Press Briefing by Mike McCurry

The Briefing Room

11:29 P.M. EDT

MR. MCCURRY: Good morning and welcome to our combination gaggle-brief, brief-gaggle. What are we doing? Who am I and why am I here? (Laughter.)

The President is in the Residence and we have no report from him. He did get an update from Mr. Bowles earlier today on things going on here while he's concentrating on what matters most in his life at this moment, and we expect him in in a short while. He'll go out to the Air Force, as you know, and then he's got some staff meetings here, internal White House staff meetings on a number of issues, before he departs with his family for California late today. That's the President's day.

Q: The Vice President says that the President is working, and his aides are working, on legislation on tobacco, and he also said the congressional leaders will be here the first week in October. Didn't we understand yesterday that they were not working on legislation?

MR. MCCURRY: Oh, no. We have to -- in order to accomplish the principles the President outlined yesterday, we'll have to codify them in legislation that would be enacted by Congress. And we will work closely with Congress, as the President and Vice President indicated, to write that legislation. We didn't attempt to write an entire new tobacco policy and present it yesterday, because the President wanted to concentrate on the fundamental principles and engage members of Congress and engage the affected communities in further discussion as we write the legislation.

Q: There will be an administration bill, per se?

MR. MCCURRY: There will be a bill that arises from consultations that we have with Congress. Hopefully, it will be a consensus, bipartisan approach to this fundamentally important public health issue and will achieve the President's public health objectives with respect to teen smoking.

Q: Can I have one more question here?

MR. MCCURRY: You can have as many as you want.

Q: The New York Times says that the U.S. NIH is conducting experiments on AIDS medicine on pregnant women, and compared it to the Tuskegee --

MR. MCCURRY: Yes, that's an unfortunate and untrue comparison. There are big differences, and if you call out to the Department of Health and Human Services, you can learn a lot more about this. This is -- what is at stake here are the lives of millions of infants in the developing world who currently don't have access to any treatment for HIV-AIDS, and under no circumstances are going to be able to afford some of the more promising drug therapies that have been developed here in the United States -- protease inhibitors, AZT among them. Those are not going to be available in the developing world, and the experiments that are being conducted by CDC and NIH, if I understand correctly, have been reviewed extensively by ethical committees, both in Europe and the United States, and in the host countries in which these experiments are being done. There's literally no other way to find cost-effective treatment programs for mother-infant transmission of AIDS unless they conduct the kind of clinical trials that they're conducting now.

But the administration is very confident that the ethical review of these experiments has been done with a high sense of moral purpose, and that the ultimate objective here, which is important, is to protect millions of children. I think the estimate from the World Health Organization is something like 5 to 10 million children who might contact AIDS through parental transmission unless there's some effective treatment strategy.

Q: So these are not guinea pigs. I mean, it does have WHO stamp of approval?

MR. MCCURRY: Well, I'm not -- it has been reviewed by ethical committees, both here in the United States, in Europe, and in Africa who are participants in the trials. They can tell you more at HHS about exactly how that's structured.

Q: Is there any concern that that issue might be raised at the Satcher Senate confirmation hearing, given that he has endorsed federally funded research?

MR. MCCURRY: I don't know whether that will be a subject chosen by senators to explore or not.

Q: The NASA Inspector General on the hot seat today on the Hill -- what is the administration's posture on the future of American astronauts on Mir?

MR. MCCURRY: We have been reassured by the very meticulous review process that NASA Administrator Dan Goldin has undertaken. He's been in regular contact with Dr. Jack Gibbons, the President's Science and Technology Advisor. Mr. Bowles had an opportunity to meet both with Administrator Goldin and Dr. Gibbons this morning just to review once again the formal process that NASA uses for its review, and it is extensive and it is one that is aimed at the most important objective, which is the safety of U.S. personnel who are in space. And we have a high degree of confidence that they have got a process in place that addresses that fundamental question, and it also addresses the tradeoffs between prolonged missions in space and what we learn from them and some of the other options and benefits that exist through our space program.

Q: Was there any White House role in the decision to let an astronaut go forward, another astronaut going aboard Mir?

MR. MCCURRY: This is the review process run by NASA, which has got, I think, three stages to it, is one that that they undertake and then they make the decision there. We don't oversee or review their decision process.

Q: Mike, do you have a list of the persons President Clinton will be meeting with in New York?

