11/7/2002 George W. Bush Presidential Hall, Dwight
D. Eisenhower Executive Office Building http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/11/20021107-2.html THE PRESIDENT:
Thank you. Good afternoon. Thanks for coming. This is an important week for our
country and for the world. The United Nations will vote tomorrow on a
resolution bringing the civilized world together to disarm Saddam Hussein. Here
at home, our citizens have voted in an election that I believe will strengthen
our ability to make progress for all the American people. I congratulate
the men and women, Republicans and Democrats, who were elected this week to
public office all across America. I appreciate their willingness to leave their
private lives and to serve their communities and to serve our nation. I also commend
the millions of voters across America, and across the political spectrum, who
went to the polls. At a time when our freedoms are under attack, it is more
important than ever that our citizens exercise the rights and responsibilities
of our democracy. Now that the
voters have spoken, I urge the members of both political parties to come
together to get things done for the American people. I've talked to leaders of
both parties and assured them I want to work with them. I talked to Senator
Daschle yesterday and said that, although the Republican Party now leads the
Senate, I still want to work with him to get things done for the American
people. I talked to Leader Gephardt, as well. I look forward
to working with members of the Congress and the newly-elected governors to make
America's families safer in their homes and their communities, to make our
economy stronger so people can find work, to make our country a better and more
compassionate place. Members of the new Congress will take office in January
and they'll have a full agenda. The current Congress, however, will return in
just a few days to take up some unfinished business. We have a responsibility
to protect the American people against threats from any source. I'm grateful
to the members of the Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, that came
together to support the war against terror, and authorize, if need be, the use
of force to disarm Iraq. We must bring the same spirit of bipartisan
cooperation to the urgent task of protecting our country from the ongoing
threat of terrorist attack. The single
most important item of unfinished business on Capitol Hill is to create a
unified department of homeland security that will vastly improve our ability to
protect our coasts and our borders and our communities. The election
may be over, but a terrorist threat is still real. The Senate must pass a bill
that will strengthen our ability to protect the American people. And they must
pass a bill that preserves the authority every President since John Kennedy has
had to act in the interest of national security. It's imperative that the
Congress send me a bill that I can sign before the 107th Congress ends. We have a
responsibility to strengthen the economy so people can find work. We're working
to keep this economy moving. And one immediate thing Congress should do to help
people put -- back to work is to pass legislation so that construction projects
can get insurance against terrorism. This will spur construction and create
thousands of good hard-hat jobs that are currently on hold because projects
without insurance cannot be built. Although it's
late in the process, Congress must show fiscal discipline. At a time when we're
at war and a time we need to strengthen our economy, Congress must be wise with
the people's money, fund the nation's priorities and control wasteful spending.
The workers of America deserve our action on these important issues, which have
been stalled, yet, when approved will strengthen our economy. Many of the
fundamental economic indicators are good. Interest rates are low, so Americans
can buy more homes. Inflation is low, so paychecks go further in buying
groceries and gas. The productivity of our workers is high. The economy has
come out of a recession and is growing, but I'm not satisfied because I know we
can do better. We must have an economy to grow at a faster and stronger pace so
Americans can find a job. And so I'll work with new Congress to pass new growth
and jobs packages early next year. I look forward
to welcoming a new Congress. And I look forward to working with the current
Congress to finish some very important work. And now it's my privilege to take
some of your questions, starting with Sandra. Q Thank you,
Mr. President. Do you believe that Tuesday's election gave you personally a
mandate? And now that you have the Republican Congress, what will you do
specifically, beyond terrorism insurance and government spending restraints, to
address the real anxieties -- of everyday Americans -- THE PRESIDENT:
Yes. First, I think candidates win elections because they're good candidates,
not because they may happen to have the President as a friend -- or a foe, for
that matter. Races that were won were won because people were able to convince
the voters they could trust their judgment, convince the voters they care
deeply about their circumstances. I believe if there is a mandate in any
election, at least in this one, it's that people want something to get done.
