Text 655, 884 rader
Skriven 2005-03-16 23:33:22 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (0503163) for Wed, 2005 Mar 16
====================================================
===========================================================================
President's Press Conference
===========================================================================

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
March 16, 2005

President's Press Conference
James S. Brady Briefing Room

President's Remarks
"); //--> view


10:15 A.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you for giving me a chance to come by and say hello.
I'm preparing for my trip out of town for Easter -- the Easter week, and I
thought I'd share some thoughts with you and answer some questions.

I am looking forward to continuing my dialogue with the people on Social
Security. It's important for the American people to understand that I
believe the Social Security system has worked well, that Franklin Roosevelt
did a positive thing when he created the Social Security system, but that I
am deeply concerned about the Social Security system for younger Americans.
And I believe we're making progress on convincing the American people of
two things: One, nothing will change for seniors, those who have retired or
near retirement; and secondly, that we must work together to make sure the
system works for a younger generation of Americans. That's progress.

As I said -- I think I told you all earlier that one of my missions in the
Social Security debate was to set that issue before the people so the
people fully understand why I was addressing it, in other words, why -- I
fully understand some in Washington are saying, why would the President
bring this up, it's a difficult issue, it may cause us to have to make a
tough vote. I'm making that case to the people, and will continue to do so
-- in Florida on Friday, and then we'll head out West from Crawford and
then back to Crawford for my meetings with Prime Minister Martin and
President Fox.

I urge the members to go out and, when they go home, to talk to their
constituents not only about the problem, but about solutions. I urge
members to start talking about how we're going to permanently fix Social
Security. Members, I hope, would not talk about a Band-Aid solution, but I
think it's important for them to talk about a permanent fix, something that
will last forever. I think the voters will appreciate people who come up
with constructive suggestions, not statements merely in opposition of some
ideas.

And so this is -- part of what I wanted to share with you is that I'm --
I'm actually enjoying myself on these trips. I hope you're enjoying
traveling with me. It's -- I like to get out of Washington, I like to
discuss big issues, I like to remind people that my job is to confront
problems, and I will continue to talk about Social Security for the next
period of time.

Iraq had a meeting today of its transitional national assembly. It's a
bright moment in what is a process toward the writing of a constitution,
the ratification of the constitution, and elections. And I want to
congratulate the Iraqis for their assembly. And it's -- we've always said
this is a process, and today was a step in that process. And it's a hopeful
moment, I thought.

I am looking forward to seeing you down there in Crawford, those of you
lucky enough to be able to travel with me. I wish you all a happy Easter.
And I'll be glad to answer some questions.

Q Mr. President, the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq once had 38 countries
contributing troops. And now that number has fallen to 24. And yesterday,
Italy said that it was going to start pulling out some forces in September.
How can you keep the coalition from crumbling? And is it time to think
about a timetable for pulling out some U.S. troops, given that the Iraqi
parliament was seated today, and you're making progress in training some
forces?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, actually I called Silvio Berlusconi on another matter,
which may or may not come up during this press conference. It's -- I'll
give you a hint. I called him about the World Bank, and -- (laughter) --
and discussed my nominee, and -- but he brought up the issue of Italian
troops in Iraq and said, first of all, he wanted me to know that there was
no change in his policy, that, in fact, any withdrawals would be done in
consultation with allies and would be done depending upon the ability of
Iraqis to defend themselves. And I said, are you sure I can say this to the
press corps that will be wanting to know what took place in our
conversation? He said, absolutely.

So I think what you're going to find is that countries will be willing --
anxious to get out when Iraqis have got the capacity to defend themselves.
And that's the position of the United States. Our troops will come home
when Iraq is capable of defending herself. And that's generally what I find
to be the case, Terry, when I've talked to other allies on this issue.

And we're making progress. I've talked to General Casey quite frequently.
And he keeps us abreast of the progress being made. One of the things --
one of the issues in terms of Iraqi troops being able to defend their
country is the ability to stand up chains of command. I think I've shared
this with you before, and it's still an issue that they're working on.
There's officer training schools, plus the ability for a command to go from
a civilian government to a military chain of command, down to the lower
ranks of troops. And there's positive signs that have taken place in the
development of the Iraqi security forces, and there's still work to be
done. Our allies understand that.

But I say "anxious to come home," every -- nobody -- people want their
troops home, but they don't want their troops home if it affects the
mission. We've gone -- we've made a lot of progress. It's amazing how much
progress has been made, thanks in large part to the courage of the Iraqi
people. And when I talk to people, most understand we need to complete the
mission. And completing the mission means making sure the Iraqis can defend
themselves.

Q So you don't think it's crumbling, the coalition?

