ought to take this direction. But I hope there will be some Republicans I can work with too. I'm always more comfortable doing that.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. President, why have you remained so silent on the Dick Morris situation?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Well, what is there to say?

MR. LEHRER: Well--

PRESIDENT CLINTON: He worked for me, and was in my campaign, and he's not in may campaign anymore. He and his wife went through a wrenching personal trauma, and, uh, I don't see that anything that I say, except to wish them both well as human beings and to hope that they go on and have, that they work through this and have good successful lives, I don't see that there's anything else for me to say.

MR. LEHRER: Well, a lot of newspaper editorials have raised the issue that here you had--you had the allegation--it has not been denied--that he allowed an outsider to listen in on confidential phone calls with you, the President of the United States. The question that's being asked is: Have you ascertained whether or not that is true, and, if not, why not?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Because I think now it obviously doesn't matter anymore. I mean, we've gone on. We've got a good campaign team. We're going forward. If it did happen--let's just say it happened, if it did happen--it was obviously part of a much larger personal crisis. And we serve each other well by--it doesn't make a lot of sense when you're rational, and it doesn't make any sense at all for people when they're in personal crisis, when they're not particularly rational, and so I would say again, you know, he worked hard for me in every election he ever worked for me in, he worked hard, he did the best he could--uh, we had an unusual relationship and we were free to disagree vigorously, which we often did, but I can't forget that either, and I know that if, if all this has occurred, that there's a--that this is a personal problem more than anything else. And I think now that our relationship, our political relationship is not--you know, he's not working for me anymore, I, I just hope that for him and for his wife that, that they can put their lives together and go on. That's just the way I feel about it. I mean, maybe I--you know, I know that other people think I should have a different view but I think that the best thing to do here is to focus on that for him, and for me I've just got to go on with this campaign.

MR. LEHRER: Sure. But just for perspective purposes, he, he suggested before he resigned that he, that he may have been the most influential presidential adviser in history. Does that jibe with your recollection?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: I don't know. You know, you've got Harry Hopkins, Louie Howe--

MR. LEHRER: Was he in that class?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: There's lots of folks there and they were basically working in the White House all the time. But he's a very gifted man and a very brilliant man, and he had some very good ideas, and when he came to me in late 94, he said, I think that you have been portrayed in a way that doesn't reflect the person I know, and I would like to help you because I think if people knew you and knew what you were trying to do, and if you can--

MR. LEHRER: He came to you. You didn't go to him?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: He called me.

MR. LEHRER: I see.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: He called me. He said, I think if that happened, you could recover your momentum, and he did that at considerable cost to himself because that by time I think virtually all of his class were Republicans. So it was a high risk strategy for him. He had no way of knowing whether I would be able to enjoy the success as President or recover the political position that it appears that I have, at least at this moment, although a lot of things can happen in 43 days. And you know, I appreciated that, and I just think that again I view this largely in personal terms--if something like this happens, you have to, I think, just say to people you hope that their lives work out all right. You know, this is just beyond politics to me.

MR. LEHRER: I know it's beyond politics but--for you--but does he deserve credit for your showing in the polls now? In other words, when he called you in 94 and he advised you, is he largely responsible--

PRESIDENT CLINTON: First of all, no one person is largely responsible for that. All the critical decisions were decisions I had to make. The most important personal adviser and supporter I had during this whole period was the Vice President, and he has had a huge impact on a lot of what we did, for example, the work we did to get the V-chip in the telecommunications bill so parents could keep their kids from watching inappropriate material and the work we did to try to stop the advertising and marketing of tobacco to minors. That's something else that Sen. Dole opposed me on. He thought it was the wrong thing for us to be doing. That's just the difference between us, you know. So, there were a lot of people who were involved in that, but everybody--he played a major role. So did, so did others. We have a good team, and I would always say that he was entitled to some credit--some significant credit for what was done. I always think it a mistake for anyone, including me--uh, and I made the final decision in every case--to claim too much credit in life. There's enough credit to go around if you succeed. What did President Kennedy say--that victory has a thousand fathers and defeat is an orphan--so I'd be happy to give him a fair share of the credit for it, but others deserve a lot of credit as well, beginning with the Vice President.

