For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
February 27, 2001
Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
- President's Meeting with NATO Secretary General
- President's Address to Joint Session of Congress
- President's Tax Proposal
- Social
Security
- Estate
Tax
- Presidential
Pardons
- Secretary Powell's
Trip to the Middle East
- President Clinton
Library/Transport of Archival Material
- Plan
Colombia
- State
Department Human Rights Report
- The Budget/Tax
Cuts
- U.S. Army Rangers/Black
Berets
- D.C. General
Hospital
3:38 P.M. EST
MR. FLEISCHER: What happened to the front row? Let me
begin with an announcement. President Bush will meet with
NATO Secretary General Lord Robertson on March 8th next week, and that
is the only scheduling announcement I have for the day. And
with that, I'm all yours.
Q Who
will be the guests in the family box tonight?
MR.
FLEISCHER: We will put out a piece of paper shortly after
this briefing with a list of all the guests in the family
box. It will have all their names listed, it will have why
they're there, their general background, a little bit of biographical
information for everybody. And for the Tvs, we will have an
exact seating chart so you know who will be where.
Q Opponents
of the tax proposal for the Democratic side focused much criticism on
the priorities; that the President's plan doesn't set the priorities
right. There's nothing wrong in itself with giving relief to
the middle class or cutting the highest rate, but you don't do enough
for low-income people.
So I wonder
if the President will have much to say to people in the lowest income
bracket, to people most in need?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The President's plan helps people at the lowest
income brackets the most. They receive the biggest
percentage of the tax cuts. And it will be their point life
that they get the most help, and that's because we double the child
credit from $500 to $1,000.
I think --
and also, we lower the bottom bracket from 15 percent to 10
percent. And I think logic simply dictates that if you pay
$2,000 in taxes and you have one child and you just got your child
credit increased from $500 to $1,000, that means so much more to
somebody at the low-income end of the scale than somebody who pays
$25,000 in taxes because they make $100,000 a year. That
extra $500 is nowhere near as significant to somebody paying $25,000 in
taxes as it is to somebody who pays $1,000 or $2,000. They
will benefit the most.
One of the
families that the President will have with him tonight will be a tax
family, somebody who pays taxes at the lower to medium end of the
scale, who is going to receive a very sizeable tax reduction.
The average
tax reduction per American family, under the President's plan, will be
$1,600 a year, average family. That's a lot of money to a
lot of people.
Q Following
that logic out, though, would the President consider making that credit
refundable so that people could pay little to no income tax, but a
fairly hefty payroll tax bill which they'll get benefits?
MR.
FLEISCHER: It is already a partially refundable
credit. The child credit the President proposes is exactly
in line with the 1997 Bipartisan Budget Agreement, which provides a
partially refundable child credit and also the health care tax credit
the President is proposing of $2,000 for people who don't have
employer-provided health insurance. That is a fully
refundable credit.
Q Would
he entertain making it fully refundable?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The President thinks the best plan is a
bipartisan one.
Q Ari,
there is some talk out there that all of your talk about retiring the
"eligible debt" is just a convenient ploy to carve out enough money in
the Social Security surplus to use it to pay the transition costs for
private accounts. Could you speak to that?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think it's the soundest of sound economics to
pay down all the debt that is available to pay down, but not to
penalize the taxpayers, the government or the bondholders by forcing
taxpayers to bear penalties for paying it down even more. It
would be fiscally irresponsible to go down that path and that's why the
President chooses not to do so.
What we
hope is that nobody will seek to find new ways to spend more money by
arguing against what the President is doing.
Q And
if I could just follow that up, you said in answer to a question of
where does the transition cost come from for private accounts, you said
general revenues. It sounds to me like you've changed your
plan.
MR.
FLEISCHER: No, I've never indicated. I haven't
really discussed at great length where the transition costs come from
on Social Security. That all depends -- and this was my
answer to you at the time -- on the exact type of Social Security
reform plan that is agreed to. Because the transition costs are
totally dependent on the decisions that are made.