THE PRESIDENT: No, quite -- quite to the contrary, I think the coalition is
-- has been buoyed by the courage of the Iraqi people. I think they've been
pleased and heartened by the fact that the Iraqis went to the polls and
voted and they're now putting together a government, and they see progress
is being made. And I share that sense of enthusiasm about what's taking
place in Iraq.

Yes, Steve.

Q Yes, sir. The Iranians have dismissed the European incentive as
insignificant. Should more incentives be offered? How long do they have
until you take their case to the Security Council?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I -- first of all, I want to thank our European
friends for taking the lead on this issue, telling the Iranians that they
should permanently abandon any enrichment or reprocessing to make sure that
Iran does not develop a nuclear weapon.

Let me review the bidding on this, if I might, just kind of the history,
right quick. Iran has concealed its -- a nuclear program. That became
discovered, not because of their compliance with the IAEA or NPT, but
because a dissident group pointed it out to the world, and -- which raised
suspicions about the intentions of the program. You can understand why.
It's a non-transparent regime, they're run by a handful of people. And so
suspicions were raised. And as a result of those suspicions, we came
together with friends and allies to seek a guarantee that they wouldn't use
any nuclear program to make weapons. A lot of people understand that if
they did have a weapon, it would create incredible instability; it wouldn't
be good for world peace.

And so the best way to do that -- and this is where we are in the talks --
was to say to the Iranians that they must permanently abandon enrichment
and reprocessing. And the EU 3 meant it. And now we're waiting for an
Iranian response.

Q So how long do you -- how long do you wait? When do you go to the
Security Council?

THE PRESIDENT: The understanding is we go to the Security Council if they
reject the offer. And I hope they don't. I hope they realize the world is
clear about making sure that they don't end up with a nuclear weapon.

David.

Q Mr. President, you say you're making progress in the Social Security
debate. Yet private accounts, as the centerpiece of that plan, something
you first campaigned on five years ago and laid before the American people,
remains, according to every measure we have, poll after poll, unpopular
with a majority of Americans. So the question is, do you feel that this is
a point in the debate where it's incumbent upon you, and nobody else, to
lay out a plan to the American people for how you actually keep Social
Security solvent for the long-term?

THE PRESIDENT: First of all, Dave, let me, if I might correct you, be so
bold as to correct you, I have not laid out a plan yet, intentionally. I
have laid out principles, I've talked about putting all options on the
table, because I fully understand the administration must work with the
Congress to permanently solve Social Security. So one aspect of the debate
is, will we be willing to work together to permanently solve the issue.

Personal accounts do not solve the issue. But personal accounts will make
sure that individual workers get a better deal with whatever emerges as a
Social Security solution.

And the reason why is because a personal account would enable a worker to,
voluntarily, by the way -- this is a voluntary program, you can choose to
join or choose not to join. The government is not making you do that, it's
your option, and you can decide whether or not you want to put some of your
own money aside in a conservative mix of stocks and bonds to earn a better
rate of return than that which you would earn -- your money would earn
inside the Social Security system. And over time, that compounds, it grows,
and you would end up with a nest egg you could call your own.

And so I think it's an interesting idea, and one that people ought to
discuss to make sure the system works better for an individual worker. But
it's very important for people to understand that the permanent solution
will require Congress and the administration working together on a variety
of different possibilities.

Q But, sir, but Democrats have made it pretty clear that they're not
interested in that. They want you to lay it out. And so, what I'm asking
is, don't --

THE PRESIDENT: I'm sure they do. The first bill on the Hill always is dead
on arrival. I'm interested in coming up with a permanent solution. I'm not
interested in playing political games. (Laughter.) I'm interested in
working with members of both political parties.

Q Would you say if you're specifically supportive of an income test for the
slowing of future benefits? Could that get some kind of bipartisan
consensus going?

THE PRESIDENT: David, there's some interesting ideas out there. One of the
interesting ideas was by the fellow -- by a Democrat economist name of
Posen. He came to visit the White House -- he didn't see me, but came and
tossed some interesting ideas out, talking about making sure the system was
progressive. We're open for ideas. And I -- look, I can understand why
people say, make -- force the President to either negotiate with himself,
or lay out his own bill. I want to work with members of both political
parties.

And I stood up in front of the Congress and said, bring your ideas forward.
And I'm looking forward to people bringing ideas forward. That's how the
process works. I'm confident we'll get something done. See, the American
people want something done. They don't like partisan politics; they don't
like people saying, I'm not going to accept so-and-so's idea because it
happens to come from a particular political party. What they want is people
coming together to solve this problem.

John.