They want people to work together in Washington, D.C. to pass meaningful
legislation which will improve their lives. The best way
to win an election is to -- is to earn the trust of the voters, and that's what
happened in state after state after state. We had some really good candidates
who overcame some pretty tough odds. They were running against incumbents, in a
lot of cases, and they ran great races. And they were reassuring people. And I
really attribute the successes to the nature of their candidacies, and the
hardworking people that turned out the vote. There were some really effective
voter turnout organizations around the country. And I think
the way to look at this election is to say the people want something done. They
see the risks are high, the risk of being able to find a job or the risk of
keeping the homeland secure. And they want people to come together to work on
it, and that's what I intend to do. Helen. Q The
specifics of your -- THE PRESIDENT:
Oh, sorry, yes. Well, I'll let you know at the right time. For right now, we
got to get through a lame duck session. A lame duck session, for people who
don't know what that means, it means the Senate is coming and the House is
coming back between now and Christmas and they've got a few days to get some
big things done. And the most important thing to get done, I want to emphasize,
is get a department of homeland security finished. Some rumors
moving around that we may not be too keen on getting that done. I want it done.
It is a priority. We got a good bill out of the House, and they need to get a
bill out of the Senate and to conference, and to my desk. I don't know how much
time that's going to take, but having watched the debate prior to the election,
it may take some time. But it doesn't matter how long it takes, they need to
get it done. Secondly, they
need to get a budget done. We need to get the bills, the appropriation bills
done. And I mentioned, they've got to get the terrorism insurance bill done. Now, given the
amount of time they're likely to be here, that's a pretty big agenda. And in
terms of afterwards, I'll let you know. But there are some issues, of course,
that I intend to work with the Congress on, and one of them is to get
prescription drug benefits to our seniors. That's an important issue. It's an
issue that I talked about at every speech. The candidates, I'm sure both
political parties, talked about it. And that's something that we need to get
done. But let's get
this -- get out of this lame duck session first. Steve. Q Mr.
President, how confident are you that the Security Council will approve the
tough new resolution on Iraq? And if that happens, what happens next; what's
the next step? Is war inevitable? THE
PRESIDENT: Well, first of
all, the resolution we put down is a tough new resolution. It talks about
material breach and inspections and serious consequences if Saddam Hussein
continues to defy the world and not disarm. So, one, I'm pleased with the
resolution we put down. Otherwise, we wouldn't have put it down. I just talked
to Jacques Chirac, and earlier today I talked to Vladimir Putin. I characterize
our conversation -- I'm loathe to put words in somebody else's mouth. That's,
evidently, not the case with a lot of people in Washington, but nevertheless, I
am. And I'm optimistic we'll get the resolution vote tomorrow -- let me put it
to you that way. And, Steve,
the resolution is a disarmament resolution; that's what it is. It's a statement
of intent to, once and for all, disarm Saddam Hussein. He's a threat. He's a
threat to the country, he's a threat to people in his neighborhood. He's a real
threat. And it's now time for the world to come together and disarm him. And
when this resolution passes, I will -- we'll be able to say that the United
Nations has recognized the threat, and now we're going to work together to
disarm him. And he must be
cooperative in the disarmament. So the job of inspectors is to determine his
level of cooperation, see. He has got to be the agent of disarming; he's got to
agree that what we're doing is what he said he we do. And just like the United
Nations has agreed that it is important to disarm him, for the sake of peace, and so the next step will be to put
an inspection regime in there to -- after all the declarations and after all
the preamble to inspections, that he's got to show the world he's disarming.
And that's where we'll be next. Let's see
here. Helen. Q I have a
follow-up -- THE PRESIDENT:
Yes, I have a list. (Laughter.) I don't want to be so discriminatory that
people will say that I haven't thought this through. After all, the new
arrangement -- and by the way, we're here in honor of Ari Fleischer; otherwise
we'd be in his house. But since he's getting married this weekend, I thought it
appropriate to leave the podium that he occupies empty, in honor of the fact
that he's getting married. I hope you all have sent your gifts to him.
(Laughter.) Ari, I did
what you asked me to do. (Laughter. I'm sure he's on C-SPAN right now. Helen. Q Mr.