MR. LEHRER: You've been in politics all your professional life. Do you believe that the role of political consultants that has been dramatized by his case as well as the Ed Rollins case, has gotten out of hand, and that something ought to be done about it?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Well, I think the--I think it's different--I think that it's different in every case. It depends on what the role is, what the picture is. First of all, I don't think anybody in public life in a public office ought to do something that he or she does not believe in, does not agree with. I think that the-- secondly, I think everybody should be free to consult with people about how best to communicate what it is you want to do.

MR. LEHRER: That's a legitimate function.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Legitimate, absolutely legitimate, how to best communicate it, No. 1. No 2., I also think it's a good thing to have a lot of tentacles out there, particularly when you're President, about ideas for what can be done consistent with your philosophy of what you're trying to do, to get new ideas about how to--interesting thing about Morris was that a lot of people thought that somebody was always just giving me political advice, you know, how to tack to the right, or tack to the center, or, you know-- but what I found most interesting and often most helpful is that he would frequently come up with new ideas and about half of them I didn't agree with, and didn't like, but a lot of them were perfectly consistent with what I wanted to do, so he was interested in issues; he wasn't just a political person and a purely political friend. So all these people are different, but I think that people should be free to consult people, to get their help. I just think that the voters are entitled to know that the person in public office is making the decision and doing what he or she believes. That's what I think is really important. And, by the way, I think if you try to do something you don't believe in, sooner or later it shows up. It's awful hard to just--if there's any length of time involved, it's awful hard to ride a horse that you wish you weren't on.

MR. LEHRER: So all of these things that you're criticized about- -and we talked about them a moment ago--about the idea that you have moved to the center and you've done it for political reasons because you want to be reelected and that's the only reason you've done it, and these aren't based on convictions, it's just total nonsense from your perspective?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: It is total nonsense. For one thing, what was my 92 campaign about? It was about creating a dynamic center in American politics, not a split-the-difference, middle-of-the-road, don't every do anything center, but a dynamic center, where you-- we could meet the challenges of the modern era, preserve the traditional American value, and bring people together to actually do things. And that is consistently what I have tried to do. But the idea that, you know, that we haven't tried to take tough decisions or been willing to do things that were controversial is just wrong. The budget was controversial; taking on the NRA over the Brady bill and the assault weapons ban were controversial, dealing with the tobacco companies, which no other President has done was controversial, the Bosnia decision, the Haiti decision, the decision to give aid to Mexico was controversial. And, by the way, we've gotten our money back with interest, and made a profit out of it. I've done twenty or thirty things that were wildly controversial. I don't mind being unpopular and controversial, but my philosophy, the one I outlined, you go back to 1991, I gave a set of speeches at Georgetown, and I said that we needed to create opportunity, insist on responsibility, and create a stronger sense of American community, and that the role of government was not to advance government; it was to give people a tool to make the most of their own lives. 1996, I wrote a new book, said the same thing, here's where we've come from, here's where we're going, so I have tried to be very consistent. And, you know, anybody--if you serve long enough, you make thousands of decisions, you're going to have some decisions where you actually change your mind, one or two things where you just think that you ought to do something different. China is a good example, where I became convinced the more I studied it that the worst thing we could do was cut off all trade relations with China, even though we disagree with their human rights policy, because we'd lose all ability to influence it, and if you looked at the world twenty, thirty, fifty years from now, when they're almost certainly going to be more powerful,stronger than they are today, we should continue to work with them and engage with them and be tough where we can but to cut off all contact would be in error. I just made a decision about that. But I think that if you look at the record, I think there's a remarkable amount of consistency there, and I feel quite comfortable with it. And I'm saying the same things I did when I ran for President in 92, except focused more on the future, focused more on what are we going to do tomorrow, not what have we done in the past.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. President, thank you very much.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Thank you.

MR. LEHRER: President Clinton in an interview at the White House this afternoon. Bob Dole has accepted our invitation for a similar session. We are working on the date. Ross Perot will be here tomorrow night. FOCUS - DOCTOR'S OPINION

MR. LEHRER: Now the heart problems of Boris Yeltsin and to Elizabeth Farnsworth.

MS. FARNSWORTH: President Yeltsin is undergoing a second week of tests in a hospital in Moscow, where every day brings new rumors and revelations about his health. We'll talk to a leading cardiac surgeon after this report by Lawrence McDonnell of Independent Television News.