Q Mr. President, the price of oil is at record levels, well above the $28
price point that you would prefer. The price of gasoline is projected to go
above $2.50 this spring. How concerned are you that this could start to
affect the American economy? Is there more you could do to talk with
oil-producing nations to get the price at the wellhead down? And is there
more you could do, since part of the problem is refining capacity, to
encourage oil companies who haven't built a new refinery in 20 years to
start increasing their capacity domestically?

THE PRESIDENT: No, I am concerned about the price of energy. I'm concerned
about what it means to the average American family when they see the price
of gasoline going up. I'm concerned what it means to small businesses. I'm
worried about the price of natural gas, particularly given the sense that
because a lot of utilities now rely upon natural gas to provide electricity
for their consumers. And I have been worried about this since 2001, when I
first showed up in Washington, D.C.

I'm concerned about the relationship between the demand for oil -- our
growing economy's demand for oil, but more particularly, the demand for oil
from -- or energy, in general, from countries like China, fast-growing
countries that are consuming a lot of raw materials and natural resources.
And it is of concern, John. And that's why I went to the Congress and asked
them to join in a comprehensive energy plan, which they have yet to do. I
would hope that when members go back to their districts and hear the
complaints of people about the rising price of gasoline, or complaints from
small business owners about the cost of energy, that they will come back
and, in the spirit of -- in a proper spirit, get a bill to my desk that
encourages conservation and continue to find alternative sources of energy.

The -- and by the way, the modernization of the electricity grid is an
important part of the energy bill. I, frankly, don't think we need a lot of
incentives for energy companies in the energy bill. The incentive is price.
That's plenty of incentive for people to go out and find additional
resources. I hope Congress passes ANWR. There's a way to get some
additional reserves here at home on the books.

In terms of world supply, I think if you look at all the statistics, demand
is outracing supply, and supplies are getting tight. And that's why you're
seeing the price reflected. And hopefully, there will be more conservation
around the world, better conservation around the world, as well as
additional supplies of energy.

One thing is for certain; we've got to use our technology to, over time,
evolve away from reliance upon oil and gas, and at the same time use our
technologies to make sure we can use our plentiful resources like coal in
an environmentally friendly way. I went to Columbus, Ohio the other day and
talked to the person responsible for the FutureGen plant, which is an
innovative use of technology for there to be emissions-free coal-burning
plants. That would not only be helpful to the United States, it would be
helpful for the world -- developing nations to be able to use this
technology.

This is going to be a subject, by the way -- was a subject of interest in
my trip to Europe. In the councils of the EU, we talked about how we can
work together on technological developments to change habits and change
supply of the energy mix for the world. And this will be a topic of -- at
the G8, as well.

Yes.

Q Mr. President, could I follow up? Everybody else has had a chance to
follow up.

THE PRESIDENT: I know, I'm trying to break the habit. (Laughter.) Sorry,
it's not you, Roberts. Don't take it personally. (Laughter.)

Q I never do, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: That's good. Neither do I.

Q Mr. President, can you explain why you've approved of and expanded the
practice of what's called rendition, of transferring individuals out of
U.S. custody to countries where human rights groups and your own State
Department say torture is common for people under custody?

THE PRESIDENT: The post-9/11 world, the United States must make sure we
protect our people and our friends from attack. That was the charge we have
been given. And one way to do so is to arrest people and send them back to
their country of origin with the promise that they won't be tortured.
That's the promise we receive. This country does not believe in torture. We
do believe in protecting ourselves. We don't believe in torture. And --

Q As Commander-in-Chief --

THE PRESIDENT: Sorry, what -- make Roberts feel terrible.

Q That's all right.

THE PRESIDENT: No, no, you shouldn't make --

Q It doesn't bother me at all. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: Elisabeth.

Q As Commander-in-Chief, what is it that Uzbekistan can do in interrogating
an individual that the United States can't?

THE PRESIDENT: We seek assurances that nobody will be tortured when we
render a person back to their home country.

Elisabeth.

Q Paul Wolfowitz, who was the -- a chief architect of one of the most
unpopular wars in our history --

THE PRESIDENT: (Laughter.) That's an interesting start. (Laughter.)

Q -- is your choice to be the President of the World Bank. What kind of
signal does that send to the rest of the world?

THE PRESIDENT: First of all, I think people -- I appreciate the world
leaders taking my phone calls as I explained to them why I think Paul will
be a strong President of the World Bank. I've said he's a man of good
experiences. He helped manage a large organization. The World Bank is a
large organization; the Pentagon is a large organization -- he's been
involved in the management of that organization. He's a skilled diplomat,
worked at the State Department in high positions. He was Ambassador to
Indonesia where he did a very good job representing our country. And Paul
is committed to development. He's a compassionate, decent man who will do a
fine job in the World Bank. And that's why I called leaders of countries
and that's why I put him up.