MR. MCCURRY: Yes, he's going to see -- on Monday he goes up to New York. I can tell you the little I know about the speech at this point if some of you are interested in that. But he'll speak to the General Assembly at around 10:45 in the morning. The President's general theme is going to be the opportunities that globalization presents in the post-Cold War era -- the growing interdependence of countries on this planet and how we can work together to address the common problems we face, some of the dangers that exist because of globalization, both the kinds of things we talk about often: international crime, international drug trafficking, terrorism, proliferation -- those issues that define the post-Cold War national security agenda in many respects.

They are evidence of the downside of globalization, but I think the President will suggest that there is a real upside to the growing capacity of nations to work together, and that's the way in which we've formed networks all around the world to address these common problems. And he'll point to the utility of the United Nations itself as a way in which we advance common objectives with other like-minded countries, and he'll talk, of course, a bit about the arrears issue, which we hope we are on the way to settling, given the work we've done in our Congress. So it will be a speech that I think will be very interesting, but I imagine you might guess it's not going to be especially newsworthy. Interesting.

Q: Does that mean no specific proposals?

MR. MCCURRY: Yes. What I'm suggesting is, he's not taking this occasion to outline any new initiatives, but he just wants to step back a bit and comment on the truly extraordinary changes that are taking place in this world and the ways in which the United States can advance its objectives along with other members of the international community.

Q: Bilaterals?

The President will then -- yes, his bilateral meetings with Prime Minister Sharif of Pakistan. He then sees Foreign Minister Primakov from the Russian Federation and his other formal bilateral will be with Prime Minister Gujral of India. He will also see Foreign Minister Udovenko of Ukraine, who is currently sitting as President of the General Assembly. And he will attend a luncheon hosted by Secretary General Annan. And then he goes, of course, to the opera that night, to Carmen.

Q: What do you mean, of course he will?

Q: What can you tell us about the Vice President's trip to Moscow?

MR. MCCURRY: You know, I don't have anything on Gore-Chernomyrdin, but it's the standard basket of issues that they do in the Gore-Chernomyrdin Commission, which is one of the principal vehicles through which we have an ongoing working relationship with the Russian Federation, addressing questions of science and technology, proliferation, the host of issues that have been identified by Presidents Yeltsin and Clinton for the review of their -- both the Vice President and the Prime Minister.

Q: Mike, Chelsea Clinton expressed herself rather eloquently in Africa, and one wonders whether she has been an adviser to the President on certain issues, and if so, which ones?

MR. MCCURRY: Certainly on diet. (Laughter.) I think she is a very engaging young lady and she probably has taken the opportunity to talk to him about things. She is interested in the world that she lives in. She's interested in her father's work as President of the United States, and they discuss it regularly and often. But I don't want to suggest that she's an adviser to the President or any such role. I think she's a very happy and loving daughter.

Q: Can you elaborate on what you mean by "certainly on diet"?

MR. MCCURRY: She has talked about -- I mean, she's part of the lean cuisine crowd at the White House. (Laughter.) I keep reading -- every time I pick up a newspaper, I read -- there is always these offhand references to the President's fondness for greasy burgers, and I have never, ever seen him have one. And to my knowledge, he just doesn't eat that kind of stuff.

Q: Has he ever been a vegetarian?

MR. MCCURRY: I don't think he's a vegetarian, no. (Laughter.)

Q: When you say she's a lean cuisine -- is she urging more vegetables? Does she -- (Laughter.)

MR. MCCURRY: Look, I'm not going to -- reductio ad absurdum.

Q: Mike, speaking of Africa, with the Africa initiative and the President's planned visit to Africa next year, and also with the Tuskegee apology, what are the President's thoughts about this Johns Hopkins study, these AIDS trials in Africa using placebos, finding ways to prevent --

MR. MCCURRY: We did that, April. We already did that. Yes?

Q: Mike, the VP and Dan Goldin are going out to Moscow as part of the Gore-Chernomyrdin. Are there any issues regarding space cooperation, now and in the future, that they will raise at that level while they're there?

MR. MCCURRY: Well, that is one of the general subjects that will be under discussion, to be sure, and that's one reason why we wanted to visit with the Administrator this morning. There are -- that there's a linkage sometimes between our discussions related to proliferation questions and the space program, and we explore those issues as well. But that is a -- the U.S.-Russian cooperation in space exploration has been a principal agenda item of that commission since its creation.

Q: But will Goldin raise any of these concerns that are being raised on the Hill with regard to future participation in manned missions?