President, what is the logic of your insistence on invading Iraq at some point,
which may someday have nuclear weapons, and not laying a glove on North Korea,
which may have them or may produce them? Both of which, of course, would be
against international law. And I have a follow-up. (Laughter.) THE PRESIDENT:
Well, I may decide to let you have that follow-up or not depending upon --
(laughter) -- depending on whether I like my answer. (Laughter.) I am insistent
upon one thing about Iraq, and that is that Saddam Hussein disarm. That's what
I'm insistent on. He agreed to do that, by the way. Saddam Hussein said he
would disarm. And he hasn't. And for the -- Q And you
don't -- THE PRESIDENT:
Is that the follow-up? (Laughter.) Okay, that is the follow-up. I do care about
North Korea. And as I said from the beginning of this new war in the 21st
century, we'll deal with each threat differently. Each threat requires a
different type of response. You've heard my strategy on dealing with Iraq. I've
been very clear on dealing with the strategy all along, and tomorrow it looks
like part of that strategy is coming to fruition. With North
Korea, we're taking a different strategy, initially, and it's this -- that
we're going to work with countries in the neighborhood to convince North Korea
that it is not in the world's interest that they develop a nuclear weapon
through highly enriched uranium. We know
they've got the capacity through plutonium; we have IAEA inspectors there
watching carefully their plutonium stockpile. And then we discovered that,
contrary to an agreement they had with the United States, they're enriching
uranium, with the desire of developing a weapon. They admitted to this. And so,
therefore, we have worked with our Japanese friends and South Korean friends,
with the leadership in China -- I will talk with Vladimir Putin about this
after my trip to the NATO summit -- to remind North Korea that if they expect
to be a -- welcomed into this family of peaceful nations, that they should not enrich
uranium. I thought it
was a very interesting statement that Jiang Zemin made in Crawford, where he
declared very clearly that he wants a nuclear weapons-free Korean Peninsula.
That was, in my judgment, an important clarification of Chinese policy that I
hope the North Koreans listen to. Believe we can achieve this objective, Helen,
by working closely with this consortium of nations, which have got a valid
interest in seeing to it that North Korea does not have nuclear weapons. Terry. Q Mr.
President, can I have a follow-up -- THE PRESIDENT:
Of course, you can. Yes, it's fine. (Laughter.) If the elections had gone a
different way, I might not be so generous. (Laughter.) Q You are
leaving the impression that Iraqi lives, the human cost doesn't mean anything
-- THE PRESIDENT:
Say that again? Q You are
leaving the impression that you wouldn't mind if you go to war against Iraq,
but you deal with another nation which may have weapons in a different way. But
there are two other impressions around. One, that you have an obsession with
going after Saddam Hussein at any cost. And also that you covet the oil fields. THE PRESIDENT:
Yes. Well, I'm -- some people have the right impressions and some people have
the wrong impressions. Q Can you -- THE PRESIDENT:
Well, those are the wrong impressions. Q Okay. THE PRESIDENT:
I have a deep desire for peace. That's what I have a desire for. And freedom
for the Iraqi people. See, I don't like a system where people are repressed
through torture and murder in order to keep a dictator in place. It troubles me
deeply. And so the Iraqi people must hear this loud and clear, that this
country never has any intention to conquer anybody. That's not the intention of
the American people or our government. We believe in freedom and we believe in
peace. And we believe the Iraqi dictator is a threat to peace. And so that's
why I made the decisions I made, in terms of Iraq. Now, Terry
Moran. Q Thank you,
sir. On Iraq, you've said many times that if Saddam Hussein does not disarm, he
will be disarmed militarily, if necessary, by the U.N. or the U.S. and others.