MR. MC DONNELL, ITN: When American heart specialist Michael DeBaake flew into Moscow today, he refused to come into the operation facing the Russian president, other than to say he was, as ever, optimistic. That's mode than could be said for one of his old students who turned up to meet him. Dr. Renat Achurin heads the team of surgeons who will operate on Boris Yeltsin. Last night on Russian television, he said it may be up to two months before his patient is strong enough to go into theater, and if he's thought too weak to operate on, then he won't go in at all. Ever since Boris Yeltsin announced he'd chosen to have bypass surgery to improve the blood supply to his heart, the secrecy that surrounded the true state of the Presidents health has quickly been replaced by a sense of alarm. Some doctors here now put his chances of surviving the operation at an even 50/50. Just a week ago, they were talking of a 98 percent success rate. And today's suggested the President is capable of working on documents for just 15 minutes a day. In his recently staged television performances, he was clearly having trouble with even some of those documents. Boris Yeltsin is by no means the first Russian leader to carry on as head of state in poor physical health. When General Secretary of the Communist Party Constantine Chernenko was helped to the ballot box in 1983, he could hardly stand unaided. He died shortly after these pictures were taken. Leonoid Brezhnev fell seriously ill in 1974, and many of his close aides though him unable to rule the Soviet Union. In fact, he ruled for another eight years until his death. Towards the end, he was so heavily drugged it's now acknowledged he had little idea of what was going on around him. Vladimir Kryuchkov was head of the KGB when the Soviet Union collapsed five years ago. He was one of those who kept Brezhnev in charge. He told Channel 4 News that in the old days it was possible to keep leaders going because the system could cope, but that's not the case today.

VLADIMIR KRYUCHKOV, Former KGB Chief: [speaking through interpreter] Especially in the last few months it was difficult for Brezhnev to rule, but the system was effective. We had a team of advisers who were committed to keeping the state strong. Today there is no management. There is no tradition of rule. There is a total lack of control.

MR. MC DONNELL: Asreports emerged that Boris Yeltsin has suffered a third heart attack ahead of the second round of presidential elections in July, there quickly calls for him to step down. The Communist runner-up in those elections, Gennady Zyuganov, argued that voters had been deceived. The president, he claimed, was incapacitated, and according to Russia's constitution, the prime minister should take over ahead of fresh elections. Mr. Zyuganov's deputy, Alexei Podberyozkin told me the opposition found it unacceptable that the country was being elected by non-elected officials in the president's name.

ALEXEI PODBERYOZKIN, National Patriotic Movement: Unfortunately, it was in our history many times when the czar or the president is ill or cannot fulfill all obligations from his side and some people are doing the politics while independently having behind their back the president's name. This situation really disturbs us.

MR. MC DONNELL: But Boris Yeltsin's staff don't believe their man is about to give out just yet.

MR. MC DONNELL: Do you think Boris Yeltsin will resign under any circumstances?

VYECHELSLAV MILKONOV, Yeltsin: Well, I'm sure he will not. President Yeltsin is not a kind of person who is going to resign under any circumstances, especially if some people from their position will tell him to do so.

MS. FARNSWORTH: New information often hard to verify is, as I said, revealed almost daily about Boris Yeltsin's health. Over the weekend, his former press secretary said that besides heart trouble, the President also suffers from problems with his kidneys, liver, back, hearing, and with the blood vessels that supply his brain. And the surgeon who is slated to perform Yeltsin's bypass and who said Friday the President had a heart attack before the second round of the summer's presidential elections corrected himself yesterday. He said it was not an attack but unstable angina which did not damage the heart. Here to explain the surgery that Yeltsin is facing and the risks from his other health problems is Dr. Robert Jones, a cardiac surgeon and the chief medical officer for Duke University Hospital. Thanks for being with us, Dr. Jones.

DR. ROBERT JONES, Duke University Hospital: [Raleigh, N.C.] Thank you, Elizabeth.

MS. FARNSWORTH: Let's begin at the beginning. Please help us understand what is the nature of the heart trouble that Boris Yeltsin has.

DR. JONES: Well, none of us really know the exact problem from the reports we hear from the press we think that he has blockage in the coronary arteries that carry blood to the heart muscle.

MS. FARNSWORTH: If you--could you use the diagram that we have and explain what that is.