Q One
time when I did ask the question, you said general revenues.
MR.
FLEISCHER: Ultimately, in about 2030 to 2040, there will be
a bridge period where there will be a need for general
revenues. That's always been obvious. But the
extent of it depends on the decisions that are made.
Q Ari,
on the subject of decisions being made on Social Security, what is the
President's timetable for appointing the members of this commission,
how fast would he like it to act and what kind of parameters is he
going to lay out for this commission as it deals with Social Security?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The President will indicate that this commission
will be named sometime in the spring, and at that time is when he will
lay out the exact numbers, the details of it, who will be on the
commission.
Q Does
he have an approximate timetable for it to act, sometime this year,
next year?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The President will address that tonight.
Q Ari,
why take the hard issue last, the Social Security issue? Why
not take -- you know, getting Congress to approve a tax cut is
certainly a much more popular thing to do than to propose restructuring
Social -- and also simpler than restructuring Social
Security. Why not tackle the hard one first, when a new
President is in office, has momentum, has initiative? Why --
MR.
FLEISCHER: Well, I think the President's number one priority
remains improving education. And that's what he is dedicated
to do. And we're also going to pay off an awful lot of debt,
and we will fight for the tax relief that the President ran
on. That's the order in which we will proceed at the
beginning portion of this year. And the President remains
just as firmly committed to getting Social Security done as
ever. But this is the order that the President has decided
to proceed in. He thinks this makes the most sense to build
the greatest support across the country.
Social
Security will never be an easy issue. Medicare never an easy
issue. Many of the issues we will confront with a narrow
margin of the Congress are not easy. But the President has
got an order to his approach that he believes will gather and gain the
most strength from the American people so that we can take on some of
these other challenges later.
Q He's
going to propose appointing these folks in the spring. How soon does
he think that they're likely to get back with him?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The President will get into that tonight.
Q But
it's not going to happen --
Q Ari,
will the commission be charged with finding a way to implement the
personal retirement accounts? Will that be an inherent part
of their mission? And is that a fixed part of the
President's vision --
MR.
FLEISCHER: The President believes very strongly that one of
the best ways to save Social Security is through a bipartisan idea, and
that is the creation of personal retirement accounts so people can have
a higher rate of return on the money that they invest, that is taken
out of their paychecks for Social Security. That is a core
principle for the President.
Q During
the campaign, the President said quite often that the Clinton
administration did not lead on this issue and, in his words, "we will."
MR.
FLEISCHER: That's right.
Q Why
does not the President, then, in fact, live up to those words and lead,
and put a proposal on the table? Why must he turn to some
other device, a rather time-honored one here in Washington, of a
commission for the many times in history past commissions'
recommendations are ignored and go nowhere?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I would urge you to listen to the President's
words tonight, and you will hear him and see him lead on saving Social
Security. I'll also remind you that the last time Social
Security was successfully reformed was in 1983, in good part thanks to
a commission. There have been commissions since then that did not
work.
But the
trick to commissions in Washington, D.C. is to create the will so you
can get the way. And that's what President Bush intends to
do. He intends to invest the capital to get it done, and he will fight
to get it done.
Q Ari,
as you know, there have been a lot of rich people who have been
speaking out against abolition of the estate tax. I talked
to some people on the Hill who believe that this has really undermined
support for abolition of the estate tax on the Hill, which at one point
seemed like it was going to happen. Is that your perception
as well?
MR.
FLEISCHER: No, the President is going to fight -- and you
will hear this tonight as well -- the President tonight will fight for
a repeal of the death tax. He thinks it's a wrong tax, he
thinks it's a tax that is punitive, it's double taxation, and it ought
to be abolished. He will fight to abolish it. And
if you recall in the last Congress, there was a vote in the Congress, a
rather overwhelming bipartisan vote, to abolish it. So we
think that will happen again this year.