There's a school of thought that says that going to war against Iraq would be a
dangerous and misguided idea because it would generate a tremendous amount of
anger and hatred at the United States, and out of that you'd essentially be
creating many new terrorists who would want to kill Americans. What's wrong
with that analysis? THE PRESIDENT:
Well, that's like saying we should not go after al Qaeda because we might
irritate somebody and that would create a danger to Americans. My attitude is
you got to deal with terrorism in a firm way. And if they see threats you deal
with them in all different kinds of ways. The only way, in my judgment, to deal
with Saddam Hussein is to bring the international community together to
convince him to disarm. But if he's
not going to disarm, we'll disarm him, in order to make the world a more
peaceful place. And some people aren't going to like that -- I understand. But
some people won't like it if he ends with a nuclear weapon and uses it. We have
an obligation to lead. And I intend to assume that obligation to make the world
more peaceful. Terry, listen,
there's risk in all action we take. But the risk of inaction is not a choice,
as far as I'm concerned. The inaction creates more risk than doing our duty to
make the world more peaceful. And obviously, I weighed all the consequences
about all the differences. Hopefully, we can do this peacefully -- don't get me
wrong. And if the world were to collectively come together to do so, and to put
pressure on Saddam Hussein and convince him to disarm, there's a chance he may
decide to do that. And war is not
my first choice, don't -- it's my last choice. But nevertheless, it is a -- it
is an option in order to make the world a more peaceful place. Let's see
here. King. John King, that is. Q Sir, in
referring to the elections, you're being quite humble about the results and
your role. But many conservative lawmakers and many more conservative groups
are saying, seize the moment. They say early in the new Congress, you should
push your plan to partially privatize Social Security; you should push for new
restrictions on abortion; you should push and re-nominate the judges that were
rejected by the Senate; and that you should push a total overhaul of the tax
code. What are your views on that? THE PRESIDENT:
Well, I appreciate all the advice I'm getting. (Laughter.) One of the things
about this job, if you listen carefully, you get a lot of advice. And I -- it's
important for a President to set priorities, and the two biggest priorities are
the protection of the American people -- that's why I wanted to get this
homeland security department done -- and the other one is people being able to
find jobs. And we'll work on those. And tax relief or tax reform, however you
want to describe it, is part of, in my judgment, of creating economic vitality. But there are
other things we can work on. Obviously, I'd like to see some of my judges get a
good -- a fair hearing and get approved; and Medicare, prescription drugs is a
very important issue, needs to get done. Terrorism insurance is an important
issue; energy bill is an important issue. I mean, there's a lot of things we
can do and should do when they come back. And I can't remember the litany of
things -- listen, there's going to be a huge laundry list of things people want
to get done, and my job is to set priorities and get them done. And job
creation and economic security -- job creation and economic security, as well
as homeland security, are the two most important priorities we face. Q Social
Security and any new restrictions -- THE PRESIDENT:
No, I think the Social Security debate is an incredibly important debate. And
we call them personal savings accounts, John, so that people have the option,
at their choice, to manage their own money. That would be younger workers.
Obviously, we've got to assure older workers that the promises we have made
will be kept. And the
danger, really, is for young workers. That's the threat, as to whether Social
Security will be around for young workers without some massive tax increase.
And I still strongly believe that the best way to achieve security in Social
Security for younger workers is to give them the option of managing their own
money through a personal savings account. Yes, it's an important issue, as
well. Listen,
there's a lot of important issues. The budget is an important issue. The budget
is an important issue coming out of the lame duck session. And the budget, as
you know -- you're an old hand around here -- is always an important issue in
the next session. So that's always an issue, too. There are some practical
matters, as well, that will occupy time here in Washington, D.C. Roberts. John
Roberts, that is. Q I'm
wondering, sir, is Harvey Pitt, the Chairman of the SEC, just the first member
of your economic team to go? And a separate question: Will you ask William
Webster to resign? THE PRESIDENT:
Well, let me start with Pitt. Harvey Pitt did some very good things at the SEC,
and it's important for the American people to know that. Right after 9/11, he
did a lot to get the markets opened. He really was -- played a major role in
that, and received good credit for that. And I want to thank Harvey Pitt for that,