I was pleased to see that Jim Wolfensohn, earlier today, made a very strong
comment about Paul's candidacy. Jim Wolfensohn has done a fine job in
leading the World Bank. He's represented the World Bank with a lot of class
and a lot of dignity, and I think his comments are very important comments
for -- for people to get to know Paul better before the -- before the vote
is taken.

Jim.

Q Tom DeLay, the House Majority Leader, has been admonished three times by
the House Ethics Committee, is currently embroiled in several controversies
involving a lobbyist who happened to be a pretty big fundraiser for your
two campaigns. Do you have the full confidence in Tom DeLay, his tactics
and his leadership role in the Republican Party?

THE PRESIDENT: I have confidence in Tom DeLay's leadership, and I have
confidence in Tom DeLay. And I am -- we've worked closely with Tom DeLay
and the leaders in the House to get a lot done during the last four years,
and I'm looking forward to working with him to get a lot done during the
next four years. We've got a big agenda. We've got to get an energy bill
out of the House; we've got to get more legal reform out of the House;
we've got to get a Social Security reform package out of the House; got to
get a budget out of the House. There's a lot going on. And Speaker Hastert
and Leader DeLay and Whip Blunt are close allies and people with whom we're
working to get a lot done.

Q Mr. President, you have spoken out about the need for owners, coaches and
players in all sports to stop steroid use. And you've also voiced
reservations about government getting too involved in that. And as you
know, Congress is issuing subpoenas to Major League baseball players during
spring training. Do you think that that's an abuse of power, or is it
appropriate, in your view?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, Congress generally has an independent mind of its own.
I spoke out and was pleased to see that baseball responded, and they've got
a testing policy in place for the first time ever -- a firm testing policy
in place. And it's very important that baseball then follow through and
implement the testing and, obviously, deal with those who get caught
cheating in the system.

And the hearings will go forward, I guess. I guess that's the current
status. But I'm wise enough not to second-guess the intentions of the
United States Congress. I do appreciate the public concern about the use of
steroids in sports, whether it be baseball or anywhere else, because I
understand that when a professional athlete uses steroids, it sends
terrible signals to youngsters. There's -- we've had some stories in my own
state, one of the newspapers there pointed out that they thought there was
steroid use in high schools as a result of -- in order to make sure these
kids, at least in the kid's mind, could be a better athlete. It's a bad
signal. It's not right. And so I appreciate the fact that baseball is
addressing this, and I appreciate the fact that the Congress is paying
attention to the issue. This first started, of course, with Senator McCain,
who basically said, get your house in order. And baseball responded, and my
hope is the system will work.

Q You have no problem with the subpoenas?

THE PRESIDENT: No.

Carl.

Q Mr. President, your judicial nominees continue to run into problems on
Capitol Hill. Republicans are discussing the possibility of ending the
current Democratic filibuster practice against it. And Democrats yesterday,
led by Minority Leader Harry Reid, went to the steps of the Capitol to say
that if that goes forward, they will halt your agenda straight out. What
does that say about your judicial nominees, the tone on Capitol Hill? And
which is more important, judges or your agenda?

THE PRESIDENT: Both. I believe that I have a obligation to put forth good,
honorable people to serve on the bench, and have done so. And I expect them
to get a up or down vote on the floor of the Senate. This isn't a new
position for me, or the -- I've been saying this for the last several
years. And they ought to get a vote. They're getting voted out of
committee, but they're not getting a vote on the floor. And I don't think
it's fair to the candidates, and I don't think it's fair to the
administration for this policy to go forward. And so, hopefully, the Senate
will be able to conduct business and also get my nominees a vote -- an up
or down vote on the floor of the Senate.

Yes, sir. John.

Q Sir, on Social Security, what is the time line that you want to see for
action by Congress on a bill? When do you start to get worried about not
getting something done this year? And also, if I can add, would you be
willing to drop personal accounts in order to get a bill?

THE PRESIDENT: Personal accounts are very important for the individuals.
It's a -- you know, it's interesting -- David quoted some poll -- there's
all kinds of polls. For every poll you quote, I'll quote another one. It's
kind of the way Washington works these days. They poll everything. The one
I read the other day said people like the idea of personal accounts.

I think people like the idea of being able to take some of their own money
-- in other words, government says, you can decide, as opposed to, we'll
decide for you, you get to decide if this is in your interest. And you get
to decide whether you want to set some of your money aside in an account
that will earn a better rate of return than that which will be earned in
the Social Security system. That's an important part of making sure the
system works for the individual.