MR. MCCURRY: I think that will be a subject of discussion, and there is already very close working relationships between NASA and the Russian space command, and they will review the importance of that dialogue, and again stress the fundamental importance we attach to astronaut safety. Yes?

Q: I asked several times yesterday, and never got an answer, as to whether we are sending any kind of representative delegate to Ottawa, even observer status. And what's the fallout from our position?

MR. MCCURRY: We are not sending anyone there to participate in what will be a signing of that because, as the President indicated yesterday, we won't be an original signatory of that treaty. We are looking to achieve the President's objectives through a separate forum, the Conference on Disarmament, which is ultimately where -- the only forum, because the Ottawa process did not include the countries that need to be a part of any international regime -- those that are manufacturing and exporting the land mines that cause the most damage to the innocent civilians around the world. They need to be included in that process. They won't be there and never were going to be there in Ottawa for the signing of that document, so we have to continue to pursue our objectives in the way we outlined yesterday.

Now, whether we will have --

Q: So we're not going to be there at all, huh?

MR. MCCURRY: Whether we have an observer status representative, I just don't know. But certainly no one there to participate in the formal signing since we won't be signing.

Q: Mike, the President leaves for South America in 23 days. Will he try to make a major push to get fast track agreement before?

MR. MCCURRY: Those are -- it's sort of a non sequitur. Yes, we will be making a major push. It is important to the President's advancement of our economic objectives in some of the sessions we'll have, but it's not directly triggered by that timing. We would obviously like to have some significant progress on the trade negotiating authority he needs prior to going to meet with these countries that will want to know, are you going to be a part of history, are you going to be part of the economic transformation occurring in this part of our hemisphere, or are you going to sit on the sidelines while other countries, trading competitors of the United States -- Europe, Canada, others -- take advantage of extraordinary market opportunities there. So they will pose that question to the President and we hope to say we plan to be fully engaged and participating in vibrant trading relations.

Q: Mike, last year, the administration changed their minds about deportation of certain Irish nationals and linked it to the continued cease-fire of the IRA. A couple of days ago there was a bombing that the IRA did not claim and has not been attributed it to them. But for those families, the hours between the bombing and then the recognition that this was not an IRA act of violence was very difficult for them. Their biggest concern is, what is the administration's threshold of violence that would put them back on the deportation --

MR. MCCURRY: The decision made by the Attorney General, influenced by the Secretary of State and others who are following the developments in Northern Ireland, was based on the commitment that's been made by Sinn Fein to the Mitchell principles, and our threshold is full expectation that an unequivocal, permanent cease-fire will continue to be the declared and real commitment of Sinn Fein and the IRA.

You're correct in pointing out that the bomb blast that occurred two days ago was not claimed by the IRA; in fact, may have been disclaimed, if certain press reports are to be believed. But we condemn any act of violence and we have enormous sympathy for those victims and their families who have suffered through The Troubles.

At the same time, the whole purpose of our policy and the whole purpose of our encouragement of the talks now going on at Stormont is to reconcile the divisions between the two families and bring them together so they can live in peace.

Q: Speaking of bomb blasts, what about the Cairo bomb blast. Do you know anything further about that?

MR. MCCURRY: Not much. The Secretary of State -- did she address that? Secretary Albright has addressed that already. Obviously, we condemn that act of violence. We express our sympathies to the German people who apparently have lost -- most of the victims have been of German descent -- who were there in Cairo. And we are working through our embassy to learn more, and learn what we can about the circumstances of the incident.

Q: Can you tell us if you have any reason to back off from the President's nominee to be ambassador to Morocco?

MR. MCCURRY: Not that I am aware of. Yes, Deborah.

Q: Mike, there's been a lot of stress on how it's very a very emotional time for the President to be taking his daughter to California. Could you explain how this trip came to be the occasion for three separate fund-raising events?

MR. MCCURRY: He's going to be in California, and he is going to have to get on with his life, and she's going to have to get on with hers. Pretty simple. Yes, Helen.

Q: Is the President --

Q: You don't think it's a little inappropriate?

MR. MCCURRY: No.

Q: Is the President going to try in any way to block the -- to extend the immigration open door for a while for the illegal immigrants to appeal their status and continue -- otherwise, I think the law expires. I'm not putting it well, but --

MR. MCCURRY: We have made some -- particularly with the Central American cases that INS is reviewing, we've made some adjustments. I haven't looked at that anytime recently. Do you recall?