Q Will
he address the campaign that's being waged by these rich people who say
they don't need it?
MR.
FLEISCHER: No, he will fight for what he believes
in. He won't address those other concerns; he'll just fight
for what he believes in.
Q On
the pardon issue, thank you. Senator Lott has indicated that
the courts said the investigation should be handled in the courts.
Does the President prefer that the Senate and the House drop their
investigations of the "Pardongate" situation?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Well, he has said that the nation should move on
and that this White House will move on. We are not even
looking at those areas. We are focusing on improving
education and paying down the debt, cutting taxes, rebuilding the
military. That's the agenda of this White
House. And the President also understands that Congress will
do as Congress sees fit. But his preference is to move
forward.
The
President also understands -- he said this earlier today -- that
investigative reporters will look at this. He can't stop
that. He understands.
Q Has
he asked the senators and the congressmen to stop their
investigations?
MR.
FLEISCHER: No, he understands the Congress will do what it
is going to do and he can only speak for what this White House will do
in this case.
Q Ari,
will he address the question about emergency supplemental for the
military on this maintenance issue?
MR.
FLEISCHER: That will not be in his remarks tonight.
Q Ari,
Secretary Powell received a lot of criticism on his trip to the Middle
East from many Arab leaders, critical of the U.S.-British bombing of
Iraq, one Arab leader saying that the U.S. was living in a 1991 time
warp.
Has not the
decision on the part of the U.S. and Britain to go for the bombing gain
support for Saddam Hussein rather than mobilizing support for the old
Gulf War Coalition, if that was your purpose?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The President has made crystal clear, and he
could not make it any clearer, that he will continue to enforce the
no-fly zone over Iraq, and that's what he intends to do.
Q Isn't
it more difficult now when many of the Arab leaders have reacted to the
bombing and are not as amenable to supporting U.S. action in the
future?
MR.
FLEISCHER: No, I think the President has made clear what he
intends to do and he will continue.
Q Regarding
the President and his commendable goal to save money for the people of
the United States, The New York Times reports that 625 tons of Clinton
archival material were flown from Washington to Little Rock on eight
C-5 transport planes. And my question is, why was this flown
rather than shipped slow freight, since the groundbreaking for the
Clinton Library is blocked by two lawsuits, as well as insufficient
funds? And isn't President Bush willing to ask the Clinton
Library Foundation to repay the U.S. Treasury for the difference
between flying and slow freight? Couldn't he address this in the name
of the economy, Ari? Why was it flown?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think in the spirit of looking forward and not
backwards, you should address your question to those who make the
decisions to fly or not fly --
Q Who
would that be?
MR.
FLEISCHER: That was a previous administration, I believe.
Q Ari,
one on Plan Colombia. Some of the critics are concerned that
this sort of smacks of nation-building -- a two-part
question: One is, nation-building a bad word to this
President, as it is to some in this city? And two, is Plan
Colombia partly nation-building?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Well, the President supports plans to work
closely with our allies on a host of issues that make for a stronger
communities, and that involves trade, which is something that was
discussed during the meeting with President Pastrana; human rights in
Colombia as they discussed it; efforts to win the drug war as they
discussed it. The President considers all that important
parts of a bilateral relationship with Colombia, and he is committed to
those areas and to working with the government of Colombia.
Let me also
just add, there will be a briefing shortly after this on background to
give a readout on that meeting, and what I would urge reporters to do
on any other questions involved in that meeting, if you don't mind,
gather right here in lower press after the briefing and we'll have a
background briefing from somebody who was present.
Q Could
I ask you on the policy -- nation-building, is that a bad word for this
President?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I really don't have anything for you on that.
Q Can
I just have a follow-up on a question I asked this morning, which
doesn't speak to the meeting, but to U.S. policy? General
Barry McCaffrey had maintained that Plan Colombia was an anti-narcotics
operation, not a counterinsurgency operation; was and always would be.
