Text 3367, 286 rader
Skriven 2006-10-06 23:31:12 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (061006a) for Fri, 2006 Oct 6
===================================================

===========================================================================
Vice President's Remarks at a Luncheon for Vern Buchanan for Congress
===========================================================================

For Immediate Release
Office of the Vice President
October 6, 2006

Vice President's Remarks at a Luncheon for Vern Buchanan for Congress
Hyatt Sarasota
Sarasota, Florida



12:26 P.M. EDT

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. (Applause.) Thank you very much.
(Applause.) A welcome like that is almost enough to make me want to run for
office again. (Laughter.) Almost, almost. (Laughter and applause.)

But I'm delighted to be here this morning. And, Vern, I thank you for the
introduction. And I want to thank all of you for that welcome. I just came
in from Washington this morning, and I'm honored to bring personal
greetings to all of you from the President, George W. Bush. (Applause.)

The President and I spend a good deal of time on the campaign trail these
days -- doing all we can to help Republicans across the country, and to
make certain that the voters have a clear sense of what is at stake in this
election year. Your congresswoman, Katherine Harris, has a long record of
public service, and is our party's nominee for the U.S. Senate. And she has
our support. (Applause.) And so does Attorney General Charlie Crist, the
next Governor of Florida. (Applause.)

It's always a pleasure to be in your state, especially when I can stand
next to a superb candidate like Vern Buchanan. (Applause.) Vern is running
a great campaign, and President Bush and I are proud to sign on to his
team. He's an entrepreneur, a community leader, a former member of the Air
National Guard, and a man of conviction and accomplishment. He believes
deeply in the principles of limited government, wise stewardship of the
taxpayer's dollar, and a strong national defense. He's a friend to the
small businessman and woman, the senior, the veteran, and every person who
strives to build a better life and to live the American Dream. Vern
Buchanan will take those commitments with him to Washington. He'll never
forget where he comes from, and he'll remember who sent him there. And in
this challenging time for America, he'll be a congressman who stands one
hundred percent behind the men and women of the United States military.
(Applause.)

The 13th District of Florida deserves a congressman who speaks with the
common sense and solid values of the district, and there's no doubt that
Vern Buchanan is the man for the job. He'll be a fine member of the House
and the President and I look forward to seeing him sworn in as the new
member of Congress come January.

Now, I have an interest in the House of Representatives since, as Vern
mentioned, I was Wyoming's congressman for 10 years. Wyoming only has one
congressman. (Laughter.) It's a small delegation. But it was quality.
(Laughter.) But over the years I came to appreciate the characters and
qualities that make a really good member of Congress because I had to go
out and round up allies. It wasn't like being from Florida or Texas or New
York or California where you had sort of a built-in block of allies you
could count on, on local issues. I had to go out and find members of
Congress that I could work with. And you looked for people that had firm
convictions and a breadth of experience and knew what they believed and
were willing to stand up and be counted for it. And I think Vern is exactly
that kind of member. He'll be a superb member of Congress.

These are times of incredible consequence for our country -- with difficult
issues, with big debates, and with decisions that require not just
toughness but wisdom. One of the most important issues on November 7th is
taxes -- and when Americans go to the polls, they're going to have the
clearest possible choice. This administration and the Republican Congress
are pro-growth and pro-jobs. And we believe the first principle of economic
growth is for government to leave money in the hands of those who earned
it. (Applause.) The President signed major tax relief in 2001, 2002, 2003,
2004 and 2006. We reduced taxes for every American who pays income taxes.
We doubled the child tax credit, reduced the marriage penalty, and created
new incentives for small businesses to invest. The Bush tax relief has left
more than a trillion dollars in the hands of workers, investors, small
businesses, and families. And they have used those resources to fuel more
than four years of uninterrupted economic growth.

Another key decision we made was to reduce taxes on dividends and capital
gains. These cuts were designed to lower the cost of capital, and to
encourage businesses to expand and create more jobs and to hire new
workers. They were passed in 2003. I should point out that when the matter
came up in the Senate, the vote was 50 senators in favor, 50 senators
opposed. Fortunately, the Constitution provides a remedy in such cases. And
I was there to break the tie. (Applause.) The thing I've noticed is that
every time I get to vote, our side wins. (Laughter.)

The tax reductions are doing exactly -- exactly -- what we expected. Since
August of '03, the United States has added more than 6.6 million new jobs
-- more than Japan and the 25 nations of Europe combined. The economy
continues to grow; last year alone it grew faster than Japan, twice as fast
as France, more than three times as fast as Germany. President Bush's tax
relief plan was right for America -- and it is working.

