2:30 P.M. EST 
Real Audio of Briefing
MR. DENIG: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Foreign Press Center. As you know, mayors from around the country are currently in Washington, D.C. for the U.S. Conference of Mayors’ 72nd winter meeting, under the leadership of conference president James Garner, the Mayor of Hempstead, New York. This meeting brought together about 275 mayors from cities with populations of at least 30,000 from around the United States.
We're very pleased today to be able to welcome several of these mayors here to discuss with us the topic “The Mayors’ Views: Key Issues in Election Year.” And I want to thank particularly April Nichols from the Development Counsellors International for helping to organize this session with the mayors.
I'd like to briefly introduce our distinguished guests. To my far right, the first mayor is Mayor James McClinton. He is from Topeka, Kansas, in our Midwest. I should say also that all mayors, all local officials in the U.S., are typically voted in on a non-partisan basis. Many of them, however, do have a party preference or affiliation. I'll mention that to you just to help you to know where they're coming from. Mayor McClinton is a Democrat. Then next to him is Mayor Neil Giuliano from Tempe, Arizona, in our Southwest. That's the same state that Senator McCain is from. He is a Republican. Then next to him is Loyd Neal from Corpus Christi in Texas, a heavily Democratic area, even a liberal Democratic area, I understand. And finally, to my immediate right is Alan Autry from Fresno, California in our far West and he is a Republican.
I'll ask each of the mayors to make a brief statement commenting on how they view some of the key issues that are afloat this year from their local government perspective, and then we'll be glad to take your questions. So we'll start with Mayor McClinton from Topeka, Kansas.
MAYOR MCCLINTON: Hi, I'm James McClinton from Topeka, Kansas. Topeka is a city of about 122,000. We're strategically located in the center of the country, a distribution hub. We just recently landed a Target distribution center there. One of the things that I got out of the conference here is economic development, and I think that's one of the key things that helps Topeka run. And just listening to other mayors and listening to what the President said, I think economic development is a pretty serious item in the President’s speech that he talked about in the State of the Union address.
I believe that we could use more federal help as it relates to economic development. Whereas the President sees that economic development is doing really good in the country, I believe that cities haven't seen that robust movement yet, and so we hope that that will come soon.
MR. DENIG: Okay. We'll now ask Mayor Neil Giuliano from Tempe, Arizona.
MAYOR GIULIANO: Thank you. It's good to be with you here this afternoon in Washington, D.C. I took the conference looking at it from the way that the people in my community would respond to some of the issues that have been talked about, both by President Bush this morning who addressed all of us and the other speakers who came before us and really focus in three areas: the first being national security, what's going on around the world -- certainly, of course, with regard to the war on terrorism around the world; homeland security and how does it -- what's going on around the world resonate within our actual borders that we're responsible for as local elected officials, everything from police departments to water service delivery and so forth; and then economic security -- what are we doing to improve education. We see in my community a direct relationship between education and economics and economic security.
So those are the three areas that we're spending a lot of time on. Those are the areas that are -- as I interact with people in my community, that's what they're asking about. And then also, I'd just say, so I don't forget later, we invite you all to come to Tempe, Arizona this fall. We are hosting the final presidential debate between the nominees of the two parties, President Bush and his democratic challenger, in Tempe, Arizona, and that's on October 13th, 2004, will be the final presidential debate sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates. So we look forward to having you there.
MAYOR NEAL: Good afternoon, I'm Loyd Neal. I'm the Mayor of Corpus Christi, Texas. We're a city of about 300,000, located on the Gulf coast of Texas, principally an oil and oil-refining city with a major port. Agriculture is big in our economy as is the military. We are a training base for the naval aviators in the United States.
I've had the pleasure of knowing President Bush when he was our governor, the governor of the state of Texas, and worked very closely with him on a number of issues, and I know how passionate he is about education. This was a big issue with him when he was the governor of Texas and the No Child Left Behind issue, the funding of the community colleges across the country, those were things that he and Mrs. Bush, of course, being an educator, also believed very strongly in. So I think he's on the right track there and there are a number of other major issues that we'll be glad to discuss with you that were in the State of the Union address.
MR. DENIG: Very good. Finally, Alan Autry from Fresno, California.