I repeat, personal accounts do not permanently fix the solution. They make
the solution more attractive for the individual worker. And that's
important for people for understand, John, and that's why it's very
important for Congress to discuss this issue.

In terms of timetables, as quickly as possible -- whatever that means. No,
I am going to -- one of the things that I think is very important for
people to understand is that I believe that we have a duty to work on big
problems in Washington, D.C., and so I'm going to continue working on this.
And it's, I guess -- I'm not going to go away on the issue, because the
issue is not going to go away. The longer we wait, the more difficult it is
to solve the problem.

And, listen, I fully understand it's a difficult issue; otherwise it would
have been solved a long time ago. And I understand some members don't --
view this as a tough vote. In other words, why did you bring it up, it's a
tough vote? And -- but that's just not the way I think, John. I think we
have a duty. I truly do. This is -- now is the time to get this solved. I
remember 1983, we've got a 75-year solution. It wasn't a 75-year solution
that they came up with. It was a -- I like the spirit of people coming
together from both parties to sit down and see if they couldn't solve the
immediate problem, but it wasn't a 75-year solution because we're talking
about it now. And in 2018, the situation starts to get worse because more
money is coming into the system -- I mean, more money is going out of the
system than coming in.

You know, one thing about Social Security -- I'm sorry to blow on here, but
now that you asked -- a lot of people in America think there is a trust:
your money goes in, the government holds it, and then the government gives
your money back when you retire. That's just not the way it works. And it's
important for the American citizens to understand. It's a pay-as-you-go
system. And right now, we're paying for a lot of programs other than Social
Security with the payroll tax coming in, thereby leaving a pile of IOUs.
And part of why I think a personal account is an attractive option for a
younger worker is that there will be real assets in the system at this
point in time.

I also will continue reminding people, when it comes to personal accounts,
that the system oftentimes doesn't work for a widow. You know, if a
wage-earner dies prior to 62, there are no spousal benefits available until
62. If the spouse -- both spouses work, the spouse that survives will get
the higher of his or her Social Security benefits, or the death benefits,
but not both. In other words, somebody's contribution to the system just
goes away. And a personal account will enable somebody to leave behind an
asset base to whomever he or she chooses. And that's an important concept
for people to understand.

Peter.

Q Mr. President, your administration recently called on the Texas courts to
review some death -- some death penalty cases down there.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes.

Q And during your State of the Union you talked about the importance of DNA
evidence, and you talked about the possibility that maybe there were
inequities in the system and the lawyers that represent death row inmates.
I'm wondering if this represents a change in your feelings about the death
penalty since you were governor of Texas. And if there are the
possibilities -- the possibilities exist of problems, why not call on --
for a moratorium?

THE PRESIDENT: No, I still support the death penalty, and I think it's a
deterrent to crime. But I want to make sure, obviously, that those subject
to the death penalty are truly guilty. And that's why I talked about what I
talked about, and why I made the decision I made. I think, regardless of
your position on the issue, one of the things we got to make sure is that
we use, in this case, technology, DNA technology, to make sure that we're
absolutely certain about the innocence or guilt of a person accused.

Yes.

Q Mr. President, are you trying to send a message to the IRA by not
inviting Gerry Adams and the other Northern Ireland politicians tomorrow?

THE PRESIDENT: I talked to Bertie Ahern about this and -- at the EU, and he
just asked who was coming to the events, which -- I said, you are, for
certain. And we wanted to make sure that we honored those in civil society
in Ireland who are contributing positively to the peace process. And that's
what we'll be doing on this particular trip.

It's very important that people understand that the parties must renounce
violence. There's a -- the Good Friday Agreement laid out the way forward
for peace in Northern Ireland, and this administration and our government
strongly supports those steps. But tomorrow's message will be, we want to
thank those in civil society who are working hard to achieve a peaceful
resolution.

Q By inviting the widow -- the sisters, rather, of this man who was killed
--

THE PRESIDENT: That's part of the statement -- a very strong part of the
statement. And I'm looking forward to meeting these very brave souls.
They've committed themselves to a peaceful solution. And hopefully, their
loved one will not have died in vain. I mean, out of the -- hopefully, some
good will come out of the evil perpetuated on this family.

Yes, sir.

Q Mr. President, yesterday you said that Hezbollah could prove it is not a
terrorist organization by laying down arms and supporting peace. How
willing and flexible, and under what conditions are you able to, as you
promote democracy in the Middle East, encourage parties like Hezbollah to
discontinue the use of terrorism as a tactic?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I think -- let me make sure that you put my answer into
full context. I first said that Hezbollah is on the terrorist list for a
reason: because they have killed Americans in the past, and they -- they're
a violent organization. And the question was about Lebanon, and let me take
a step back, if I might, on this question, because it's important for the
American people to understand our policy.