MR. LUZZATTO: I don't, but we can check.

MR. MCCURRY: We can try to -- maybe NSC can help you out on that. We are making some -- we announced, I think, about a month ago.

Q: There are so many sad stories about --

MR. MCCURRY: We're very well aware of those, and of course, it is a subject of dialogue the President had with Central American leaders when he was in Costa Rica. And we pledged then that we would try to work through with Congress some ways in which we could address that. And I believe that we've achieved some modifications in the way in which INS is processing that. I just don't recall specifically how that works now, but INS can probably help you out, too.

Q: Mike, has the President made any calls this week to some Republicans on the Hill, trying to push the census sampling bill through, and if so, who did he talk to and what did he say? It's supposed to be considered, I understand, sometime this week.

MR. MCCURRY: I'm not aware that he has made any calls. I'd have to check on that. I know the subject came up when the President visited with the House Democratic Caucus and the President again said this is an issue of accuracy. If you do not statistically sample, we will end up with a census that's not worth the money we're going to pay for it because it won't be accurate. It's a very simple proposition, and the President is confident that at the end of the day this will be a judgment made on common sense, logic, and statistical purity, and not politics.

Q: In the unlikely event that it happened to be made on politics, would he veto a bill that --

MR. MCCURRY: His senior advisers have recommended a veto if they excise the funding for sampling, and the President obviously will be inclined to look carefully at the recommendation of his advisers.

Q: But you're not flat out saying --

MR. MCCURRY: We kind of gradate the way we do this and we're at the senior advisers recommend veto level at this point.

Q: Mike, there was an article in the Post this morning about the administration's decision to certify China so it could lift export control bans. Can you tell us if that's likely to be done by the Jiang-Clinton summit and if this is something that's under discussion?

MR. MCCURRY: I can't. I think it's accurate to say we are working hard on that issue. We work hard on proliferation questions all the time. We are mindful of the declaration made by the People's Republic in May of 1996. We have no information that would indicate that they have not abided by that declaration, but we will continue to work at a technical and expert level with them, as we are now, to clarify issues and concerns in advance of the summit. And we hope it will be a subject of discussion at the summit.

Q: Is the Post article wrong then?

MR. MCCURRY: The Post article is speculative.

Q: Mike, back on the Mir stuff -- does the President support sort of this open-ended commitment to manned space cooperation with the Russians, or does he favor more of a mission-by-mission approval process based on the results of what's going on up there?

MR. MCCURRY: It's not an either-or question. There is only one process, which is mission-by-mission, each mission carefully evaluated under the process that NASA uses, and that's the correct way to do it. The scientific benefit, with we learn from each of these missions has to be calibrated against what the risk is, what the cost is, and those decisions, I think, are made very carefully and very capably by NASA.

Q: So the administration is not raising the threshold on that in the meetings with the Russians next week?

MR. MCCURRY: "Raising the threshold" is not the way I would say it. I would say there was going to be a careful and fairly meticulous exploration of some of those issues, certainly at Administrator Goldin's level, because he does that in a regular basis, but having an exchange at this level during his meetings will be very useful, I'm sure.

Q: Mike, even though you say that the White House has stayed out of the decision on how or whether to extend participation in this Mir mission, to what extent are relations with Moscow tied to this? To what extent are there geopolitical considerations involved?

MR. MCCURRY: Our work that we do with the Russian Federation is so broad-gauged that this is not contingent on any one particular area of cooperation, but has been a great source of pride to the people of the Russian Federation and a great source of satisfaction to the American people that we've been able to cooperate together in space exploration in doing so many of these ventures together. I think that certainly there is a predisposition to try to continue that cooperation, but it has to be done consistent with the criteria that the Administrator uses to evaluate the technical risks, the risks to those people that take on these dangerous missions, and ultimately what the costs and benefits are of each planned venture.

Q: On the Labor-HHS bill, even though it has the education provisions in it which fall short of what the President wants, does he intend to sign it?

MR. MCCURRY: There is a statement of administration policy again that reflects some of the recommendations. There is a strong recommendation that if it includes the Gorton block grant amendment or if it includes the -- who did the wrong thing on standards -- the House -- if it does not include the Senate-passed compromise version on standards, that the advisers would recommend a veto, and I wouldn't rule out the President addressing that subject sometime soon, like Saturday.

Q: You mean threatening to veto it?

MR. MCCURRY: I didn't say what he would do, I said he would address the subject.