MAYOR AUTRY: Yes, my name is, as he said, Alan Autry, Mayor of Fresno. We're a city of about half a million, right in the heart, the center of the state of California. In between the beaches of Hollywood and the beautiful bays we have probably some of the richest agricultural land in the world. I'd like to say we're the hands that feed the world; about two-thirds of the vegetables supplied to the country come from San Joaquin valley and we ship more, a lot, and it's -- we're looking to diversify our economy, but agriculture is the backbone and will always be in that area.
But I think what I got out of this is, as my colleagues have said, two issues: the war on terrorism and the economy. And these are two issues that should very much interest you all because we're directly connected umbilically to those two issues. It's certainly a global world when we're talking about terrorism and it's rapidly becoming a global economy. And that first factor, the war on terrorism, is something that's really an overriding issue. If we don't win that, everything else we're talking about is moot. If you can't believe that preservation is a key component to a healthy world, then there's not much to talk about. And I think we all agree on that.
But also the trick is how do you keep the economy going, not only for other quality of life things outside of winning the war, but you're going to have to finance that war, which promises to be a long and very costly one, and a war that the President's asked probably everyone of your countries to participate in. Some of you have, maybe all of you here, I don't know.
But there's a philosophical battle going on right now, the best way to finance that. Is it to take more tax dollars and see if that grows the economy? Or to leave more tax dollars in the pockets of your citizens and let them fuel the economy? And I think the result of that and the plan that comes out of that is going to determine the quality of life, not only for our city, but our country and your countries as well.
MR. DENIG: Thank you, gentlemen. They'd be very glad to take your questions now. As usual, please use the microphone and identify yourself and your news organization.
Let's start in the front row here, please.
QUESTION: Thank you. My name is Ruben Barrera and I work for Notimex. That's a newswire, news agency from Mexico. You mentioned national security, homeland security and economy as the three major issues that you were concerned. And if may I -- if -- may I -- I would like to ask immigration, and especially because, maybe in (inaudible), you see this is a phenomenon who has different degrees of impact. As you know, President Bush announced a couple of weeks ago an ambitious initiative to bring this issue into the table and to see there is any meaningful reform to the immigrations law that the Congress will pass -- certainly not this year but maybe next year.
My first question is, I would like to know your impressions about these proposals. How urgent do you feel that it's, you know, what is the urgency to tackle this issue? And the second is, the Los Angeles Times newspapers published today a story in this regard saying that the President Bush initiative has been not very good received among the Border Patrol agents. They quote one official from the Border Patrol union saying that some Border Patrol agents feel betrayed by the proposal because they feel like, in this way, all the work that they have been doing is meaningless. So I would like to hear your comments, please.
MAYOR AUTRY: Well, probably, I know that Texas and California, this is a very -- and I'm sure every state, Arizona and Kansas -- I think the President showed great courage. You know, is it a perfect plan? No, but you can't let perfection stand in the way of progress, and we had to make progress on this issue. And how you begin that is to flat out just acknowledge that we have to do something about it, because in California, the Catch-22 was that you had an economy built around labor that you had to have to live but a system that you couldn't live with and eventually was going to come back and get you when you have so many immigrants coming forward.
Even though they're doing very noble work and important work for the economy, the only thing it was cheap was to the employer after you add up all the social services that we naturally want to provide because we're a compassionate country. And I think somebody had to start it. [President] John Kennedy said one time -- and it reminded me when I heard President [Bush] bring the subject up -- John Kennedy at his inaugural said the things that we must accomplish here in America to be where we want to be and go where we want to go are not going to be achieved in my first term nor my second term, perhaps [not in] my lifetime upon this planet, but begin we must.
So I think it's a great step to begin, the fact that, hey, we have to find a way to get the folks that are working here that are so essential, properly take the illegal status off of them. You talk about dignity. How would you -- I know personally, a lot of folks that are here, they're illegally. And they're good people. And to take that illegal description from them would be the best thing you could do, but how you do that is very important.
Amnesty is not the way, and I'll sum up with this, because I know my colleagues want to really jump in on this. But to get an orderly, legal guestworker program, we have to get there. And this -- and you got to start somewhere and I think that's what the President said. And I think it was a bold move because it certainly didn't help him politically in California, if he was just thinking about politics. But this President puts the right thing over politics.