Our policy is this: We want there to be a thriving democracy in Lebanon. We
believe that there will be a thriving democracy, but only if -- but only if
-- Syria withdraws not only her troops completely out of Lebanon, but also
her secret service organizations, intelligence organizations -- not secret
service, intelligence organizations. I am concerned, and the world should
be concerned that the intelligence organizations are embedded in a lot of
government functions in Lebanon, and there needs to be a complete
withdrawal of those services in order for there to be a free election. And
we will -- this government will work with a -- elected leaders of a free,
truly free Lebanon, and looking forward to it.

I like the idea of people running for office. There's a positive effect
when you run for office. Maybe some will run for office and say, vote for
me, I look forward to blowing up America. I don't know, I don't know if
that will be their platform or not. But it's -- I don't think so. I think
people who generally run for office say, vote for me, I'm looking forward
to fixing your potholes, or making sure you got bread on the table. And so
-- but Hezbollah is on the terrorist list for a reason, and remain on the
terrorist list for a reason. Our position has not changed on Hezbollah.

Judy.

Q President Bush, a court ruling in California this week has revived debate
over same-sex marriage. You support a constitutional amendment to ban such
marriages. But it's not something you talk about nearly as often as Social
Security and many other issues. Will you put some muscle behind that effort
this year? Or is it something you'd prefer not to deal with?

THE PRESIDENT: No, I haven't changed my position. And as a matter of fact,
the court rulings are verifying why I took the position I took, and that is
I don't believe judges ought to be deciding this issue. I believe this is
an issue of particular importance to the American people and should be
decided by the people. And I think the best way to do so is through the
constitutional process. I haven't changed my mind at all. As a matter of
fact, court rulings such as this strengthen my position it seems like to
me. People now understand why I laid out the position I did.

Q What can you do to promote action on that amendment?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I -- the courts are going to promote a lot of the
action by their very rulings. People will understand that -- the logic
behind the decision I made. And no matter what your position is on the
issue, this is an issue that should be decided by the people, not by
judges. And the more that judges start deciding the issue, I'm confident
the more the people will want to be involved in the issue. This is a very
important issue for the country and one that obviously needs to be
conducted with a great deal of sensitivity and concern about other people's
feelings. But this is -- it's an issue I feel strongly about.

Yes, Stretch.

Q Mr. President, you faced a lot of skepticism in the run-up to the Iraq
war, and a lot of criticism for miscalculating some of the challenges of
postwar Iraq. Now that the Iraq elections seem to be triggering signs of
democratization throughout the broader Middle East, do you feel any sense
of vindication?

THE PRESIDENT: First of all, I fully understand that as long as I'm the
President I will face criticism. It's like part of the job. Frankly, you
wouldn't be doing your job if you didn't occasionally lay out the gentle
criticism. I welcome constructive ideas as to how we might do our job
better. So that doesn't bother me. And, therefore, since it doesn't bother
me and I expect it, I don't then seek vindication.

Look, history -- shall I give you my talk on history and presidencies?
Okay, thank you. I don't -- what's interesting is George Washington is now
getting a second, or third, or fifth, or tenth look in history. I read the
Ellis book, which is a really interesting book, and -- "His Excellency,"
it's called. And McCullough is writing a book on George Washington, as
well. People are constantly evaluating somebody's standing in history, a
President's standing in history, based upon events that took place during
the presidency, based upon things that happened after the presidency, based
upon -- like in my case, hopefully, the march of freedom continues way
after my presidency. And so I just don't worry about vindication or
standing.

The other thing, it turns out, in this job you've got a lot on your plate
on a regular basis, you don't have much time to sit around and wander,
lonely, in the Oval Office, kind of asking different portraits, how do you
think my standing will be? (Laughter.) I've got a lot to do. And I like to
make decisions, and I make a lot of them.

But, you know, look, the people who deserve the credit in Iraq are the
Iraqi citizens that defied the terrorists. Imagine what it would be like to
try to go vote thinking that there could be a suicide bomber standing next
to you in line, or somebody would lob a shell or a mortar at you. The
courage of the Iraqi citizens was just overwhelming, I thought. It's easy
for us to vote. The question is, what it would be like to vote if you were
fearful for your life. Parts of the country people were getting messages
that said, if you vote we'll find somebody you love and take care of them.
And yet they defied these terrorists. It was a powerful moment in the
history of freedom. People in the world got to see what it means to -- for
a group of people that have been downtrodden to rise up and say, I want to
be free.