DR. JONES: Yes. The diagram shows the heart as a surgeon would see it looking through an open chest. The round portion is that which pumps blood up through the aorta to the body and the first blood vessels that come off of the aorta are the coronary arteries, and they carry blood to the heart muscle. And, as you can see illustrated, the hardening of the arteries caused by atherosclerosis has partially or totally blocked the arteries in the illustration. One of the important things about Mr. Yeltsin to know is how severely those arteries have blocked.

MS. FARNSWORTH: And you don't know that, right?

DR. JONES: No, I don't know, and I don't think anyone in the West does know.

MS. FARNSWORTH: Using the second diagram, explain what bypass surgery is. How does it work?

DR. JONES: It's really just a plumbing operation where you take natural tissues to use as new pipes, and route blood around those blockages. In this illustration, the two pipes used are pieces of vein that are harvested from the skin of the leg. Occasionally we use natural arteries in the chest wall, and these blood-carrying vessels then bring arterial or red oxygenated blood to nourish the heart. And these are sewn into the vessel below the area of blockage.

MS. FARNSWORTH: Dr. Jones, for an ordinary patient, somebody who needs a bypass but does not have a lot of other complications, how dangerous is the operation?

DR. JONES: We usually talk of risk in terms of percent, and a standard bypass in a patient Mr. Yeltsin's age would be about 1 percent risk. That would be out of 100 patients like him you would expect 99 to live. But that's assuming that he has no damage to his heart or that he doesn't have any other severe health problems.

MS. FARNSWORTH: And we should say he is 65.

DR. JONES: Yes, that's right.

MS. FARNSWORTH: Now, his doctor said Friday that he may have had a heart attack last summer, then corrected himself and said it was stenocardia, which I gather is a kind of angina. Could you explain that.

DR. JONES: Yes. That term in this country is called unstable angina, and it is simply chest pain that is irregular in its tempo and reflects the fact that the heart's not getting the blood that it needs, and the oxygen lack is the thing that causes the pain.

MS. FARNSWORTH: So a patient who had this problem in the summer would not have a much higher risk if he had an operation now?

DR. JONES: No, he would not. The big concern is whether unstable angina progresses to heart attack, which means that some of the heart muscle has actually been damaged irreversibly, and particularly if that damage involves the structure that supports the valves of the heart, it can raise the risk of surgery substantially.

MS. FARNSWORTH: And we just don't know about that either?

DR. JONES: No, we don't.

MS. FARNSWORTH: But what about the reports that the President, that President Yeltsin has other problems? Let's assume for a moment, which we don't know the facts exactly, but there is some evidence that he has--somebody has said he has liver problems. Would that raise the risk?

DR. JONES: Yes, it would. The liver is involved in making a number of proteins in the blood that aid clotting, and patients who enter surgery with a large amount of problem with their liver can be at a good deal higher risk.

MS. FARNSWORTH: What about kidney problems?

DR. JONES: Kidney problems also can raise the risk of surgery. I think we are speaking in the terms of two- to three-fold increase in risk if he has severe damage of either the kidneys or the liver.

MS. FARNSWORTH: And what about reduced blood supply to the brain?

DR. JONES: That's a concern for a stroke that might occur near the time of surgery. The same hardening of the arteries process and the arteries leading to the brain is the most common cause of stroke, and as one goes through the stress of surgery, uh, you can have an extra risk of stroke if you are known to have blockage in those arteries.

MS. FARNSWORTH: So let's assume for a moment that what his press secretary is right, that he has all three of those problems. What does that leave us with, the risks? What are the figures then?

DR. JONES: Well, one would really need to know how severe the problems were, but in general, you have about a twofold risk for each of those problems, and so that you could see that if he has some damage to his heart and has kidney, liver, and brain problems, that his risk could approach even 25 percent, where out of 100 patients like him, you would expect only 75 to live.

MS. FARNSWORTH: We heard in the report that some doctors in Moscow are saying a 50/50 chance. Does that seem a little high to you?

DR. JONES: That's a little high, but it depends, again, on how severe those disorders are of the other organs particularly.

MS. FARNSWORTH: What about the facilities in Moscow, can he get good treatment in the clinic where he's to be operated?