and the American people should, as well. He has done a
lot to make it clear to corporate Americans that think they can -- don't have
to be responsible in their positions -- a lot of enforcement, more so than ever
in the history; he's enforced the corporate responsibility ethos. He has
disbarred more people, more money has been disgorged as a result of illegal
activity. And that's positive, what Harvey has done, as well. And under his
watch, CEOs now must verify their returns, and that's good. All that's
positive. He made the decision himself that he thought that he couldn't be as
effective as he needed to be. I received his letter. I appreciate his service. William
Webster, the -- there's a IG investigation going on there at the SEC; we'll see
what that says. But I will tell you, William Webster is a fine man. He is a
decent, honorable public servant who has served our country well. Q -- with
respect to -- THE PRESIDENT:
Is this a three-part question? Q No. I'm just
kind of reiterating the first. He is just the first member of your economic
team to go? The implication is -- do you have -- THE PRESIDENT:
Listen, my economic team came in during very difficult times. There was a
recession; there was a terrorist attack; there were corporate scandals. We have
done a lot to return confidence and to provide a -- provide stimulus through
tax cuts. My economic team developed a tax cut package, sold the tax cut
package, is implementing the tax cut package. And for that, they deserve a lot
of credit. They made good -- we're making good progress on the economy. There's
still work to do. And I appreciate the hard work of the economic team. Campbell. Q Thank you,
Mr. President. You were very gracious earlier, giving credit in this last
election to the individual candidates. But a lot of those candidates say they
have you to thank. Given the fact that your own election for President was so
close it had to be decided by the Supreme Court, do you now feel personally
reassured that these midterm elections validated your presidency? THE PRESIDENT:
Thank you for that loaded question. (Laughter.) Look, sometimes you win them,
and sometimes you lose elections. That's just the way it is. And I was pleased
with the results. I was more particularly pleased for the candidates who worked
so hard, and their families and their workers. That's how I feel about it. I
really don't put this in personal terms. I know people
in Washington like to do that. You know, George Bush won, George Bush lost.
That's the way they do it here. Zero sum, in Washington. And I know that. But
if you're really interested in what I think, I think the fact that Norm Coleman
ran a very difficult race in difficult circumstances and won speaks volumes
about Norm Coleman. The fact that John Thune ran a difficult race against
difficult circumstances and at this point is still short, nevertheless, speaks
volumes about his desire and his intention to serve the country. There's case
after case of people who have put their reputations on the line, who spent a
lot of time away from their homes and their families, shaking a lot of hands
and putting their hearts and souls -- in both parties. They deserve the credit.
Thank you for trying to give it to me, but they deserve the credit. I know what
it's like to run for office. I know the strains it puts on families. I know the
tired -- the endless hours you spend campaigning, and all the wonderful
questions you have to answer as part of a campaign. I know all that. And these
candidates deserve all the credit. And I was proud
to help some of them the best I could. But the way you win a race is you
convince the people of your state or your district that they can trust your
judgment and they can trust your character and they can trust your values. And
it takes a lot of work to do that, and these candidates get the credit. And I
-- I appreciate you pointing out that some people have given me credit. The
credit belongs to people in the field. Yes, sir,
Wendell. Q Mr.
President, thank you very much. You have put a lot of effort toward getting the
United Nations to rally the world to disarm Saddam Hussein. And yet you and
your aides have expressed a great deal of skepticism about whether Saddam
Hussein will actually comply. Can you give us an idea, sir, how long you think
it might take for the world to know whether Saddam Hussein actually intends to
go along with the call of the world to disarm? Will it be a matter of days or
weeks, months, or perhaps a year, sir? THE PRESIDENT:
Well, Wendell, this much we know -- it's so far taken him 11 years and 16
resolutions to do nothing. And so we've got some kind of history as to the
man's behavior. We know he likes to try to deceive and deny, and that's why
this inspection regime has got to be new and tough and different. The status
quo is unacceptable, you know, kind of send a few people in there and hope
maybe he's nice to them and open up the baby milk factory -- it's unacceptable. And so that's
why you'll see us with a different inspection regime, one that works to see to
it that Saddam Hussein disarms. It's his responsibility to disarm. I don't put
timetables on anything. But for the sake of peace -- sooner, better. And we'll see.