Now, there's a lot of work to be done, and I'm sure there will be some
opinions about what takes place during the next nine months, as the
constitution is written, and whether or not the elections move forward as
smoothly as some think they should. Obviously, there's concern now I read
about -- occasionally reading, I want you to know, in the second term --
that -- your stories, that is -- that they haven't formed a government yet.
But I take a different look. First of all, obviously, there will be a
government formed, but I think it is interesting and -- to watch the
process of people negotiating and worrying about this and worrying about
that, and people seeking out positions as to their stands on issues that
will be relevant to the future of Iraq. It's a wholesome process. And it's
being done in a transparent way. I mean, you've got the press corps all
over them, watching every move, which is a positive example for others in
the region.

And that's important. It's important for people in that region to see what
is possible in a free society. And I firmly believe that the examples of
Iraq and Afghanistan -- I believe there will be a Palestinian state; I
believe we'll be able to convince Syria to fully withdraw, or else she'll
be isolated -- fully withdraw from Lebanon, or else she'll be isolated -- I
believe those examples will serve as examples for others over time. And
that will lead to more peace. And that's what we want.

Yes, Carl.

Q Mr. President, do you also think it will lead to America's reputation
being restored? Earlier this week you brought Karen Hughes back at
ambassador rank to address the question of antipathy to America around the
world --

THE PRESIDENT: Yes.

Q -- particularly the Muslim world. What does that entail?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, it entails a couple of things, Carl. It entails people
understanding why we do things we do. You know, for example, there was -- I
think we had the image of wanting to fight Muslims -- the United States
stood squarely against a religion, as opposed to a society which welcomes
all religions. And, in fact, we're fighting a handful of people relative to
the Muslim population that wanted to -- I used to say -- hijack the
religion.

People need to understand we're a compassionate nation and we care deeply
about suffering, regardless of where people live. And the -- you know,
President Clinton and President Bush 41 did a fine job of helping the world
see the great compassion of America when they went on the -- went on their
trips in the areas ravaged by the tsunamis.

It is very important for us to have a message that counteracts some of the
messages coming out of some of the Arab media -- some of it coming out,
partly, because of our strong and unwavering friendship with Israel. You
know, Israel is an easy target for some of the media in the Middle East,
and if you're a friend of Israel, you become a target. And since we're not
going to abandon our alliance with Israel, there's a -- there was some
churning in the press, and there was some unhelpful things being said. And
so part of that is to make sure people understand the truth. And that is,
in this particular issue, you bet we're going to stand by Israel. But we
also believe the Palestinians have the capability of self-governance in a
truly democratic state that will live side-by-side with the Israelis in
peace.

And so Karen is going -- one, I want to thank her for coming back from
Austin. It's very hard, if you're a Texan, to abandon Austin for anywhere
else, and -- or Texas for anywhere else. Secondly, I applaud Secretary
Rice's decision to include Karen in the process. I thought that was very
wise of her to call upon Karen's talents. And Dina Powell, from my office,
an Egyptian American, is also going over, leaving the White House compound
to work with Karen, because she believes deeply in the American experience,
in American values, and wants to share those values with people around the
world.

And, you know, I think when people also see, Carl, that we do what we say
we're going to do -- for example, that we helped feed the hungry and that
we believe all folks should be free and that women should have an equal say
in society. I think when people see we actually mean that, and then when it
comes to fruition, it will help people around the world better understand
our good hearts and good nature.

Yes, Ken.

Q Mr. President, earlier this year, you told us you wanted your
administration to cease and desist on payments to journalists to promote
your agenda. You cited the need for ethical concerns and the need for
bright line between the press and the government. Your administration
continue to make the use of video news releases, which is prepackaged news
stories sent to television stations, fully aware that some -- or many of
these stations will air them without any disclaimer that they are produced
by the government. The Comptroller General of the United States, this week,
said that raises ethical questions. Does it raise ethical questions about
the use of government money to produce stories about the government that
wind up being aired with no disclosure that they were produced by the
government?

THE PRESIDENT: There is a Justice Department opinion that says these --
these pieces are within the law, so long as they're based upon facts, not
advocacy. And I expect our agencies to adhere to that ruling, to that
Justice Department opinion. This has been a longstanding practice of the
federal government to use these types of videos. The Agricultural
Department, as I understand it, has been using these videos for a long
period of time. The Defense Department, other departments have been doing
so. It's important that they be based on the guidelines set out by the
Justice Department.

Now, I also -- I think it would be helpful if local stations then disclosed
to their viewers that that's -- that this was based upon a factual report,
and they chose to use it. But evidently, in some cases, that's not the
case. So, anyway.