Q: In the Radio Address?

MR. MCCURRY: We've got an event -- it wasn't mentioned by The New York Post, but we also are doing an education event on Saturday at a charter school on the San Francisco Peninsula, and it will be an opportunity for the President to talk about the very important role that charter schools play in our strategy of developing choices for parents. There was only -- I think when Bill Clinton became President -- one charter school in this country and there's 700 now. And we've requested funding to go up to 3,000 by the end of the century. And that's an important part of what we see as a strategy for education reform.

Q: Mike, what's your read on the Senate blocking NEA cuts?

MR. MCCURRY: I think the Senate came to the sensible position that our cultural life as a nation has been enhanced by that agency and that despite those that are kind of far out on the political spectrum, who want to abolish it, that it's a good role for the endowment and for the work that they do.

Q: What's your posture for the House fight?

MR. MCCURRY: We will strongly oppose any effort to eliminate the agency.

Q: Mike, four-way talks with North Korea open today in New York. Is the White House any more optimistic that the President's plan on the proposal for four-way talks dating from April of last year is going to be more successful this time than it was last time?

MR. MCCURRY: I don't think -- in this area of the world we are neither optimistic nor pessimistic. This is an area in which our diplomacy has to be done very carefully and prudently, and we will continue to work very, very hard to address the concerns that have been raised by the DPRK -- the North -- as they learn more of our proposal for four-way talks. And we hope that these preparatory talks will ultimately lead to a dialogue that will achieve reconciliation on the Korean Peninsula.

Q: Can you tell us what you know about what the family has been doing last night, this morning, what last-minute packing was like -- anything at all?

MR. MCCURRY: I assume they're doing all of the above, but we -- aside from a discussion of what we're doing for business here that Erskine had with the President, we haven't pried into their personal affairs.

Q: And how the CD negotiations went?

MR. MCCURRY: No. No report.

Q: Is the President considering the use of the line item veto on the Labor-HHS bill?

MR. MCCURRY: I'm not going to speculate on that.

Q: Mike, can you talk a little bit about next week's schedule, and particularly, what's the President doing in Houston?

MR. MCCURRY: There's a lot I can tell you about next week and Houston is the one thing I can't tell you anything about because we don't know yet. Right? There will be a fundraiser there and then there's some event there, but they haven't told us what it is. Is that correct? That's correct.

You want me to do the -- why don't we just do -- want me to do the week ahead now.

Saturday, as I said, will be focusing on education at the San Carlos Charter Learning Center. The President's Saturday radio address will be on the subject of education. I think I already gave a broad hint what that might be about. Monday we already did, the U.N. speech to the General Assembly and some of the bilateral meetings he'll have. And the Metropolitan Opera Monday night. Tuesday, nothing scheduled. Wednesday, Pittsburgh for an address to the AFL-CIO, where, obviously, the President will talk about the performance of the national economy, the benefit that is derived to American working people as a result of that. And he'll make the strong argument that a fundamental element of our economic strategy, which is working so well, is free and open trade, so you would expect he would make that argument.

Q: Is he going to take them on?

MR. MCCURRY: Thursday he will speak at the 40th anniversary of the desegregation of Little Rock High School in his home state, and there is a Congressional Medal of Honor Society reception he will attend that night. Friday, he goes to Houston and we have to develop some details on that. Saturday, he's got no official schedule, but he's going -- we don't know what he's doing.

MR. TOIV: High school reunion.

MR. MCCURRY: Yes, one thing we know for sure he's doing, is, he's going to a high school reunion.

Q: In Pittsburgh, a very blue-collar city, is he going to be able to convince those workers that their jobs are essentially going to be safe under fast track?

MR. MCCURRY: You can't guarantee anyone that their job is going to be safe in the kind of changing global economy that we all participate in. What he can guarantee the AFL-CIO is that he's going to work on behalf of working people in this country to make sure that we've got what it takes to be competitive so that our economy can grow, so that jobs can continue to be created, so that the 13 million jobs that the President has helped create since he's been President will be added to considerably in the years ahead.

But this is a dynamic world economy and we are trying to give the American people the tools they will need to compete in that economy, and I think, by and large, the AFL-CIO acknowledges that the economic performance under this President has been a strong one, and that the President will suggest part of that is because of the work that we've done to open up markets overseas.

Q: Mike, is the President expecting for his statements to the AFL-CIO to kind of fall on deaf ears, because last week the national labor unions were outside making threats that they would have a work stoppage just like UPS if fast track does go through.