But you must know that I am serious -- so are a lot of other countries --
serious about holding the man to account. I was serious about holding the U.N.
to account. And when they pass this resolution, which I hope they do tomorrow,
it shows that the U.N. is beginning to assume its responsibilities to make sure
that 11 years of defiance does not go unanswered. It's very important that the
U.N. be a successful international body because the threats that we face now
require more cooperation than ever. And we're still cooperating with a lot of
nations. We're still sharing intelligence and cutting off money the best we
can. And there's still law enforcement efforts taking place all around the
world. And that's why
the international -- this international body called the U.N. is an important
body for keeping the peace. And it's very important that they're effective. And
we'll see tomorrow -- starting tomorrow. And then the
key on the resolution, I want to remind you, is that there are serious
consequences. And that's one of the key elements to make sure that everybody
gets the picture that we are serious about a process of disarming him in the
name of peace. Hopefully, he'll choose to do so himself. Sammons, Super
Stretch. Q Thank you,
Mr. President. (Laughter.) THE PRESIDENT:
You and I are eye-to-eye, right? (Laughter.) Q Now that the
2004 presidential campaign has unofficially begun, can you tell us whether Vice
President Cheney will be your running mate again? Or will you, instead, choose
someone who might harbor greater presidential ambitions to, perhaps, succeed
you one day? THE PRESIDENT:
Well, first of all, I'm still recovering from the '02 elections. And we got
plenty of time to deal with this issue. But should I decide to run, Vice
President Cheney will be my running mate. He's done an excellent job. I
appreciate his advice. I appreciate his counsel. I appreciate his friendship.
He is a superb Vice President, and there's no reason for me to change. I also want to
thank him for all his hard work during the campaign. He was out there toiling
along, working hard and turning out the vote, and I want to thank him for the
hours he put out there, as well. Please, yes. Q If I may
follow? Last time you had -- THE PRESIDENT:
Thank you for not standing up, you block the cameras. (Laughter.) Q Last time
you had to kind of convince him to take the job. Have you talked to him this
time, whether he is interested in serving another term? THE
PRESIDENT: I'm confident
that he will serve another term. Judy. Q Thank you,
Mr. President. You said this afternoon that the U.N. Security Council vote
tomorrow would bring the civilized world together against Iraq. But broad
opposition remains all over the world to your policy. Will you continue to try
to build support and, if so, how will you do that? Or do you think that a
Security Council vote would be all the mandate you need? THE
PRESIDENT: First of all, broad opposition around the world not in support of my
policy on Iraq? Q Yes, sir. THE
PRESIDENT: Well, I think most people around the world realize that Saddam
Hussein is a threat. And they -- no one likes war, but they also don't like the
idea of Saddam Hussein having a nuclear weapon. Imagine what would happen. And
by the way, we don't know how close he is to a nuclear weapon right now. We
know he wants one. But we don't know. We know he was close to one at one point in time; we have no idea
today. Imagine Saddam Hussein with a nuclear weapon. Imagine how the Israeli
citizens would feel. Imagine how the citizens in Saudi Arabia would feel.
Imagine how the world would change, how he could alter diplomacy by the very
presence of a nuclear weapon. And so a lot
of people -- serious people around the world are beginning to think about that
consideration. I think about it a lot. I think about it particularly in the
regard of making the world a more peaceful place. And so it's
very important for people to realize the consequences of us not taking the case
to the U.N. Security Council. People need to think about what would happen if
the United States had remained silent on this issue and just hoped for a change
of his attitude, or maybe hoped that he would not invade somebody again, or
just hoped that he wouldn't use gas on his own people when pressure at home
began to mount. I'm not
willing to take those kind of risks. People understand that. I think a lot of
people are saying, you know, gosh, we hope we don't have war. I feel the same
way, I hope we don't have war. I hope this can be done peacefully. It's up to
Saddam Hussein, however, to make that choice. I also want to
remind you that, should we have to use troops, should it become a necessity in
order to disarm him, the United States, with friends, will move swiftly with
force to do the job. You don't have to worry about that. We will do -- we will
do -- we will do what it takes militarily to succeed. I also want to
say something else to people of Iraq, that the generals in Iraq must understand
clearly there will be consequences for their behavior. Should they choose, if
force is necessary, to behave in a way that endangers the lives of their own
citizens, as well as citizens in the neighborhood, there will be a consequence.