MAYOR MCCLINTON: I think the timing is somewhat political, but I have to agree with the President. You know, Kansas, being an agricultural state, immigration does impact us. And I think that the President has to do something, we have to do something as it relates to homeland security and immigration to make sure that we know who is coming into this country and working, and I'm not sure what the result is going to be three years from now. But we do need to keep track of who is coming into the country and not penalize people who are here already.
MAYOR GIULIANO: It's a very big issue in my state and in my community in Arizona. And I appreciate very much that President Bush has given this the profile that comes with the President commenting on it. But I would say -- and I would say that much of what he's talking about is contained in the legislation being proposed by Senator McCain and Congress Jim Kolbe of southern Arizona.
But I would also add that the start of the conversation really isn't enough. I actually think immigration in this country is in need of major reform. I think there should be a national bipartisan commission for immigration reform and we ought to rethink exactly how we're treating people of the world who wish to come to the United States to reflect the 21st century and to reflect the opportunities that so many of us have had in this country.
It's my view, from what I see locally, it's really broke. People are not treated equally. People are not treated fairly. Illegal, I think, needs to be done away with because there are people who are illegal throughout our community no matter what country they're coming from and no matter how -- whether they're working in our country or not. We have a lot of undocumented workers without whom the economy in Arizona, a tourist-driven economy that relies on undocumented workers, to be honest, you know, that's simply a fact of life. And we need major reform with regard to immigration on the national level to be able to address issues like that.
MAYOR NEAL: The Matricula Consular card is an issue that is a big issue in Texas and in other parts of the United States. And this was an attempt to perform a real service in giving identification to people who were in this country. And this is an issue that is polarizing. It's an issue that many people don't understand and I applaud the President in trying to find a way to get us to the next step.
It is not like we're not going to have a lot of people in this country, legally or illegally. What we do is we're going to have to figure out, as my colleagues have said, how to do this. We have to educate the people who come into Texas, regardless of their legal status. When they come in and they go to our schools and they go to our hospitals and they go to our workplaces, they become citizens. They don't have all the rights of citizenship, but we're certainly going to have to find a way, working through this in a compromise way, to do it.
And your President, President Fox, and President Bush probably have come closer to agreeing on a way to get there in the last few weeks than we've -- and that's a bold step. You know, President Fox has at least agreed to begin to talk about this in a very serious way, and I, personally, being in south Texas, appreciate that. But this is not a border issue. A lot of people think, well, this is something along the borders of the southern part of the United States. This is a global issue across this entire country, and there are probably more problems in the heartland of this country than there are in Corpus Christi, Texas, quite frankly.
MR. DENIG: All right. Let's take the gentleman in the back there, please.
QUESTION: Brian Young from Nippon TV, a Japanese TV network.
I would like ask this question to, especially to Mayor Giuliano and also welcome other mayors' comments and opinions.
Currently, there is a lot of discussions and talks on this topic, and also this topic, also, draw a lot of attentions worldwide. This topic is civil unions, this topic. So -- and also the President Bush talked this topic in his State of Union address. So I would want to know, what's your comments on this topic? And also what's your comments on President Bush address, especially on this topic?
MAYOR GIULIANO: I'm worry, what was the topic again?
MR. DENIG: Civil unions.
QUESTION: Civil unions, same-sex marriage.
MAYOR GIULIANO: Sure. It is a topic of the day and has the potential, I think, to divide our country in very harmful ways. You know, I happen to believe that all Americans ought to be treated equally with regard to the protections that are afforded by the government. I have no interest in trying to tell folks of a particular religious belief or religious institutions what they should honor, what they should recognize and so forth, but I do believe our government should treat all of us the same.
So for two individuals who are in a same-sex relationship, from the standpoint of government treatment, from the standpoint of accessibility to legal records, accessibility to hospital visitations and a whole lot of other rights -- there are over 1,000 individual rights that heterosexual married couples are entitled to that same-sex couples are not entitled to. So from that standpoint, I think our government needs to do better to try to treat all Americans equally.
Well, what is President Bush saying about it? Quite frankly, the President is trying to not turn away a part of his political base, that being the very strongly religious right base of the Republican party, the party that I am a member of. He's trying to hold on to them and give them the comfort that they have to have with regard to him being opposed to civil unions or same-sex marriage and, at the same time, he's trying not to anger middle America and a lot of more moderate Republicans and other people in the United States who really think everybody should be treated fairly without regard to what one religion says about this relationship or another religion says about the relationship.
