For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
May 15, 2002
Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
1:22 P.M. EDT
MR. FLEISCHER: Good afternoon. Let me give you a report on the
President's day, then I have two announcements. One, the President
began this morning at 7:00 a.m. with a breakfast with the congressional
leaders, Democrats and Republicans, to discuss the congressional
agenda. They spent particular time on trade, and also they discussed
the budget and the need to make progress on the budget.
The President then, later in the morning, met with members of the
United Jewish Communities who gather here at the White House. This is
a group that focuses mainly on domestic issues in terms of helping the
poor and the needy. And the President talked to them about the
importance of Congress passing the CARE Act, or the faith-based act.
Many of them are in town for the purpose of going up to discuss the
importance of passing this legislation with members on the Hill. They
also talked about events in the Middle East.
Then the President went up to the United States Capitol where he
concluded a meeting with the House Republican Conference. He spoke to
members of the House, gave them a war update, talked to them about the
importance of funding our nation's defenses. He also talked about the
importance of corporate responsibility and making sure that corporate
leaders were good citizens in our community. He talked about passage
of Medicare reform that includes a prescription drug benefit for
seniors. He talked about welfare reform and education.
Then the President is just finishing his remarks, or has just
finished his remarks at the Annual Peace Officers Association Memorial
Service to pay tribute to those killed in the line of duty. And then
he will return to the White House. Later this afternoon, the President
will sign the No Fear Act. This is a piece of civil rights legislation
that increases government accountability by requiring federal agencies
to pay from their own budget for settlements or judgments resulting
from discrimination cases. It also requires employees to be notified
of their rights under all discrimination laws, and it enforces the
agencies to report to the Congress information pertaining to civil
rights abuses. The President will be pleased to sign that.
Two last items: The President, also this morning, called Prime
Minister Vajpayee of India to express condolences for the 33 people
killed in the May 14th terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir, and to
offer sympathy to the families -- the victims' families. The
President condemned the terrorist activity and said he was working very
hard to end terrorism and to find a peaceful solution to the bilateral
tensions between India and Pakistan.
Finally, also on foreign policy, President Bush, since the very
beginning of this administration, has worked hard to initiate a new era
in relations between the United States and Russia. The President sees
this as a new era, goes beyond, obviously, the Cold War, and ushers in
a new way with Russia, a way where Russia works with the West. In both
Washington, D.C. and Crawford, President Bush and President Putin
agreed to build a new constructive NATO relationship in conjunction
with other members of NATO.
Yesterday, the President saw the wonderful results of this effort.
The President was pleased that NATO took a major step yesterday in
Reykjavik toward integrating Russia with the European Atlantic
Community of nations with the establishment of the NATO-Russia
Council. This council's agenda will include counterterrorist
cooperation, crisis management, nonproliferation, search and rescue at
sea, military-to-military cooperation, and civil emergency situation
response and management. The council allows for joint discussion,
joint decision, and joint action, while protecting NATO's prerogatives
at 19.
As a member of NATO, the United States looks forward to building on
this initial agenda as the council develops a track record of
cooperation.
And just more broadly on that, I think one of the more notable
developments over the 14, 15 months of President Bush's term in office
has been the strengthening of U.S.-Russia ties; the cordial,
cooperative relationship that is really flourishing between the United
States and Russia; Russia's movement toward the West.
These are important sea changes that could go down as sea changes
in history. These changes begin, it's important that they grow; time
will tell, but the beginning has been marked by great success between
the United States and Russia, particularly if you remember how
relations began with Russia in the wake of a spy issue of a very
serious nature. Since Slovenia and the President's meeting with
President Putin, there has been a lot to herald in terms of strong and
tangible results in U.S.-Russia relations, in reductions of offensive
weapons, and of course, this event, with -- who could have believed
it as we were children growing up, at least -- Russia now as a
partial member of NATO -- NATO at 20.
Helen.
Q Ari, why doesn't it get full membership? And, short of that,
does the President ever contemplate the time when Russia will become a
member of NATO? And why not? I mean a full-fledged.
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, this is the beginning. And as I indicated,
that we look forward to building on the initial agenda, as they develop
a track record of cooperation. And we welcome Russia into this new
arrangement with NATO. It is an historic break. This is a rather
remarkable event for people who grew up in the Cold War, and even
watching what took place in the '90s, as Russia's communism died in
Russia -- what is emerging is a new Russia that's looking westward,
that is strong and is proud, is independent, and Russia finding a
friend in the United States, a friend in NATO.