Does the President share that view, or is he concerned that the more
involved we get in Colombia, the closer we could get to funding a
counterinsurgency operation?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think that's a good question you might want to
bring up at the briefing, post this.
Q Ari,
according to India Globe, the Taliban in Afghanistan, they have offered
that they are ready to hand over Osama bin Laden to Saudi Arabia if the
United States would drop its sanctions, and they have a kind of deal
that they want to make with the United States. Do you have
any comments?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Let me take that and get back to you on that.
Q And
also, if you have seen the human rights report issued yesterday by the
State Department, if the President has seen it, that it's calling on a
U.S. resolution against China in Geneva at the United Nations. What
will be different this time? Every year, there's a
resolution, but never been passed. How far President Bush is
willing to push this year to bring the allies together to pass this
resolution against China?
MR.
FLEISCHER: That resolution will have the support of the
United States because President Bush believes it's the right thing to
do. And that is why he is supporting it. We will see what
the ultimate outcome is, but that's why the President is advocating
it.
Q Ari,
can you tell us something about the practice sessions today, whether
any changes were made to the speech today, what kind, who was --
MR.
FLEISCHER: Yes. The President practiced on the
TelePrompTer this morning. It was 36 minutes at his first
practice, so the length of the speech, of course, will depend on the
applause. So it could either be a 37-minute speech or a
lengthier speech, we hope. (Laughter.)
Q No
one was applauding during the 36 minutes?
MR.
FLEISCHER: That's correct. Staff behaved
itself. So the speech was about 36. And the
President will practice again this afternoon before the
TelePrompTer. He's doing the practice in the theater.
Let me
mention one thing also on the speech tonight, because this is
notable. Tonight is not only going to be for President Bush
a special moment, because it is first address to a joint session of the
Congress, but this will be the first time for our nation that there has
been an address to a joint session of Congress by a Republican
President to a Republican House with a Republican Senate since
1954. The first time in almost 50 years, which is older than
many people in this room. The New York Giants were the World
Series champion in 1954. (Laughter.) The Oscar
award winning movie in 1954 was On The Waterfront. Alaska
and Hawaii weren't even states the last time something like tonight
took place.
So it is a
different moment. It is a special moment. It is a
new chapter in American history and a new chapter in American politics,
and it is a chapter that the President is going to work very hard
tonight to set a different tone in Washington, to bring more civility
to Washington and to fight for his agenda on funding his priorities of
reducing the debt and cutting taxes.
Q Ari,
is this the sound of gridlock breaking?
MR.
FLEISCHER: We'll find out. We'll find
out. But it was a different Capitol in 1954. You
didn't have the rancor, you didn't have the
partisanship. But I do mean what I've said. I
have spent a lot of time working on Capitol Hill starting almost 20
years ago. And this is a singular moment, and I don't think
that should be lost. It is unusual in American politics for
trends that long in the making to be broken. And the
election of President Bush and keeping the House and Senate Republican,
even with small margins, is an historic accomplishment. The
first time the House and the Senate -- the last time the House and
Senate stayed Republican as long as they have was in the '20s.
Q Ari,
there was a man in 1954 named Joe McCarthy. How can you say
there was no rancor then? (Laughter.)
MR.
FLEISCHER: I am talking about, in terms of the partisanship
on domestic issues. I don't think it was marked the same way
it is now with every single day every issue, every bill, every
opportunity for gridlock. I'm never suggesting that in 1954,
all of America's problems were gone; they certainly weren't.
Q Do
you get the idea that the Democrats share your sense of awe and
wonderment at this special event? (Laughter.)
MR.
FLEISCHER: Ask me after the speech.
Q Do
you know if this is the first time that he's been at a State of the
Union or a joint session?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Tonight is the first time that George W. Bush
will have been at a State of the Union or addressed a joint session.
Q He
was not there for his father?
MR.
FLEISCHER: No. He did note earlier that it's kind
of interesting that the first one he'll be at is the actual one he's
giving. He won't get to listen to it, as he said.