DR. JONES: Yes. That's the leading clinic in the Soviet Union and in Russia these days, and there are some excellent, well-trained surgeons there.

MS. FARNSWORTH: Even though they don't do as many surgeries as here? I've read that perhaps a hundred to a hundred and fifty of these surgeries I believe a year they do there as opposed to how many do you do?

DR. JONES: I do, uh, much more than that, and--

MS. FARNSWORTH: How many would you say you do a year, just out of--

DR. JONES: The average in this country for large centers is over a thousand and usually each surgeon will do around two hundred.

MS. FARNSWORTH: So is that a problem, that there aren't as many done?

DR. JONES: No. I think at that center there are very well trained surgeons. Throughout the rest of Russia and the former Soviet republics, uh, the expertise in coronary surgery is not as high as in this country, but there are excellent surgeons at that institution.

MS. FARNSWORTH: What about the problem of President Yeltsin's stature? And given the history of hiding health problems of Russian leaders, does the fear that a doctor might have treating somebody like President Yeltsin, can it affect his health or affect his work?

DR. JONES: Yes, it clearly can. One is always under a little pressure doing surgery, but when you're doing surgery on a very prominent individual, there's always the tendency to decrease your crispness of decision, to try not to make any decision that would have any risk and to be extra conservative, and that sometimes that can bring more risk than giving a patient the usual treatment that you would usually give for your standard patient.

MS. FARNSWORTH: This is something that is not limited to Russia. This is true here too, I suppose?

DR. JONES: That's true. It's been shown that some of our presidents in the past have had some very poor judgments made about their treatment.

MS. FARNSWORTH: So do you think that may be why they're delaying the surgery? Can you tell us anything about why surgery may be delayed? That's what the President--that's what doctor announced this weekend.

DR. JONES: I think that there is a strong concern to make the right decision, and I think that's why they've invited some prominent surgeons from this country to give them some advice. There's some consideration that he will have some extra testing, particularly non-invasive physiologic testing of the heart, and it seems that all those judgments are very reasonable.

MS. FARNSWORTH: Explain to us the difference in President Yeltsin's behavior. You'll see him dancing--and there's this famous image of him dancing during the presidential campaign, and really showing a lot of vitality, and then he's very ill, can hardly move the papers, as you saw in the tape. Is this typical of heart patients, or is this something about President Yeltsin?

DR. JONES: Heart patients that have very advanced heart disease cannot have enough blood supplying the needs of their body so that they can dance and appear very frisky as he did earlier. It's quite possible that he has gone into what we would call congestive heart failure, which fortunately is a reversible situation if his heart can be fixed. He does look very chronically ill on the videos that are supplied.

MS. FARNSWORTH: What about alcohol? How does alcohol ingestion affect a heart operation of this sort?

DR. JONES: Alcohol can have a direct depressing effect on the heart if it's used over many years. Additionally, the concern about his liver may be alcohol related, and if he has very severe liver disfunction, this represents one of his more major risks for cardiac surgery.

MS. FARNSWORTH: Well, Dr. Jones, thank you very much for being with us.

DR. JONES: Thank you, Elizabeth. NEWS SUMMARY

MR. LEHRER: In other news this Monday, Ross Perot filed a federal lawsuit to get into the presidential debates. The suit asks that the debates be stopped unless he is included. Representatives of President Clinton and Bob Dole agreed over the weekend to hold two one-on-one televised presidential debates: October 6th in Hartford, Connecticut, October 16th in San Diego, plus one between Vice President Gore and Jack Kemp on October 9th in St. Petersburg, Florida. U.S. troops set up camps in the Kuwait desert today near the Iraqi border. They plan a three-month stay that will include live fire exercises. Defense Sec. Perry said today he may withdraw one of two U.S. aircraft carriers from the Persian Gulf if things remain quiet in the region. The Turkish foreign minister said today Turkey will not stop patrolling Iraq's Northern fly zone. Yesterday, the "New York Times" quoted her as saying the petroleum would stop if Iraq would end the flow of Kurdish refugees into her country. At a meeting with Secretary of State Christopher in New York today, Tansu Ciller said her remarks were misunderstood. The 51st United Nations General Assembly opened in New York City today. Among the issues to be discussed over the next three weeks are finding a new secretary general and collecting $3 billion in back dues. In Washington, President Clinton said the U.S. will begin paying the $1.6 billion it owes this year. Shannon Lucid started her journey back to Earth this morning aboard the space shuttle "Atlantis." She spent six months on the Russian space station "Mir" setting the U.S. space endurance record. "Atlantis" was docked at Mir for five days before Lucid's return trip. Before departing, Lucid said good-bye to her Russian colleagues and to her replacement, U.S. astronaut John Blaha. The shuttle, with Lucid aboard, is scheduled to land on Thursday.