Q Does he foresee a full membership?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think, Helen, at this point, it's notable and
remarkable that Russia has this role in NATO. And over time, other
assessments will be made -- that's going to depend on cooperation,
it's going to depend on events. And this is a garden that will be
watered and that will grow. And that's very cooperative.
Q Ari, the Senate Majority Leader this morning on Cuba said, we
can democratize Cuba with greater trade and greater outreach, as we
have attempted to do with other countries in the world. How does that
statement sit with where this administration --
MR. FLEISCHER: Who did you say said that?
Q Senate Majority Leader Daschle. Where does that statement sit
with where this administration is going with its Cuba policy?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President very strongly believes that the trade
embargo with Cuba is a very important ongoing part of America's policy,
because trade with Cuba only benefits the repressive government of
Cuba; it does not get into the hands of the people. That's been the
experience of the nations that have traded with Cuba. And trade with
Cuba, unlike trade with any other nation in the world -- almost any
other nation in the world -- does not help the people of Cuba. And
that's the heart of the problem with the trade issue with Cuba.
Q So if I could just follow that, in terms of the embargo and
the Cuba review, I take it it's safe to say that we're not looking at
loosening anything up.
MR. FLEISCHER: No, I think -- I've indicated already on the
record, the President will, of course, continue to enforce the embargo
against Cuba because he believes it does not help the people of Cuba to
trade with Cuba, it only gives money to the government that the
government then uses as part of its repression of its people.
Q Are you even going to tighten up on Cuba even more?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the President will give a speech on Monday
where he will talk about the importance of freedom and democracy in
Cuba, and the President will address that himself.
Campbell.
Q Not everybody in the administration, though, is on board. I
mean, there are a lot of people who don't believe these sanctions are
working. Vice President Cheney, on Meet The Press, said, "Sanctions,
frankly, haven't worked very well in Cuba." Why then is the President
so unwilling to try something new?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think what the Vice President was saying in that
entire interview was that the problem in Cuba is you have a repressive
dictator who it doesn't matter what efforts are made by outsiders; his
only interest is to continue the repression, to continue to keep
himself in power, to continue to deny his people the same civil
liberties that have broken out across the hemisphere.
Cuba is the last tyrant left on Earth -- let me re-phrase that
-- Cuba is one of the last great tyrants left on Earth. And that's the
problem with these typical devices that do help improve relations with
other nations, that wouldn't work with a nation like Cuba because of
the repressive nature of the regime.
Q Can I follow up? How much of this has to do with politics in
Florida? We all know what happened in Florida, and there are adamant
positions held there that we should never even consider.
MR. FLEISCHER: Given the fact that this has been the President's
position and it's been the position of many people in the United States
prior to the 2000 election, I think it shows it has to do with merits,
not politics.
John.
Q Can you reiterate -- this issue has received a lot of
attention, obviously, because of President Carter's trip and the
President's planned speech -- President Bush's planned speech on
Monday. Can you reiterate then to the American people the
distinction? If you read the State Department's human rights report, a
lot more ink given to China and what the State Department would say is
a repressive regime that denies its people the right to vote, the right
to speak freely -- than Cuba, a similar government, from the State
Department's view. Why then the distinction of a President saying,
engagement is a good idea with China?
MR. FLEISCHER: Absolutely. The President has been asked that
numerous times, and so you can roll your tape and get it directly from
the President. But what the President believes is that trade with
China means trade with a totally different system, with different
economic values, than Cuba. And trade with China has been dispersed
widely throughout the people of China. Trade with China has led to a
broader group of citizenry who have benefited and, therefore, are
pushing China for democratic reforms. And interestingly, China has
been moving in the area of democratic reforms, particularly in the
country.
Q Why would the State Department --
MR. FLEISCHER: Cuba is not doing that. Cuba has traded with other
nations. It's not just the United States -- the United States has an
embargo, but other nations don't. And trade with Cuba has not gotten
to the people of Cuba. The money that Cuba has gotten has remained
firmly in the hands of the repressive government.