Q I
just would like -- who was in the practice sessions besides --
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think Andy Card was there. Let me
find out exactly who was there this morning. I'll try to let
you know.
Q Ari,
does the President feel a need now to say something to bolster
Americans' confidence in the economy? Consumer confidence
polls have been heading straight downward pretty much since his
election became clear. I mean, has he talked the economy
down enough now? Does he need to bolster some spirits?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Surely you don't think I would accept the premise
of that question. The economic data is continuing to come in
a manner that raises worries about the strength of our economy and the
President and, I remind you, Vice President Cheney accurately addressed
and assessed this issue several months ago. The economy that
we are inheriting is not strong, and the President believes the best
way to talk it up or to improve it is to pass his economic
plan. That's what he will talk to the Congress about
tonight.
Q Ari,
when you've paid down all the debt you think it's possible to pay down,
$2 trillion, how does the President -- how much do you think will be
left, first of all, and how does the President propose to pay the
rest?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The remaining debt will be approximately $800
billion, and it will mature at a time frame and will be paid off in
that time frame in a manner that doesn't incur penalties to the
American taxpayers. It just makes no good fiscal or economic
sense to pay a penalty to retire debt that won't come due for, in some
cases, 30 years. It's bad economics, it's not fiscally
responsible and it need not happen.
Q Ari,
keeping it on the books for 30 years is going to incur a penalty as
well, paying the interest. And, as you know, the premiums
are paid to offset that. So what is the difference?
MR.
FLEISCHER: It's no penalty; it's exactly what people were
promised. People were promised if you buy a 30-year bond,
you will get paid interest at this rate for 30 years. It's
an obligation of the United States government and, frankly, I think
there are a lot of people, particularly elderly Americans, who take
comfort in the fact that they own the safest investment in the world,
and I am not certain that they would welcome the hand of the United
States government coming and taking those bonds away from them.
Q Giving
them their money --
MR.
FLEISCHER: Well, again, but who pays the
premium? At what price? It's going to be -- it's
estimated that could cost as much as a $100 billion.
Q Ari,
what will be the policy of continuing to sell bonds?
MR.
FLEISCHER: That's a question that the Treasury Department is
addressing. As the debt diminishes, the issuance of bonds,
too, will diminish. It already has. It has
diminished for the last several years. The Treasury Department has
canceled auctions on some notes. And it is a wonderfully new
issue for the government to deal with because it's a sign of more good
things to come.
The last
time the government was in such a position was one century
ago. It's a good position to be in, and our budget will
continue that strength for the economy.
Q Ari,
the President said yesterday that he would like to return fiscal sanity
to Washington. Under that rubric, exactly how specific is he
going to be in the speech tonight about programs that either will not
grow very much, grow less than 4 percent, or be cut, in fact?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Under the combination of his speech tonight and
the release of the budget tomorrow, we'll be very
specific. He'll have an awful lot of answers to
those. The President will talk about the need for fiscal
discipline tonight.
Q Ari,
on the question of the loss of the Japanese fishing vessel, I believe
that the President sent a handwritten letter to the Japanese Prime
Minister in the last couple of days. My question is, why did
he do that now? Why didn't he do it a week, 10 days, even
two weeks ago? And how concerned is the President about the
state of U.S.-Japanese relations as a result of this?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Well, the President, as you know, personally
called Prime Minister Mori to express his apologies and regrets about
the accident. So, too, did Secretary Powell and many others
in the United States government. The Department of Defense
has sent a special envoy, and admiral, to Japan who did carry a letter
from the President. And it's a sign of the importance the
United States places on its relations with Japan and the sorrow that we
feel for the people in Japan who lost their lives, and for people who
have lost their loved ones.
Q Would
you say the President is taking a personal interest in the unfolding
story of the investigation of the Greenville and what happened --
MR.