MR. MCCURRY: No, he's not worried that his arguments will fall on deaf ears.

Q: Mike, on the Central High Speech, how does the President want to use that speech to augment the race conversation?

MR. MCCURRY: Talking about that important moment in the history of our nation and the history of his state and the positive things that came out of that moment of trauma is part of his national discussion of issues of race in America and I think contributes to the dialogue the President suggests is necessary. So he will use it to continue his initiative.

There are going to be additional -- I got asked the other day what other things are coming up. There is, of course, a White House Conference on Hate Crimes that comes up early next month. The President's Race Advisory Board is meeting on the 30th, I believe they've announced now. So there are a number of things coming up in which we are continuing the work of having this conversation that we so desperately need as a nation about issues of race and diversity.

Q: Is there a date on the hate crimes, Mike? Is there a date?

MR. MCCURRY: We have not announced that it's November 8th. We will do so at some point. (Laughter.) October 8th.

Q: Is he doing something in New York Sunday night, and have you explained before why he's going back to Washington rather than straight to New York?

MR. MCCURRY: He's coming back to Washington because the President and the First Lady, on reflection, decided they just wanted to come back and be here for the hours that they'll have down before they go up to New York on Sunday. They just decided they wanted to come and not go to New York.

Q: Where is that Medal of Honor thing? Is that in Little Rock?

MR. MCCURRY: That's in Little Rock. That's next week.

Q: Is he giving the Medal of Honor or --

MR. MCCURRY: No, no. It's a reception. It's a reception, annual event down there.

Q: What about Sunday? When he goes to New York Sunday, is he doing anything?

MR. MCCURRY: Sunday night he's got -- there's a UN reception that night, and he will have -- as I've mentioned, he's going to have some pull-asides, and there are different combinations of people he might see, but the NSC staff will be doing a readout on that for the pool Sunday night. And then I think he's got a private dinner he's attending, too.

Q: Is this for the day trip, or is that the first leg of the Little Rock?

MR. MCCURRY: That's the first leg of this trip that comes up, and then they go from Pittsburgh to Little Rock.

Q: Bilaterals are strange, aren't they? He's not seeing Blair or any of the --

MR. MCCURRY: We've done a lot of work with all of them, and we've seen --

Q: I mean, aren't they mostly the subcontinent?

MR. MCCURRY: Right. And then Primakov. India, Pakistan, and then the Russian Federation. We've had good exchanges with most of our allies in recent months, so this was not an occasion where we felt necessary to touch base with all of our major friends.

Q: On fast track, Mike, what's your current assessment of the chances for passing both houses?

MR. MCCURRY: We feel good about it. We've got -- we're getting creamed on both sides of the aisle, so it's great. You can know with certainty that we ended up in the right place in the center of this debate, because we've got Roth attacking us on one side, and we've got some of the liberal Democrats attacking us on the other side, so we've got -- we must have it just about right. But we're not totally discouraged by Chairman Roth's remarks. I mean, this is the start of a conversation that we think will very quickly lead to consensus around the principles in the legislation that President has presented, and you can't make an omelet without breaking eggs. (Laughter.) You can say that in Russian, I bet. It's a Russian idiom, I think.

Q: I don't want to engage in too much navel gazing, but what's the President's state of mind today, given what's going on? When you saw him, what kind of mood was he in?

MR. MCCURRY: He's wistful. I mean, you saw him yesterday. He's wistful and -- wistful. He told you yesterday, he's happy and sad simultaneously. He's like about any dad who ever says good-bye to a daughter going to college. I mean, it's not hard to imagine.

Q: Is he set up for e-mail?

MR. MCCURRY: Allegedly. (Laughter.) But my guess is the First Lady will be more proficient in using e-mail. But he'll probably figure it out. My guess is he'll resort to the telephone more often than e-mail. But we'll see.

Q: What happens if somebody writes about her in California? Are they going to jail?

MR. MCCURRY: Say again, what? (Laughter.)

Q: The kind of laws you guys are laying down on campus -- unbelievable.

MR. MCCURRY: We're not laying down laws. I mean, it's a private university. The Stanford University has a very, in my mind, correct attitude about protecting the privacy of their students, and we are going to make it possible for people who want to write about Chelsea's first day of college to write about it. And then we hope people will leave her alone. And we'll see.

END 12:02 P.M. EDT