Q And it has nothing to do with the size of the Chinese market,
which is what a lot of critics say?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, that's a factor, too, but even with the size
of the market, if a government insists on keeping the money bottled up
at the top and not getting it to its population, no matter whether the
population is small or large, the people won't benefit.
Terry.
Q What was the President's reaction to Jimmy Carter's speech
last night?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President's reaction to President Carter's
speech last night was twofold: One, as the President indicated in the
Oval Office yesterday, the President thinks that President Carter
talking on human rights is important and helpful. Two, we've already
discussed it, the President disagrees when it comes to the importance
of the trade embargo.
Q Well, one of the things that President Carter did was link
them. And it is clear that one of the reasons he was able to say those
remarkable things to the Cuban people is because he was also willing to
say that the embargo wasn't working. And so my question is, has the
embargo advanced the cause of human rights anywhere near as much as
Jimmy Carter did last night, by calling for its end and demanding
freedom for the Cuban people?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I think the only way to tell whether the
people of Cuba get freedom and human rights is in time. And that will
be watched and measured. But the President does believe --
Q How does the embargo help that?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President believes that trade with Cuba ends up
giving the government more resources to repress its people. Because
history has shown that when Cuba receives the benefits of trade from
other nations, those benefits are not passed on to the Cuban people,
unlike China, where the trade benefits are indeed passed on to the
people of China. And that's a very important economic distinction
that's a result of a different type of political leadership at the
top.
Yes, the United States has human rights problems with China,
particularly in the area of religion. And the United States has
expressed that. But that's what makes the trade issue with China a
different issue with Cuba.
Q One more on this.
MR. FLEISCHER: Terry.
Q Is there no way that the President could agree essentially
with what Jimmy Carter was proposing, which is, the embargo would only
be lifted, the door would only be opened, as far as human rights were
achieved, as far as freedom was achieved, and that maybe that could
force change there?
MR. FLEISCHER: Terry, I've described to you accurately the
President's position.
Q Ari, how could you say that it has not been passed down to the
people? I mean, they have a repressive society, so does China. But
you have people with a high literacy rate, better health care, health
care available to other people. I mean, I think that's a pretty broad
statement. How do you say that?
MR. FLEISCHER: Because the fact of the matter is that -- the
question was why China, why not Cuba? China does have a very
interesting mix of a quasi-capitalist system, where they involve trade,
where they involve some elements of open market economics. That's a
big --
Q Now they have a reason
MR. FLEISCHER: Absolutely. But there's no inclination by the
Cuban government to engage in the same liberalizations.
Q Does the President want Carter to report to him when he comes
back from Cuba?
MR. FLEISCHER: I imagine that when President Carter comes back,
he'll talk to the appropriate people at the Department of State or the
National Security Council.
Q How about the President himself? He makes these foreign
policy decisions.
MR. FLEISCHER: Helen, typically, when it comes to these trips by
former Presidents, they talk to the administration prior to going, just
as President Carter did, and when he returns, he'll talk probably to
the same people he talked to.
Q Why can't he talk to the President?
MR. FLEISCHER: I've never ruled anything out, but I'm just telling
you that's typically how trips work. And I think you know that.
Q If in 43 years the U.S. embargo against Cuba has not brought
about a change in regime and freedom and democracy, what else does the
President think needs to be done to bring -- to put pressure on
Castro to bring about that change?
MR. FLEISCHER: You will be at his speech Monday. I'm sure you
will hear carefully.
Q Ari, I have two questions. One has to do with fast track.
The amendment yesterday offered in the Senate is going to -- far more
difficult to achieve the purposes the President wants with fast track
authority. I understand it's been approved, and it's going to be voted
upon. How do you expect in the conference between the House and the
Senate bills that you can be able to eliminate this or dilute it?
MR. FLEISCHER: That was an issue that came up at the meeting this
morning with the President and the congressional leaders. And I think
that the congressional leaders have a very good understanding that
that's a provision that needs to be removed at conference in order to
get this agreed to. The President views that provision as a real show
stopper, an anti-trade provision that can harm the cause of free trade,
not help the cause of free trade. The President urges all members of
Congress to resist the siren call of protectionism.
And that is always the risk on trade legislation. That's why trade
legislation has been, typically, hard to get passed, and is often
controversial. But the United States now does stand on the verge of
getting, for the first time since 1994, trade promotion authority
enacted that will allow the United States to enter into more trade
agreements around the world, creating jobs for the American people, as
well as helping bolster the economy of a lot of developing countries.