FLEISCHER: Yes, the President is involved in this at all
stages, of course.
Q Ari,
does the President, as Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces, believe
in combat units like the Seals, Marine Corps Recon and Rangers should
be required to accept women, by lowering female physical requirements
like they do at West Point, Colorado Springs and Annapolis, or does he
believe that ability alone should be the requirement, like the way he
once hired baseball players in Texas? And I have one
follow-up.
MR.
FLEISCHER: Les, the President has always believed that the
military is well-served by men and women in the Armed Forces --
Q In
Seals, women in Seals?
MR.
FLEISCHER: And on some of the specialty categories, I think
that's a question you should address to the Department of
Defense. And there are no changes in policies that I'm aware
of from this White House.
Q Two
U.S. Army Rangers are reportedly marching from Fort Benning, Georgia to
Washington with a petition that the Commander in Chief reverse the
order of the Chief of Staff, and everybody in the Army be given their
hard-earned Black Berets. Does the President agree that all
soldiers deserve this Black Beret, or will he welcome these two Rangers
and support their petition?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The President has asked the Department of Defense
to look into that matter, and that's what they're doing at his
direction.
Q How
does he feel?
MR.
FLEISCHER: He's asked DOD to look at it.
Q But
he has a conviction on this, doesn't he?
MR.
FLEISCHER: We will let you know as he talks to DOD.
Q Is
that a formal review of that?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I'm not sure I would use the word, "formal," but
the President has asked DOD to look at it. He's going to
talk about it and see what the status is.
Q Ari,
the President talked about keeping growth rates down below 4
percent. When he was governor of Texas, the budget grew by
41 percent. So he doesn't have a track record --
MR.
FLEISCHER: It did not when you account for inflation and
population growth increases.
Q Well,
4 percent doesn't even take into account --
MR.
FLEISCHER: The premise of your question about Texas is not
accurate.
Q In
real numbers it grew 41 percent.
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think that the real issue here in Washington is
whether or not we're going to squander the surplus because it gets
spent. And if spending continues at the rate it did in the last
Congress, it will diminish the surplus by $1.4 trillion. By
that I mean in the last Congress, both parties agreed and it was signed
into law to have a 6 percent increase in domestic discretionary
spending. I heard this morning that actually the figure for
non-defense domestic discretionary spending last year was closer to 14
percent -- I'm sorry, last year it was 8 percent. The
average of the last three years was 6 percent. Domestic
discretionary non-defense was a 14-percent surge in spending last
year.
And the
President believes that the biggest threat to the surplus is more
government spending. And I think one of the issues that this
budget will test, and that tonight's speech will test, is whether or
not people in Washington are free to re-embark on another spending
spree. And I do think that this budget will represent the
last stand of the big spenders, if we're able to stop
them. And that's one reason to limit spending to the rate
the President has proposed.
Q Ari,
if you look at the last stand of the big spenders, however, if you look
at a 25 or 30-year period, discretionary spending is at about a 25-year
low, as a percentage of the Gross Domestic Product. If you
take defense out of it, it goes back to about 1967; if you include
defense, I think it goes back to the early '70s. What's the
urgency?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The urgency is that if we increase spending the
way we have in the past, it will squander the surplus. And
the President believes very strongly that the biggest threat to the
surplus comes from government spending. And I think history
is on his side on that, especially recent history. Even in
the 1980s, if you go back and look, one statistic I've seen is that
revenues doubled, spending tripled in the 1980s, even with a tax
cut. And that's the source of much of the government
spending problems and fiscal discipline. It comes from the
spending side.
And on the
tax side, what the President is saying is people shouldn't send their
money at the same rate they have been. It's not the
government's money; people ought to get to keep it. That's
his belief.