MR. LEHRER: Dorothy Lamour died yesterday at a hospital in Los Angeles. The cause of death was not disclosed. The actress was best known as Bob Hope and Bing Crosby's sidekick in their popular road films. At Hope's 90th birthday party four years ago, she described that experience: "I felt like a wonderful sandwich. I was a slice of white bread between two slices of ham." Here she is in a scene from "The Road to Bali."

SCENE FROM "ROAD TO BALI" [1953]:

GEORGE: [portrayed by Bing Crosby] Lyla, would you go to America with me?

LYLA: [portrayed by Dorothy Lamour] George!

GEORGE: I mean marry me and go to America, of course.

LYLA: Oh, it would be wonderful, but what about Harold?

GEORGE: Well, we could adopt him.

LYLA: Adopt him?

GEORGE: Of course, we'd have to send him away to school.

LYLA: It's a little late for that, isn't it?

GEORGE: Oh, no, baby. He's got to go sometime, that boy.

HAROLD: [portrayed by Bob Hope] That's enough! Why, you collapsible Como, you. You and your Pirates!

GEORGE: What do you want to do, brag about the Cleveland Indians?

HAROLD: At least they're in the major leagues.

GEORGE: They throw under-handed. That's gratitude for you. I try to plan your education and you turn on me like a mad dog!

HAROLD: I wish I were a mad dog. I'd give you distemper! Listen, don't plan my education. I'm illiterate enough now. Listen, Lyla, if you're going anywhere, you're going with me.

GEORGE: Oh, no, she's not!

LYLA: I don't know what to do.

GEORGE: Junior, don't you think you should go beddy-bye?

HAROLD: Beddy-bye, and leave you here with this Valanese pound cake? Lyla, you got to make up your mind and right now.

GEORGE: Oh, that's no way to talk to your mother.

HAROLD: Listen, mom--it's Lyla--Lyla--you promised to marry me if I got the treasure, didn't you?

GEORGE: She didn't promise you; I did. You know what a liar I am.

HAROLD: Oh, so that's it? You're up here pitching with this doll while I'm down there ad-libbing with that deep sea claw machine.

LYLA: Harold, Harold, I do love you.

HAROLD: Oh, I thought so.

LYLA: But I love George too.

HAROLD: Well, if you like the other generation, they're restful.

LYLA: I'm so confused. I--I love you for what you are.

HAROLD: A liar.

LYLA: I love Harold for what he was--some time--somewhere--

HAROLD: This kid's gone.

GEORGE: Oh, dear me, she's in sections. We'd better get to the bottom of this.

HAROLD: Yeah. Let's get to the bottom of this. What was I, where, when?

GEORGE: Probably some agonizing episode from her childhood. We'll have to probe the subconscious with a little psychiatry. Here, Lyla, just lie down here, lie down. Here, dear. Carefully now. All right? There. Are you comfy?

LYLA: Yes, Doctor.

HAROLD: There's a lot of quack in this boy.

GEORGE: Now, Lyla, we want to delve into your past. We want to go way back into your childhood, sort of a flashback.

LYLA: Well, when I got to be six or seven, I remember I was terribly lonely. I had no one to play with until one day my father brought me a little companion.

LYLA: [as little girl, talking to monkey with Harold's Bob Hope's face] Come, Sandy. Please play with me. Please, Sandy. [music in background]

LYLA: Sandy.

HAROLD: Oh, not me. You got the wrong monkey.

GEORGE: Well, I'll leave it up to me, Lyla. You want me for what I am, or want this chump for the chimp he used to be? Kick it around for awhile. I'm goin' downstairs and peel Buster a banana.

MR. LEHRER: Dorothy Lamour was 81 years old. RECAP

MR. LEHRER: We'll see you on line and here tomorrow evening with an interview with Ross Perot, among other things. I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you and good night.