So it's a hard job, and that's why nobody has come as close as
President Bush has had this year since '94. And the President will
continue at it, and that's his message to the conferees.
Q My second question, Ari, has to do with the Middle East.
Chairman Arafat has announced that he wants reforms in government. A
few days ago he spoke in Arabic, and asked for an end to the violence.
Does this mean that the administration is seeing a new Arafat, or at
least a new venue in what the United States has been asking --
including Israel has been asking for the Palestinian to do?
MR. FLEISCHER: Yasser Arafat's words in his speech were positive.
But what's most important to President Bush is to see action more than
words. And so the President will wait to see whether or not Yasser
Arafat and other in the Palestinian Authority actually take action that
lead to a better life for the Palestinian people and actions that lead
to a region that can live in more stability and security.
Ken.
Q Ari, more and more American business people are saying that
not only are they losing money by not being able to get into the Cuban
market -- growers, tourism, as a couple of examples -- but they're
also beginning to make the case that if you want to move toward human
rights, by letting us in there we can provide jobs to people and that
will be a step in that right direction. To get to the question, they
say that the President is not hearing this message. What's your
response to that?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think I've addressed it all. You keep asking the
same question about why does the President believe in the trade
embargo, and he believes in it for exactly the reasons I mentioned
several times previously.
Q Let me try it this way, then. They say that they don't have
the same access right now that the Cuban American community does on the
other side to the White House on this whole message. What's your
response to that claim?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President makes these decisions based on the
merits. He understands people's points of view and he believes in this
issue and believes in it strongly.
Q Has he met with business people who want to get into that
market?
MR. FLEISCHER: I imagine that's a message people around here have
heard. People here keep their ears open.
Peter.
Q Ari, we asked you this morning about the briefings that
Republican donors received from administration officials. What were
you able to find out on that?
MR. FLEISCHER: Yes. The Washington Post, for example, this
morning reported Mary Matalin, Vice President Cheney, Secretary Evans,
Secretary Paige, Administrator Whitman, Karl Rove, Ken Mehlman, they
all participated in briefings for several of the Republicans who were
here in conjunction with yesterday's events.
Q So where were these briefings held?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think at various hotels around town. Some of
these were different meetings or receptions that they attended. I'm
not sure every one was a briefing; people attended different meetings
that were being held, or receptions.
Q Well, what were the -- what kind of access did they get to
information at these meetings or briefings, however you care to --
MR. FLEISCHER: Very much the same things you're hearing right
here. The President thinks it's important to pass trade promotion
authority; the President thinks it's important to pass welfare reform.
They conveyed the message of the President.
And just to be clear, the reason that people in the White House
meet with people who support the President's agenda is because the
White House and people broadly in our American democrat political
system -- democratic political system -- believe that it's
appropriate and right to work with the parties so the parties can elect
people who support the agendas of the leaders of the parties -- in
this case, President Bush, for the Republicans. And I don't think
that's a surprise to anybody. It's part of our democratic process
which relies on individual private participation. And that's done to
help elect people who believe in the same agenda that the President
does.
Q One more. What does a donor have to pay for this kind of
access?
MR. FLEISCHER: You'd have to talk to the RNC about all the
fundraising structures of it; I don't know.
Q And didn't the Republicans call that purchasing access? I
mean, you just gave a very eloquent civics defense of why party
building and the President and the White House as the leader of the
party is important. Why during the Clinton administration did the
President and many other Republicans -- many of whom now serve in the
administration -- call that purchasing access?
MR. FLEISCHER: Terry, I don't believe the President ever said
that.
Wendell.
Q Ari, we now know that at least one FBI agent raised concerns
in a memo about Middle Eastern people enrolling in flight schools prior
to the 9/11 attacks. FBI Director Mueller said that even -- and also
raised in this memo Osama bin Laden's name. Director Mueller said that
that information might not necessarily have prompted action that would
have prevented 9/11. My question is, do you agree with that? Should
someone be held responsible here for what looks more and more like a
failure of intelligence?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I think -- to be fair, I think you have to,
before you reach any conclusions, Director Mueller has said, and the
President agrees, that that information in that memo, in and of itself,
would not have led to the prevention of the September 11th attacks.