Q The administration could guarantee that's happening by including that
language in the pre-packaged report.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I don't -- oh, you mean a disclosure, "I'm George W.
Bush, and I" --

Q Well, some way to make sure it couldn't air without the disclosure that
you believe is so vital.

THE PRESIDENT: You know, Ken, there's a procedure that we're going to
follow, and the local stations ought to -- if there's a deep concern about
that, ought to tell their viewers what they're watching.

Q Mr. President, do you think there should be regime change in Iran? And if
so, what are you prepared to do to see that happen?

THE PRESIDENT: Richard, I believe that the Iranian people ought to be
allowed to freely discuss opinions, read a free press, have free votes, be
able to choose amongst political parties. I believe Iran should adopt
democracy; that's what I believe.

Q Mr. President --

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, ma'am.

Q Thank you, sir. Do you believe that nativity scenes and the Ten
Commandments should continue to be displayed on federal property or in
schools?

THE PRESIDENT: We had a display of the Ten Commandments on the statehouse
grounds in Texas, and I supported that display.

Q Mr. President, back to Social Security, if I may. You said right at the
top today that you urged members of Congress to go out and talk about the
problem with their constituents.

THE PRESIDENT: About solutions to the problem.

Q But also to talk about solutions. It's that part of it I want to ask
about. Aren't you asking them to do something that you really haven't been
willing to do yet?

THE PRESIDENT: No, I'm interested in -- first of all, I have laid out, in
the State of the Union address -- I haven't looked at all previous State of
the Union addresses, but I think I'm the first President ever to say, all
options are on the table, and named a series of options. I think. Now,
maybe somebody could go back and find out -- if you've got some idle time
on your hand, you might want to go read previous State of the Union
addresses and see if that's true.

I don't believe members should go write a bill, but I do believe a member
should start discussing ideas with constituencies about how to solve the
problem, as opposed to blocking ideas -- to say, here are some ideas, and
come back and present them. That's what's happening, by the way. There's a
lot of members are talking about different concepts. I've called a lot of
them into the White House compound, I've listened to them. There's a
variety of ideas. And that's positive. I view that as a positive sign that
members of Congress, one, take the problem seriously -- I thought it was
helpful yesterday when the United States Senate said that Social Security
is a serious problem that requires a permanent solution.

And now it's time for people, when they get back from Easter, having talked
to different constituency groups, to come back and sit down and start
sharing ideas about how to move the process forward. And my pledge is that
I will not take somebody's idea and use it as a political weapon against
them. That's what's changed in this debate. In other words, the Social
Security -- they used to call it the third rail of American politics,
because when you talked about it, you got singed, at the minimum. And it's
now time to talk about it in a serious way, to come up with a permanent
solution.

Yes, Jackson.

Q Mr. President, you talked earlier about going --

THE PRESIDENT: I can't call on Herman and not on Jackson.

Q Thank you. You talked about going to the Security Council if Iran turns
down this EU 3 deal. Iran says they're not making nuclear weapons. Are we
looking at a potential military confrontation with Iran?

THE PRESIDENT: No, we've got a lot of diplomacy, you know. There's a lot of
diplomacy on this issue. And that's why I was so pleased to be able to
participate with our friends, France and Great Britain and Germany, to say
to the Iranians, we speak with a common voice, and we share suspicions
because of your past behavior. And the best way to ensure that you do not
develop a nuclear weapon is for you to have no enrichment of plutonium --
of -- have no highly enriched uranium program or plutonium program that
could lead to a weapon. That's what we've said.

And we just started the process -- we just had the discussion. How long ago
was I in Europe? Maybe 10 days, or so? Two weeks? About two weeks? I mean,
it takes a while for things to happen in the world, David. I mean, I know
there's a certain impatience with a never-ending news cycle. But things
don't happen on -- necessarily overnight the way some would like them, you
know, solve this issue and we go to the next issue. There's a certain
patience required in order to achieve a diplomatic objective. And our
diplomatic objective is to continue working with our friends to make it
clear to Iran we speak with a single voice.

Listen, whoever thought about modernizing this room deserves a lot of
credit. (Laughter.) Like, there's very little oxygen in here anymore.
(Laughter.) And so, for the sake of a health press corps and a healthy
President, I'm going to end the press conference. But I want to thank you
for giving me a chance to come by and visit. I wish you all -- genuinely
wish you all a happy Easter holiday with you and your family.

Thank you.

Q Can I get that follow-up now?

THE PRESIDENT: What?

Q Can I get that follow-up now? (Laughter.)

END 11:03 A.M. EST
===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/03/20050316-3.html

 * Origin: (1:3634/12)