So I think the President is trying to very gingerly address the issue as best as he can politically, but it's a very tough issue for the President. And given the opportunity, I would tell the President that there are over a million self-identified Republicans, Republicans who identified as gay, homosexual, in the 2000 election. That's a million votes of Republicans that the President stands to lose if, in fact, he goes too far one way in this issue. Now, you know, it could be said from the far right that he stands to lose those folks. My own belief is that those folks have nowhere else to go, so he's really not going to lose those folks politically.
But you're right. It is a very difficult issue. It's a challenging issue. It's an issue that, I think, requires a lot of introspective thought and a lot of discussion amongst the people throughout our nation and it's an issue that's not going to go away.
MAYOR NEAL: Let me try to come at that a little bit differently. The state of Texas has had some of the most stringent laws in the United States dealing with this subject and other subjects similar to that. And only in the last year did the Supreme Court of the United States overturn at least one of those laws.
The governor, when President Bush was governor, of course, he is a Texan, and he comes from a state and from a political environment and a history where this subject has never been quite openly dealt with because of the conservatism of the state of Texas and the way in which our laws have always looked upon these kinds of things. And I think the President is to really be applauded for bringing the subject up, dealing with it in a very open manner.
As my colleague said, it's not going to be easy. But he also knows that some day he has to go home and I think what this will be will be a debate that this country is going to have to carry on and whether it's a religious issue or a civil issue, it's an issue that, as we say, is not going to go away but you have to also know where he's coming from a little bit. And I think the historical significance of that and his willingness to take a very public stand on this is to really be applauded.
MAYOR AUTRY: Well, I agree he should be applauded. And I kind of disagree with Mayor Giuliano in one point. I don't believe it was a political decision. I believe he is a -- he believes in the sanctity of a marriage between a man and a woman in that regard, and that's why he has spent, I think, $53 million, I believe, it may be more than that, to promote the respect for that.
And you know, this is a subject dear to me because I come from Hollywood -- I think 23 years worked in Hollywood -- and there's a lot of gay folks that I've come to know and care very deeply about, in TV shows, and [I] appointed two openly gay people to my administration. Yet they know that I don't believe that there should be a designation because of a sexual preference.
And I think we define -- people are afraid we're going to alienate a million gay folks by saying you're not going to support gay marriage. I will say that and in the same breath say that I will fight to my dying day and I would give my life for a gay person's right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness and not be discriminated against.
And I don't believe those two comments are mutually exclusive. I think they go hand-in-hand, because what we're saying is, you know, when you make a decision whether you're going to vote on somebody, it's a total thing. And I know many, many, many conservative gay folks that -- man, woman -- that, you know, I care about our kids getting educated. Is this candidate going to be devoted to education? Is there going to be local control of our infrastructure needs and have the resources there? Health care, Medicare preservation, social security preservation. And I know many that will accept the fact that that candidate does not accept -- or doesn't support gay marriage.
So I think we -- and to be quite honest with you, prior to 22 years ago, I had my own perceptions of what a particular group thought, I'm ashamed to say. And being in Hollywood for 22 years, I've had my eyes opened. And I don't think it's going to hurt the President as much as folks seem to be thinking because there's more to a gay person than their sexual preference and priorities.
MAYOR MCCLINTON: I think the timing is somewhat suspect. The President didn't push this type of initiative in the last State of the Union address last year, but with Democrats out getting all the public attention, I think that the timing of this makes us wonder if it's merely political and if he really is trying to energize the conservative base.
I happen to be a mayor in a very conservative state, Kansas, who believes in a man and a woman being married, but I happen to be the mayor of a city that's open to anyone and everyone, regardless of whether they're in a same-sex relationship or not. And so I think that that's pretty much what most of the country thinks. I mean, if you look at polls, they're saying that polls are shifting, that people are being more open. I think the country is becoming more open. People in same-gender relationships are not going to go away, so I don't care how many laws we pass or how many initiatives we start, they're going to be here and we're going to have to deal with them and live with them.
MR. DENIG: Let's go to Andrej here in the middle, in the front.
QUESTION: Thank you. My name is Andrej Sitov. I'm with Russian News Agency TASS here in Washington. Thank you for coming over, finding time for us.