What took place in America was a sneak attack, an attack on our
country while we were at a moment of peace. And now we are a nation
that is firming up our defenses to prevent future attacks. The fact of
the matter is, prior to September 11th the FBI was doing the job it had
been doing for decades, which was working very hard and diligently to
catch criminals, mostly domestically, who committed crimes in the
United States or abroad. And then the FBI gathered evidence to build
cases that could then be prosecuted in a court of law. The FBI also
worked very hard on breaking up spy organizations that may have
operated in the United States.
September 11th changed all that. As a result of September 11th,
the FBI has reoriented itself, and the FBI is working now diligently to
be a preventive agency, to try to look over the horizon, to look
through intelligence, to work in a more analytical fashion to be able
to, with other agencies, prevent attacks. And the fact of the matter
is we were a different nation prior to September 11th, and what we
thought could possibly happen to our country.
So, but be careful as you describe what is in that memo, because
the Director has stated -- and you stated it yourself, Wendell --
the Director has stated clearly that -- and he said this in open
testimony to the Congress -- the information in that memo, had we
known about it, given what we know since September 11th, would not have
enabled us to prevent the attacks of September 11th.
Q So no one should be held responsible, there was no failure of
intelligence?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, there's a review up on the Hill to determine
what events took place prior to September 11th. As you know, that's
being conducted by the Intelligence Committees. The administration is
working closely with the Hill on that, and we will continue to do
that. It's important to look into these issues.
Les, I know your hand is up. We will eventually get to you.
Findley.
Q Last week Chairman Thomas scolded a group of corporate
executives for not working hard enough on fast track, on trade
promotion authority. Does the President share the Chairman's
disappointment with the corporate effort behind that bill?
MR. FLEISCHER: I have not heard the President talk about that. I
do know that this is an issue that has been brought to the Congress
before and was unsuccessful. And as I indicated, it now has its best
prospects for passage since 1994, in large part thanks to Chairman
Thomas's hard work in the House of Representatives. It passed by a
one-vote margin, if you recall, in the House of Representatives.
Previously, despite President Clinton's very valiant efforts on this
issue, it failed by scores of votes.
And so progress has been made, but it's not done yet. And the
President hopes that all people, whether they are from the business
community or from other sectors of our society that care about creating
jobs for American workers, will help to get an agreement so that the
Senate can pass it and so that it can be agreed to in a conference
committee.
Q Why do you think the bill has become so Christmas tree?
MR. FLEISCHER: I don't know that I can guess why. I think that
trade is an issue that, historically, going back to the 1920s, has been
a very difficult issue for politicians. Trade, on the one hand, opens
up great opportunities to create jobs at home and to help other nations
abroad; while, on the other hand, it lends itself, by definition, to
protectionism. And that's been the yin and the yang of American trade
policy for decades.
What is helpful here is the President, working with an overwhelming
number of Republicans and many Democrats, has been working to put a
coalition together that recognizes the benefits of trade. The
President took on his own party in the Republican primaries, if you
recall. There were a group of Republicans who strongly opposed trade,
particularly with China, if you remember that. The President fought
against that. So that's the history of trade. It's the way that issue
has always been.
Q Ari, on that one vote margin --
Q Ari, what is reaction here to CBS' showing part of a videotape
of Daniel Pearl's murder?
MR. FLEISCHER: The State Department spoke with CBS about that
matter and expressed concerns about that being shown. I know that Mrs.
Pearl has very strong feelings about the damage that can be done as a
result of showing that video. And the administration has great
sympathies for what Mrs. Pearl has said.
Q Does that mean the White House does not think that it
shouldn't be shown?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, again, as I indicated, the State Department
made a phone call to express our opinions.
Q Can I follow up on the --
Q Does the President have any reaction to this?
MR. FLEISCHER: I've expressed the administration's position on
it.
Q It was reported in Athens that President Bush sent a letter to
the U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan on Cyprus. Any comment?
MR. FLEISCHER: I never discuss any private communications the
President has with foreign leaders in the form of letters.
Q It was reported extensively in Athens that a White House
senior official, on condition of anonymity, would like to see the
replacement of the Greek Prime Minister Simitis, by the Greek Foreign
Minister Papandreau. Any comment on this unusual involvement?
MR. FLEISCHER: I have nothing to offer on that.