Our party has a clear record on taxes, and so do our opponents. When we
first cut taxes in 2001, most Senate Democrats and nearly 85 percent of
House Democrats voted against it. When we cut taxes in 2003, most Senate
Democrats and nearly 95 percent of House Democrats voted against it. And
when we extended key tax cuts earlier this year, most Senate Democrats and
more than 90 percent of House Democrats voted against it.

I notice that now, with less than five weeks to go before Election Day, the
leader of the House Democrats, Nancy Pelosi, claims Democrats love tax
cuts. That only invites another look at her party's record on taxes. It's
plain to see, and it stretches back a long way. The last time they had
control of Congress, back in 1993, they passed a massive tax increase.
They'll do it again if they can; they've already figured out a way to do
it. Under current law, many of the Bush tax cuts have to be renewed by
Congress or they will expire, and the old rates will kick back in. Recently
the ranking Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, Charlie Rangel,
said that he "cannot think of one" of our first term tax cuts that he would
extend. If the Democrats take control of the House, Charlie Rangel will be
chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. He would be in a position to
block any legislation coming out of the committee. And if there's no tax
legislation extending the cuts, rates will go back to their old levels.

That should raise the stakes of this election in the minds of every voter.
If the Democrats take control and let the tax cuts expire, American
families would face an immense tax increase, and the economy would sustain
a major hit. As the President has said, this nation needs more than a
temporary expansion, so we need more than temporary tax relief. For the
sake of America's entrepreneurs, families, and communities, we need to make
the Bush tax cuts permanent -- and we'll do that with a new Republican
Congress. (Applause.)

When the new Congress convenes in January, we're going to continue working
on an agenda for growth and jobs, a safe environment, and better access to
health care. We believe our job is to solve big problems, not simply pass
them on to the next generation. That's how we'll continue to do business.
And when vacancies arise on the federal courts, the President will keep
appointing outstanding justices like Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice
Samuel Alito.

Above all, ladies and gentlemen, we're going to stay focused on our number
one obligation: to protect and defend the people of the United States in
this time of war.

After the cutbacks -- excuse me, after the attacks of 9/11, President Bush
told the Congress and the country that we were in for a long struggle
against enemies who regard the entire world as a battlefield. He said the
fight would be a serious test of our patience and our resolve as a nation.
And he was exactly right.

This is a hard fight, against enemies who wear no uniform, who organize in
secret and who target the innocent. The terrorists want to seize control of
a country in the Middle East, so they have a base for launching attacks
against anyone who doesn't meet their demands. They have declared an
intention to arm themselves with weapons of mass destruction, to destroy
Israel, to intimidate all Western countries, and to cause mass death in the
United States.

To remove this danger to civilization we have to proceed on many fronts at
the same time -- from law enforcement, to diplomacy, to military action, to
a global effort against weapons proliferation. And for the long term, we're
promoting democracy and hope as the alternatives to ideologies of
resentment and violence. We're committed to making a better day possible in
the Middle East, so that our children and grandchildren won't have to live
in a world with terror states that arm themselves with ever more deadly
weapons. The United States of America is a good country, a decent,
idealistic, and a compassionate country. We're doing honorable work in a
messy and a dangerous world. We are defended by heroes. And whether they
serve in Iraq, Afghanistan, or elsewhere in the world, the brave Americans
on duty in this war can be proud of their service for the rest of their
lives. (Applause.)

The plot that was uncovered this summer in London is a stark reminder that
the terrorists are still trying desperately to commit acts of violence
against innocent Americans. As long as that remains the case, we are a
nation at war. And wars are not won on the defensive. Our country has gone
more than five years now without another 9/11. This is no accident. Nobody
can guarantee that we won't be hit again, but America is safer today
because we've conducted this war on the offensive, and because we've used
every legitimate tool at our command to protect the American people.

In this election season, national security is at the top of the agenda,
where it belongs. The President and I welcome the discussion, because every
voter in the United States needs to know where we stand, as well as how the
leaders of the Democratic Party view the global war on terror. The
differences could hardly be more clear, and they have implications for the
future security of the nation. Let me give you three examples.