Our good friends at the Foreign Press Centers have arranged a number of briefings for us and one thing stands out for me from some of those, people saying that in this upcoming election, the issues of national security and foreign policy will probably play a bigger role than in any other elections, presidential elections in the U.S. history, including the time of the Cold War with the Soviet Union, where I come from.
My question to all of you is whether you really feel that, that your voters locally, will actually pay more attention to those issues than even to the economy?
And secondly, we've been led to believe, mostly by our American colleagues, that Howard Dean was representing a groundswell, or a movement of sorts, and then we are now being led to believe that he is fading as quickly as he came up. So again, you are practicing politicians. You are close to the roots in this country. What is your explanation of the Dean phenomenon, please? Thank you.
PARTICIPANT: The Dean phenomenon.
MR. DENIG: Gentlemen?
MAYOR MCCLINTON: I think Mr. Dean did energize a number of younger people around the country. He was bringing on some fresh new ideas and he reached them through the Internet. And I think that is one of the key things that the other candidates did not focus on as much as he did. It did seem like a groundswell. And I'm not sure that Dean is out yet. It's still early in the primary season and we may see him come back. But we can't let the media define our political position in this country. The people must decide where we are politically in this country. And I think that's what we're kind of caught in right now is letting the media make that decision.
MAYOR GIULIANO: I would agree. I think it's too early to determine exactly what's going to happen to the Democratic party primary process. I think you have to go through next Tuesday, the following Tuesday, and maybe even into March but that will depend on what happens in the next couple of weeks.
I think Howard Dean is, you know, a very effective and successful executive as a governor of a small state in the United States. He showed leadership in that area and he used technology very well and he used a message to appeal to a constituency that beforehand had really been sort of left out for a long, long time in American politics, is those college students, those young folks. And whether that can carry you on the wave all the way or not, I think that's still to be determined.
But I commend him for reaching out to those young people. He had a huge rally at Arizona State University in my community, brought out the largest number of young people to get engaged in politics and then that transforms them so now they are looking at who's running for mayor in the next election, and what's going on locally, what's going on in Arizona. And all of that I think is very good. We'll just have to see what happens and who the eventual challenger to President Bush will be.
MAYOR NEAL: I think the first part of your question was dealing with national security and that issue, and I really believe that the President is not going to take that initiative away from his number one issue. He feels very strongly about the security of this country; he feels very strongly about the freedoms in this country. I don't know anything, but from hearing him this morning and at the State of the Union, I would assume that he intends to make this a high priority list, along with the economy, of course.
Let me bring a little dose of reality to what my colleagues are talking about here with the young people in this country. People in the United States over the age of 55 vote at about 55-65 percent of those who are eligible. People under the age of 30 vote somewhere in the 12-14 percent and those are real rough numbers. And while it is great to have young people in your campaign, and their energy is wonderful and they get excited and all the other things, as a group, they don't vote. And it's going to take some real energizing of a group of young people across this country to get them interested enough in something to go vote and I wish they did. You know, we gave them the vote in this country, down to 18, and yet, in local elections, at least in Texas, we have great difficulty getting those under the age of 30 interested in what's going on and getting them out to vote.
So I think the phenomena is going to be if he can carry this forward and can he sweep the country that it would be an interesting thing. But it is true in this country, across this country, if you're over 55, you go vote your pocketbook and you vote what you want to do and that's going to be an interesting way to look at this.
MAYOR AUTRY: Andrej, first, I want to compliment your country and the immigrants that are coming here to America. We have many, many in San Joaquin Valley, many right in Fresno, and let me tell you, here's the hardest working bunch of folks I have seen in my life. They make the best employees -- I'm serious. Their work ethic is unparalleled in our area. They're a tremendous asset, so I just want to pass that on.
Secondly, the issue of national security, like you said, everything else is dwarfed under that. We lose that, we're done. You see what happens when you bring two towers down; it paralyzes an economy, airlines stop flying, trains stop going. And Bill Gates has done something very profound. He's made it possible for you to stay inside your home and you get a computer, you can order your food or your clothes, your entertainment; but [meanwhile] our economy's based on people going out and going and buying and selling things and getting out of the home, going to restaurants, getting in your car and taking vacations. So economically, it's like I said, umbilically tied to winning this war, outside of the moral aspects of it, which are overriding.