Q Ari,
talk about the last stand of the big spenders, those big spenders last
year were of the Republican variety. What's the President
going to do to rein them in? Is he going to veto spending
bills?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Limiting spending to 4 percent applies to
everybody in Congress, Republican or Democrat alike. And I
haven't been shy about saying that from here. It's a problem
that exists in both parties to varying degrees, but we're confident
that we're going to be able to address it and I think we'll find a lot
more support for addressing it in the Republican Party. But
we're going to continue to work with people from both parties to get
the job done, because I know there are some Democrats who share that
concern.
Q Is
he prepared to veto Republican-authored spending bills?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think it's much too soon to start going down
that road. Allow the President to make his case
tonight. We believe that the combination of the President's
speech tonight, the budget he'll submit tomorrow, the travel he'll do
around the country will build a broad-based support for his budget
priorities, increase in spending, paying down the debt, cutting taxes,
rebuilding the military. And that will get reflected in the
will of the people, and that will influence the votes on the Hill.
Q Ari,
on the subject of the President's travel the next couple of days, can
you explain to us why some of these places were chosen? Were there
particular reasons? Are there members of Congress you're
trying to reach -- say, for example, in Georgia or Arkansas or Iowa,
who you think are --
MR.
FLEISCHER: The President is always trying to reach members
of Congress, and he does so in a variety of ways. Many of
them are at the speech tonight to the joint session; others are the
meetings he has, such as the one he just finished here with the
leadership in the House and the Senate. Travel to the
states, of course, is another way to talk to members of
Congress. When he goes to Georgia, there's a Democrat
Senator from Georgia who is a cosponsor of his tax cut
proposal. So there are a variety of ways the President
reaches out and talks to members of Congress, says thanks to members of
Congress who are supporting him. And he'll continue to do
that.
Q So
there's no strategic --
MR.
FLEISCHER: I don't have the list of traveling people yet.
We'll get that for you once we have it.
Q The
congressionally appointed control board is preparing to shut down one
of the biggest trauma units in the area, the D.C. General. Is the
President, now that he's a resident of the District of Columbia, not
concerned that this is going to affect 100,000 people who go there
every year, most of them poor, most of -- a lot of them homeless, who
are not going to receive any kind of alternative medical service as a
result of this.
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think that's a question you should address to
the Control Board, but it's also another reason that the President is
going to push for his health care tax credits and for the other
proposals that address health care in his budget. There will
be several proposals in the budget to help people who are uninsured,
who are in underserved areas, and the President will highlight those in
his speech tonight, as well as in the budget tomorrow -- community
health centers is one of the shining examples the President talked
about during the campaign, which will be a tremendous change, a big
improvement in delivering health care to people across the country.
Q A
follow-up, Ari, on D.C. General, that it's also one of the two
hospitals in the country that is capable of taking care of a
bio-terrorist attack, and that also has national security
implications. Isn't that also a primary consideration now, given that
bio-terrorism, other forms of terrorism have become more subject to
that than previously?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The President is concerned about terrorism in
this country, and he's very confident that the FBI and the other law
enforcement agencies and the training for that is done throughout the
nation with localities, municipalities, that the United States is ready
and can address any threats that are brought our way.
Q I
just came from a short trip to India, and I just wanted the President
to know that the people there -- he's very well-received in India so
far.
MR.
FLEISCHER: Very good.
Q What
they are expecting from him that he could be the first Republican U.S.
President to visit India in 30 years, and they expect that relations
between the two countries, and I also -- area, and the U.S.
Congressional delegation was also there, and they are calling on the
administration to increase more aid for the earthquake
victims. And also tomorrow, Indian Americans are having a
rally on Capitol Hill for the same reason, calling on the
administration to increase more help for the earthquake victims in
India.
MR.
FLEISCHER: I know that USAID and the State Department have
responded at the President's direction to the earthquake in India, and
that's an ongoing effort by the United States government, and we remain
very committed to helping the Indian people to recover from that
terrible earthquake.
Q Ari,
do you know what Cabinet Secretary is going to be traveling on this --
MR.
FLEISCHER: Let me get that for you.
END
4:09 P.M. EST
|