After 9/11, Congress passed the Patriot Act. This measure has helped law
enforcement. We've been able to break up terror cells and prosecuted
terrorist operatives and supporters in Texas, California, New Jersey,
Illinois, Virginia, New York, Oregon, and Florida. The Patriot Act was
passed overwhelmingly in October of 2001, because in those early days the
danger to America was still in plain view for everyone. But when it came up
for renewal last year, Senate Democrats tried to block it by filibuster.
Their floor leader, Harry Reid, boasted publicly that he had "killed" the
Patriot Act -- those were his words. Fortunately he was wrong. Fortunately
for the country he lost that battle -- but he might have won it if we did
not have a Republican majority in the United States Senate.

A second example is the Terrorist Surveillance Program -- in which the
President directed the National Security Agency to monitor international
communications, one end of which we have reason to believe is related to al
Qaeda, or to terrorist networks. The purpose is obvious: If people inside
the United States are communicating with al Qaeda, they are talking to the
enemy, and we need to know about it. Yet many leading Democrats have
denounced the President for this program. And last week, when a bill to
authorize the program came to the House floor, 177 Democrats -- 88 percent
of all the Democratic members in the House of Representatives -- voted no.

A third example is the CIA program to detain and question terrorist
operatives and leaders that we've captured, as well as to create military
commissions to try captured terrorists like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the
mastermind of 9/11. The best source of information and intelligence in the
war on terror is the terrorists themselves -- and we've obtained from
captured terrorists information that has helped us stop a number of attacks
planned to take place inside this country. Last week Congress voted on the
future of this program. In the House, 162 Democrats -- about 80 percent of
them, voted no. In the Senate, 32 out of the 44 Democrats voted no. It
appears their preference is no detention program and no military
commissions.

As the President said recently, the Democrats appear to be trying to have
it both ways. They complain that we've been holding terrorists without
bringing them to trial, and then they vote against military commissions
that were set up to bring them to trial.

Ladies and gentlemen, the key question before the voters on November 7th is
whether or not this nation is serious about fighting the war on terror. And
there can be no doubt that George W. Bush is serious about fighting it and
winning it. (Applause.)

Time and time again, we're seeing examples of Democratic Party leaders
apparently having lost their perspective concerning the nature of the enemy
we face, and the need to wage this fight aggressively. No sharper example
can be found than the Democratic Party chairman himself, Howard Dean, who
said the capture of Saddam Hussein didn't make America any safer.

Perhaps it should come as no surprise that such a party would turn its back
on a man like Senator Joe Lieberman. Senator Lieberman was my opponent in
2000 -- Al Gore's running mate, a longtime senator, and one of the most
loyal and distinguished Democrats of his generation. Joe is also an
unapologetic supporter of the fight against terror. He voted to support
military action in Iraq when most other senators in both parties did the
same -- and he's had the courage to stick by that vote even when things get
tough. And now, for that reason alone, the Dean Democrats have purged Joe
Lieberman from the Democratic Party.

Their choice, instead, is a candidate whose explicit goal is to give up the
fight against the terrorists in Iraq -- never mind that Iraq is a fellow
democracy; never mind that the Iraqi people and their elected leaders are
counting on us. What these Democrats are pushing now is the very kind of
retreat that has been tried and has failed in the past. It would be
reckless and inconsistent with our values. It would betray our friends, and
only heighten the danger to the United States. And it would mean that all
the sacrifices of our military have been in vain. So the choice before the
American people is becoming more clear every day. For the sake of our
security, this nation must reject any strategy of resignation and defeatism
in the face of determined enemies.

The case of Joe Lieberman is a perfect illustration of a basic
philosophical differences between the two parties in the year 2006. And
it's a reminder that the elections on November 7th will have enormous
consequences for this nation, one way or the other. In all the decisions
that will come in the next two years, it's going to matter a great deal
which party has the majority on the floor and the gavel in committee. And I
don't need to tell you what kind of legislation would come to us by way of
committee chairmen like Joe Biden, Ted Kennedy, John Conyers, Henry Waxman,
Barney Frank, or Jay Rockefeller.

The stakes in this campaign are high, not just for the political parties
but for the country. And that's what brings us all together today. We're
here because of the principles we hold, the values we share, and the
direction we believe is best for this nation. We have a great President
living in the White House, and he deserves a Congress that works with him
not against him. That makes the choice in the 13th District of Florida very
clear indeed. Stand with Vern Buchanan, and ask your friends and neighbors
to do the same. He deserves your vote, and President Bush and I look
forward to welcoming this Florida conservative to Washington come January.

Thank you very much

END 12:45 P.M. EDT
===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061006-10.html

 * Origin: (1:3634/12)