 No, I don't believe so. The details have not been spelled out. The proposal is still there. They've put before the negotiators in Geneva, and that's where the deal is. Mr. President, he has said there will be a cap on SS- He's trying to put you on the defensive, isn't he? He said there will be a cap on SS 20s, Mr. President. He said that there will be a cap on SS 20s back to the June 84 levels, that they will dismantle the launchers in Europe, and that he wants separate negotiations with the British and French. Isn't that quite a big change in their position? Yes, everything they're saying is a big change in their position. Well, with regard to the British and the French, that is up to the Soviet Union and the British and the French. Certainly, the United States cannot negotiate with the Soviets about what they're going to do about it, or with regard to the nuclear missiles of other countries. With regard to the remarks he made about the intermediate-range missiles in Europe, this was the, when we exceeded the European request and provided missiles for them to have intermediate missiles in defense against these missiles aimed at them, this is what caused the Soviets, more than a year ago, to walk out for more than a year from the negotiations because we had put those missiles in Europe. Now they're back negotiating, and they now, I understand, have made a suggestion about reducing the number of their weapons. This too will have to be negotiated. Why do you think they're doing that, sir? They're trying to put you on the defensive with the Europeans? Oh, I don't know whether they're trying to do that or not, but it would be nice to hope that they may have gotten religion. Well, how do you look at this? How do you look at the Gorbachev appearance in France? I'm not going to discuss the terms they're proposing because that's going to be dealt with by our negotiators in Geneva. No, but what do you think of him in France? There's this latest statement about the SS-20s, which are their multi-warhead missiles that are aimed at European targets and in response to which we had put the Pershings and the cruise missiles in Europe. As I understand it, the only proposal they've made is one that would not be destroying any of their weapons. It would simply be moving them. Well, that missile, the SS-20, is a mobile missile. It is transported. It can move from place to place to simply drive them up into the Ural Mountains or someplace else and then say that they're not a threat to Europe. It makes no sense. Well, he did say dismantle the launchers for the first time, Mr. President. Doesn't that change the nature of the movement between European and Asian SS-20s? I don't mean that, but then again, we'll leave that for our negotiators in Geneva. Is that a way of saying that if you don't give up SDI, there'll be hard times in the world? Well, he could probably feel that way because the Soviet Union is about ten years ahead of us in developing a defensive system themselves and they're very upset at the idea that they might not be the only ones that have a defense against nuclear weapons as well as having the offensive nuclear weapons. Now, we're working so that we too can have a defensive shield that kills weapons, not people. And I'm sure that is upsetting to them. But we're not going to retreat from the research that could deliver to the world a defense against these nuclear weapons and finally bring us to the realization that we should eliminate the nuclear weapons. And the testing, sir? And the testing? That goes along with research. What about the fact that these separate negotiations might undercut the U.S.-Soviet negotiations in Geneva? If they go off on their own and deal with the British and the French, doesn't that drive a wedge between us and our allies? No, I don't believe so at all. It certainly would drive a wedge. We arrogantly decided that we would negotiate on behalf of other countries and without their consent. No, this is between them and the Soviet Union. Power to them. Anything more on the Israeli raid in Tunisia? Do you still think it's understandable? The PLO said that they will reach out. Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States. And we'll remember this day as one of the most memorable of presidential visits. To have visited us as Chiefs of State and regard him as a personal friend. Because they feel they know him and understand him. If we were conferred knighthood or some title of nobility, however, the spirit of America which flows in the blood of Ronald Reagan would not permit such adulation nor feasons. And it is precisely that spirit which enhances because of his comracter, trusted because of his spirit. We are fortunate to have a leader who embodies gifts that years. Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States. Years back when we were governors together, Jim Rhodes, he said every man should take on himself a wife. Because sooner or later something is bound to happen that you can't blame on the governor. The last time I visited here it was August 1984. And when we do that, your tax rates are going to come down, not go up. Well, my friends, today I've come back to Cincinnati to help make good on that promise. In the 1920s, for example, presidents Harding and Coolidge instituted a series of tax cuts that reduced the top rate on individuals from 73% to just 25%. Today we remember off on this recovery. I understand that here in Cincinnati in 1984 in the term, syncinomics, I knew that the program was succeeding when they stopped calling it. They spent just 35%. Incorporated small businesses will receive graduated rates of 15, 18, 25, and 33%, a measure especially helpful to businesses just getting started. As you know, small businesses create most of our new jobs. From late 1982, they amplified as countless provisions for special treatment are reduced or eliminated. Take a moment to compare this simplified low-tax rate future to the present arrangement. I hope that someday we can get down to a balanced budget. We have been discussing a plan over a period of years to start the debt, to start a plan of spending cuts. There's reasons that we, so many of you, you know, talked about it. Thank you all very much.