They will be held to account. And as to the
Iraq people, what I said before -- the Iraqi people can have a better life than
the one they have now. They can have a -- there are other alternatives to somebody
who is willing to rape and mutilate and
murder in order to stay in power. There's just a better life than the one they
have to live now. I think the
people of the world understand that too, Judy. I don't take -- I don't take --
I don't spend a lot of time taking polls around the world to tell me what I
think is the right way to act; I've just got to know how I feel. I feel
strongly about freedom. I feel strongly about liberty. And I feel strongly
about the obligation to make the world a more peaceful place. And I take those
responsibilities really seriously. Elizabeth. Q Thank you,
sir. You just said you've reached out to Democrats. Does this mean that you
will be governing more from the center and taking fewer cues from the
conservative arm of your party? THE PRESIDENT:
I don't take cues from anybody, I just do what I think is right. That's just
the way I lead. And what's right is to work to stimulate the economy. I
strongly believe the tax relief was the right thing to do. If people are really
interested in job creation, they ought to join me in my call to make the tax
cuts permanent. It's an important part of sending a signal that there is
certainty in the tax code; that all the benefits from tax relief don't go away
after 10 years. As I like to say
-- you might have heard me once or 10 times or a hundred times -- the Senate
giveth and the Senate taketh away. That means there's uncertainty when that
happens. And you've got to have certainty in a system that requires risk. And
making the tax cuts permanent is an essential part. I mean -- and so that is a
common-sense drive, to create jobs. I will just
tell people what I think about how to solve the problems we face. And I ran on
a political philosophy; I'm not changing my political philosophy. I am who I am
prior -- the say guy after the election that I was prior to the election.
That's just who I am and how I intend to lead this country. Jean Cummings.
I'm having such a good time. (Laughter.) Jean Cummings -- there she is, yes. Q Thank you,
Mr. President. Getting back to the question of Harvey Pitt. THE PRESIDENT:
Pitt, yes. Q What kind of
person are you looking for to fill that position now? And how quickly do you
want to move on that? And then also, as much as you said that Mr. Webster is a
well-respected and quality person, do you think that the chairman -- whoever
that new chairman is -- should have a chance to select their own person and
have a fresh start? THE PRESIDENT:
Well, I think -- that's kind of the double-whammy hypothetical there, Jean. I
think that the -- on Webster, first, let's find out what the facts are so that
everybody knows. That's why they're doing this investigation. And it's -- one
fact is irrefutable, he's a decent man. He's served the country well. And I
know he can do that job. Secondly, as
soon as possible, for the SEC nominee, and somebody who is going to continue to
fulfill the obligation that -- of holding people to account. In other words,
holding wrongdoers to account and making sure the numbers are fair and open and
transparent, and everybody understands the facts when it comes to -- to
accounting, so we continue to regain confidence in our system. That people,
when they invest based upon the numbers of a particular stock, are confident in
that which they read. And that's an essential part of the SEC job, and I'm
confident we can find somebody soon to be able to do that. Hutch. Q Thank you. I
wanted to go back to your earlier point about the risk of an action versus the
risk of inaction. THE PRESIDENT:
Where would that be, in the Congress or at the U.N.? Q With Iraq. THE PRESIDENT:
Oh, okay. Q Your CIA
Director told Congress just last month that it appears that Saddam Hussein
"now appears to be drawing a line short of conducting terrorist attacks
against the United States." But if we attacked him he would "probably
become much less constrained." Is he wrong about that? THE PRESIDENT:
No. I think that -- I think that if you would read the full -- I'm sure he said
other sentences. Let me just put it to you, I know George Tenet well. I meet
with him every single day. He sees Saddam Hussein as a threat. I don't know
what the context of that quote is. I'm telling you, the guy knows what I know,
that he is a problem and we must deal with him. And, you know,
it's like people say, oh, we must leave Saddam alone; otherwise, if we did
something against him, he might attack us. Well, if we don't do something, he
might attack us, and he might attack us with a more serious weapon. The man is
a threat, Hutch, I'm telling you. He's a threat not only with what he has, he's
a threat with what he's done. He's a threat because he is dealing with al
Qaeda. In my Cincinnati speech, I reminded the American people, a true threat
facing our country is that an al Qaeda-type network trained and armed by Saddam
could attack America and leave not one fingerprint. That is a threat. And we're
going to deal with it. The debate
about whether we're going to deal with Saddam Hussein is over. And now the
question is how do we deal with him. I made the decision to go to the United
Nations because I want to try to do this peacefully. I want Saddam to disarm.