You only get two. Dick. You only get two. There are many people
with their hand up, and we have Les who is patiently waiting. I said
patiently, Les.
Q Getting back to China and Cuba for a moment. There have been
and continue to be great concerns about human rights issues in China,
just like in Cuba. You said a few moments ago that because of China's
quasi-capitalist society, it's advantageous for us to do business
there. Is capitalism and the presence of it more important than human
rights issues when it comes to doing business with a foreign country?
MR. FLEISCHER: They both are important, and that's why the
President, in his meetings with China, has raised both issues on a
regular basis, as you know.
Q Ellen Weintraub is the Democrats' recommendation to be on the
FEC. And Senator McCain said today he thought that out of fairness,
the President should move that as a recess appointment, just like he
did Michael Tonor for the FEC. Is the President open to doing that?
MR. FLEISCHER: As you know, when it comes to personnel, I don't
speculate about who the President may or may not name.
Q Can I just ask about terrorism insurance, and if it came up at
the breakfast this morning, and if the President is concerned about
Senate Republicans holding that back?
MR. FLEISCHER: I don't know if that came up. That was not part of
the brief that I got from the President on it. But I just don't know.
Yes, and then Les. Yes.
Q Ari, this morning, several members of the House introduced a
constitutional amendment which would prohibit same-sex marriage. I was
wondering if the President has any position on that constitutional
amendment?
MR. FLEISCHER: All I know is, that's already law of the land,
signed by President Clinton. And the President supports the law of the
land in this case.
Q Ari, first, in former President Carter's calling last night on
the United States to take the first step by lifting the embargo on
Cuba, can President Bush find anything at all about Fidel Castro to
indicate that if he -- if we took this first step, Castro would take
the second by, among other things, allowing the first free national
elections in almost half a century?
MR. FLEISCHER: Les, I think we've exhausted this topic. I have
addressed it already in my earlier statement after statement after
statement.
Q You don't believe that if we do the first, he's going to do
the second, do you?
MR. FLEISCHER: Les, I think I've addressed it.
Q In Hyde Park, New York, yesterday afternoon, the Franklin D.
Roosevelt Library archivist said that on July 20, 1944, President
Roosevelt accepted his nomination for reelection by broadcasting to the
Democratic political convention in Chicago from the U.S. naval base in
San Diego. And on August 12th of that year, he began campaigning with
another speech from the deck of the destroyer USS Cummings. But the
archivist said he knew of no Republican criticism of these widely
photographed uses of the U.S. Navy for a political purpose. And my
question is this, Ari, do you believe that Gore, McAuliffe and all
those furious, furious critics of the use of the Air Force One
photograph of President Bush were just unaware of this
Roosevelt political use of the Navy? Or do you think they believe
in a double standard? (Laughter.)
Q Here's the wind-up. (Laughter.)
Q Thirty-six questions yesterday about blood money and so forth,
and I just wondered, do you think they believe in a double standard or
--
MR. FLEISCHER: Les, let me just say that the I think the President
believes that at all times Franklin Delano Roosevelt did his job in
defending and protecting our country and was reelected. And this
President is focused, too, on doing his job to defend and protect our
country, and working hard for all the citizens.
Q So there's a good comparison about pictures of Roosevelt on
the deck of the destroyer campaigning, and George Bush on Air Force
One? There's a great comparison, isn't there, Ari? Wouldn't you say?
MR. FLEISCHER: Are you done? (Laughter.)
Q That's a good comparison.
MR. FLEISCHER: I do think it's fair to point out there were a
couple, at least, newspapers this morning that did point out just what
you said.
Q Ari, on the trade legislation, you mentioned a one-vote margin
last time. And as you know, some of the conservative Republicans have
since backed off of the trade bill because, as you said, the
conservatives are not -- these conservatives are not usually for
trade. But what I fail to understand is how you expect to pick up any
votes when --
MR. FLEISCHER: The legislative process is never easy. The
legislative process, when it comes to trade, is seldom easy. And the
democratic process, when the legislative -- when it comes to trade
involving a 50-50 Senate and 50-50 House is harder still.
Nevertheless, because of the importance of the issue, this President is
going to put his shoulder to the wheel and hope to get a bill out of
conference that can be signed. He thinks it's important.
Q Thank you.
MR. FLEISCHER: Thank you.
END 1:51 P.M. EDT
#164-05/15
|