But the Howard Dean thing, I just think the Democrats are really blowing what chance they have. I think it's a tremendous strategic blunder that's going to be fatal, come November, to try to get this country to hate this President. The fact of the matter is, people like him. I spent five minutes with him, and you like him. We spent 40 more minutes behind in a limousine. He's just -- and I don't agree with all of his policies, but he cares about people; he's compassionate.
It's the same mistake that the Republicans made with Clinton. I didn't agree with Clinton on many things but I'd love to go out and have a sandwich him and a coke with him. He -- I felt he did care about people; we just differed on ways to get there. And it was attack; we're going to make you hate this person.
And the way Clinton won the elections against George Bush 41 was the fact, look, if you're (inaudible), he never said really a bad word. He never questioned whether George Bush loved America or that George Bush loved people. His character, he never attacked that. He said, look, we're doing okay but we can do better. We must do better. And he took that message and touched a lot of hands and he won the election. He won an election nobody thought they could win.
And I just see the Democrats, the strategy of attack that's filtered all the way down through their machine to the local level, and it starts off and people are just getting turned off by it. You know, that's to start out with. Where's your ideas? Don't tell me why I should hate the President because he wants to kick old ladies out on the street, he doesn't care about your kids' education, because, right, he wants to make sure minority kids get educated with the No Child Left Behind. I've got a bunch of whining school officials saying, "We can't do it," and I ask them why. "Well, it's hard." What do you mean? "Well, we have to transport these kids to a non-failing school." Well, give me a break. What a slap in the face to minority kids and poor kids around this country and I won't tolerate it. So that's my opinion on it.
PARTICIPANT: How do you really feel?
(Laughter.)
MR. DENIG: Okay. Let's take the lady back there, please.
QUESTION: Hi, Nadia Chao from Liberty Times, Taiwan. The first question is that after 9/11, just as you said, there's a lot of, you know, negative impact on economic side, you know, airplanes stop flight and people lost jobs and tourists don't come. Now we're even seeing tighter security check in this country and some people complain it's a prejudice to certain, you know, people, and especially Muslim countries. I don't know if this, you know, situation really, for you people, from grassroot, really impact, have the impact on your relationship with those area, like tourism or trade relations, you know, economics, on economic side.
And the second question is, one important initiative the President take is about a job. He recently just made an announcement, try to create job opportunity. I don't know, for you especially, your district, do you think his policy work or, you know, reply to your need? Thanks.
MAYOR MCCLINTON: Well, let me just address a little bit of that and kind of relate a little bit to what he said. I think the President's foreign policy has much to be questioned. His relationship with foreign countries has had an impact on especially Kansas. We export billions of pounds and bushels of wheat around this world out of Kansas, and we also export beef out of this country. I think that because of his relationship, and especially as it relates to homeland security, that has had an effect on our Kansas economy and just to kind of lean over a little bit to disease control around the country and health care around the world, and I mean around the world, if the President, if this country doesn't take worldwide leadership in health care, when there's a health problem around the world, it comes back to the United States and it has an impact on my state of Kansas.
When this country doesn't take leadership and work with other countries at it relates to beef and the safety of beef around the world and here in this country, it has an impact on us on the local levels, because when our states do badly, our local economies do badly and we have to make up the difference with "mom and pop" stores in our cities and streets.
And so I think the President's policies on foreign relations has to get better. Making it harder for foreigners to come into this country does not help foreign relations around the world and it definitely has an impact on me as a mayor in a state like Kansas.
MAYOR GIULIANO: On the first part of your question, with regard to, sort of, the tourism issue and traveling and so forth, you know, if we all have to get the airport another hour earlier to ensure that every flight is going to be 100 percent safe coming in and out of our country and going within our country, then that's just the way we're going to have to do it and we're just going to have to adjust. And you know what? We will adjust and life will go on just fine when that becomes the norm. That's my take on that.
I mean, we are very tourism-dependent. More than half of our economy in Arizona is tourism-dependent, people flying into the Phoenix area, staying a few days, going to the Grand Canyon, going on to California or wherever.
So I think we have to work through a lot of these issues. There's a lot of administrative things that can definitely be improved and efficiencies that have to be employed so that it's done better, but if we have to live with that, then I think we just have to live with that. And I don't think we should complain about it. We should get on with trying to make things better. There's an old saying that, you know, don't wish things are easier, make yourself better, because things are sometimes going to be difficult and that's okay if we have to react to that.