The best way to convince him to disarm is to get the nations to come together
through the U.N. and try to convince him to disarm. We're going to
work on that. We've been spending a lot of time -- I wouldn't exactly call it
gnashing of teeth, but working hard on the U.N. resolution. It took a while,
but we've been grinding it out, trying to bring a consensus, trying to get
people together, so that we can say to the world the international community
has spoken through the Security Council of the United Nations and now, once
again, we expect Saddam to disarm. This would be
the 17th time that we expect Saddam to disarm. This time we mean it. See, that's
the difference -- I guess. This time it's for real. And I say it must not have
been for real the last 16 times because nothing happened when he didn't. This
time something happens. He knows -- he's got to understand that. The members of
the U.N. Security Council understand that. Saddam has got to understand it so
he, so, in the name of peace, for a peaceful resolution of this, we hope he
disarms. Jackson, from
Texas. You got anything -- a Texas question? Q As a matter
of fact, I do. (Laughter.) THE PRESIDENT:
Thank you. Q Do you
intend to resuscitate the nomination of Priscilla Owen and Charles Pickering?
And, also, how bloody do you think the next Supreme Court nomination will be? THE PRESIDENT:
Well, first, I want the new chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee to
understand that I am very serious about the reforms that I suggested in the
East Room, about how to get this process of nominating judges and approving
judges on the right course, not only for this administration, but future administrations;
not only for this Senate, but future Senates. And so step one on the judiciary
process, I believe there needs to be reform. I would be glad to reprise the
reforms if you can't remember them. Q Owen and
Pickering, are they going to -- THE PRESIDENT:
I'll be there in a minute. (Laughter.) I'm using this as an opportunity to make
a point on judicial reform. And that is that if a judge thinks he's going to
retire, give us a year's notice, if possible. And then we will act --
"we," the administrative branch, will nominate somebody and clear
them within 180 days. And then the Senate judiciary has got 90 days to go
through the process and then get the person's name to the floor, and 180 days
for an up or down vote. To me that would be a needed and necessary reform. So step one on
the nomination process is to work with Senator Hatch -- and Senator Leahy -- to
put these reforms in place; is to convince members of the Senate we're serious
about a process that will get rid of the old bitterness of the judicial
process. This is
probably not to your liking, by the way. You love those court fights. I'm
confident it makes great covering and great stories. I also said at
the time of Priscilla Owen's being -- not being put to the floor of the Senate
that I would hope that the judiciary committee would let her name out to the
Senate floor at some point in time. We don't have to recommit them, they never
-- they're there. Pickering and Owen are still there at the committee level.
They just weren't ever -- their names were never let to the floor for a vote. By the way, if
they had been let to the floor for a vote, we believe they would have won the
vote -- perhaps the reason why they were never let to the floor for a vote. But
-- so, I hope that judiciary committee will let their names out and they get a
fair hearing. I thought you
were going to talk about the Texas elections. But that's okay. (Laughter.) April, last
question. Q Thank you,
Mr. President. Thank you. THE PRESIDENT:
How's your child, April? Q She's wonderful. THE PRESIDENT:
Georgia W? (Laughter.) Q My husband
is watching, and the name is Ryan Tyler James. (Laughter.). THE PRESIDENT:
You might as well turn to the camera when you say that. (Laughter.) Q Well, Mr.
President, some critics contend there is a racial disparity in how immigrants
are handled here, and speaking of the Haitians versus immigrants, the other
immigrants. Do you support the current law on the books about Haiti, and why,
either way? THE PRESIDENT:
April, first of all, the immigration laws ought to be the same for Haitians and
everybody else -- except for Cubans. And the difference, of course, is that we
don't send people back to Cuba because they're going to be persecuted. And
that's why we've got the special law on the books as regards to Cubans. But
Haitians and everybody else ought to be treated the same way. And we're in the
process of making sure that happens. It's been an
enjoyable experience. |