On the whole issue of national security and so forth, you know, I think the President's trying to balance having the very firm foreign policy that we need to have and I believe we should have as the United States of America, and yet recognize the impact that it will have on economies and pockets of the economy around the United States with regard to people getting into the country and so forth.
MAYOR NEAL: The issue about the impact of foreign visitors to the United States depends upon really where you are. If you're farther way from the major entry points in this country, you're less impacted, because once you clear New York or Los Angeles or San Francisco or however you come into this country, then once you get in the country, your travel is much easier and it's not really a factor as much in south Texas like it might be in major urban areas.
We have to remember that everything in the United States starts in a city or town. The jobs of this country are created within a city or a town. And the health and the economy and the vitality of this country depends upon the health and the vitality and the economies of the cities and towns, because we are now an urban country. In our state, over 60 percent of the population of Texas -- and Texas is a very big state -- lives within 150 miles of the coastline of the state of Texas and as you go around this country, you find that a large part of our population lives within 150 miles of the coastline of this country.
But if our cities and towns are not healthy, if they're not vibrant, if they don't create an economic opportunity and a quality of life for their citizens, then it affects what this entire country does.
So any decision on the economy that has a trickle-down effect, either in unfunded mandates to cities and towns or affects our ability to attract new industry or visitors or new jobs or new citizens, has a direct impact. And I think it is imperative that we as communities and mayors continue to work very closely with the federal government as these laws are enacted to make sure the impact on us and our ability to create this quality of life in this country is not impacted.
MAYOR AUTRY: I agree with a lot of what my colleague said, Mayor McClinton from Topeka. I have not always agreed with the tactics. I can understand Mayor Giuliano said that -- it is a balancing act. I mean, over 2,000 of our people were killed on our soil. It didn't happen in Germany, didn't happen in France. I know that empathy is very strong and we appreciate that. But there's nothing -- you know, when you lose your child, it's a different feeling, even though you may empathize and shed tears and be there with that person who lost their child, it's not like losing your own.
And we're going to react differently, we're going to take different steps, but again, Mayor McClinton makes a good point. I believe there's a way that you implement that toughness, that firm stand, that no-nonsense approach. And I believe many times he's done it the right way but we can all get better. And I think that's what he's saying and I think for international relations, I think they realize that.
On the subject that you said about the Muslim being targeted, I think there's -- about the problem of, at the airports, being singled out. And that's a very, very important issue in Fresno. We have a large Muslim population and I have a great relationship with them. I've been stopped every time I go through there. I screw up every time. I either leave a quarter in my pocket or something, a pager, but I'm stopped all the time. And also I instituted in Fresno the toughest anti-profiling policies in the history of California. We take additional data on the officer as to why you stop somebody. I'll have zero tolerance for somebody just indiscriminately being stopped because of the color of their skin.
But having said that, we have to have some common sense. You know, after Oklahoma City, and they had McVeigh and were looking for his cohorts and they did a profile of McVeigh, I doubt very seriously if many resources were spent on looking for young, well-groomed African-American and Hispanic men with Harvard degrees, nor should they, you know? I think they had -- they were looking for a certain profile that lent itself to white cohorts.
And was that profiling, that white Southerner who may fit that profile and was stopped and questioned? If I fit that profile, if they were looking for a big, ugly white dude with a southern accent that's partially articulate, I would say “stop me.” I would understand. That would be common sense, because you're going to find out that I'm not involved in it and I would go by actually pretty good, like I feel when I hear the helicopter go over at night. Does it wake me up sometimes? Does it disturb me, my routine? Yeah, because I like sleep. But it also makes me feel good knowing our cops are up there looking for the bad guys.
So I think a common sense approach to it is what we have to have so we certainly don't want to trample anybody's civil rights, but we also have to, again, use some common sense. There is a definite profile that these terrorists -- happen to fill the majority of them right now.
MR. DENIG: Okay, do I have a final question from anybody? Let's go to the gentlemen up here.
QUESTION: Mayor McClinton raised the question of beef, so --
MR. DENIG: Sorry, could you identify yourself?
QUESTION: My name is Kazuo Nagata, Yomiuri Shimbun in Japan. And a question of beef. Will you elaborate on that point, so, especially the argument between the Japanese and U.S. Government, also the Japanese insist, oh, there should be more thorough examination on every single cow and the U.S. thinks, oh, there's no such need and there's no (inaudible) or, and if you -- how frustrated are you about this argument between two governments?
MAYOR MCCLINTON: Well, I think there has to be international collaboration on studying the disease itself, BSE, as it relates to cows and how we handle beef around the world. First, the problem started outside of the United States, and we overreacted, perhaps. Now the problem was found in the United States and perhaps our foreign partners overreacted.
We have to come to some type of agreement on how we should react and how we should test beef to make sure that it's safe for both people in the United States and people in the international community also. We are a global economy, and when international problems happen, they affects us. When things happen in the United States, they are going to affect them. So we have to have this collaborative effort in deciding how we define disease in our food and how we respond and react and we all have to work together because we all have a vested interest in it. And right now, we're hurting, but others have (inaudible) when it initially started.
MAYOR GIULIANO: I would agree with the comments that the mayor said. I would just add that we -- that collaboration is important with everyone involved, all who are responsible for bringing the product to market, and I think, whether we want to acknowledge it or not, a lot of this has to do with money, a lot of this has to do with profit, and everyone needs to be brought to the table and we need to have the full discussion of the full cost of bringing product to market and passing it on to the consumer, as all those costs are going to be passed onto the consumer, which I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but we need to go into all of that with our eyes open and understand what it's going to mean for this very significant industry in the country.
MAYOR NEAL: Texas, of course, exports a lot of beef, and where we're located, we happen to be located adjacent to the King Ranch. And those of you who may be familiar with the King Ranch, it's about a million acres, contiguous acres, south of Corpus Christi all the way almost to Brownsville. And they also export and raise a lot of beef.
I think we have to be very careful when we categorize beef in this country. Beef is not all the same. Those plants, like we have a local plant that is one of the largest independent meat-packing plants left in the United States called Kane Meat Company, and they were questioned very thoroughly when all of this happened up in the Northwest. And they made it very clear that there's beef and then there's beef. If you're raising the beef in a different environment, if you're killing a certain age steer or whatever you're killing, then we need to make sure that we clarify that for the world.
We need to make sure the world understands that when you're doing this in a certain way, you're less likely to have the problems that were associated with this. And while it is an issue all across this country, those in the agricultural business in Texas are taking some very strong steps to try to clarify exactly what we're talking about, as they are in Kansas, by the way, which is also a major exporter of beef, and make sure the world knows that our beef is really safe and that we are doing the right things and this was an isolated case and it was an imported cow from somewhere else.
But I think the country has really recognized that we have a job to do and we're doing a good job. We're really doing a good job now telling the world that this beef is safe.
MAYOR AUTRY: I told you where I come from, agricultural middle of California, and I couldn't agree more. And you know, there's an old saying that there's no such thing as a coincidence. It's just God's way of staying anonymous.
I think these are -- this mad cow situation and the deal with the vegetables, I forget what it was that poisoned some folks on the East cost, is an impending looming crisis, the likes of which we have never seen. A safe, affordable and reliable source of food is an international security issue. Now that's the next target.
And you know, we -- as bad as those two towers were when they come down, as powerful as it was, as horribly terrifying as that was, it's going to pale if suddenly you're keeling over at your dinner table because you've got some tainted tomatoes or you're afraid to go to the grocery store and you're holding your breath every time your child takes a bite of food. People say, well, that's extremists. Well, they thought that before the towers came down.
And I see America going in a tremendously dangerous direction. We're already at the mercy of foreign oil and we know what that does to the economy and to fight a long-term war. We put our source of food at the mercy of outside sources and many of them third-world countries that don't have our standards, don't have the regulations, don't have the proper oversight, as far as sanitary conditions, how they're picked, what goes in it, you don't seem them, they're shipped from one country to the next.
And I think, as the mayor said, this is a big wakeup call. He talked about paralyzing an economy. If we're afraid, again, to put food in our mouths -- and it's not that hard to do. So I think that's something we have to elevate to a national security issue, especially for the United States of America, and start making sure we do not put these draconian regulations on farming and move it out. I'll end with this, I know I'm going on -- but I see us in this country putting all our eggs in a high-tech basket. And I think the dot com bubble burst was a big wakeup call. We ought to bring agriculture back, we ought to keep it here and bring manufacturing back as well.
MR. DENIG: Something very short? Oh, okay. I think we'd better thank the mayors very much for being here with us, and thank you, too, ladies and gentlemen.
