For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
February 8, 2001
Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
- Personnel announcements/President's schedule
- Phone
call with Chairman Arafat
- Defense
budget/size
- Israeli Prime
Minister Sharon/comments
- Tax cut
plan
- Presidential
pardons
- Racial
profiling/meeting
- Census/congressional districts
- Shooting outside the White House/security issues
- Taxing
Internet
- President's
meeting with Democrats
- Presidential
travel
- Outreach to black
leaders
2:10 P.M. EST
MR. FLEISCHER: I have a few announcements to make, and then be
pleased to take your questions. Personnel: The
President today is announcing his intention to nominate Michelle Davis
as Assistant Secretary of Treasury for Public Affairs. We
should have the paper on that out to everybody this afternoon.
In
addition, the President today is announcing his intention to nominate
Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee to be the Senate representative to the
55th session of the General Assembly of the United
Nations. As you know, there are two members of Congress that
alternate between the House and the Senate who serve as members who
participate in the proceedings at the U.N. General
Assembly. They alternate from the House to the Senate.
There is currently a vacancy with a seat that was previously held by
Senator Rod Grams. And as a result, the President today is
nominating Senator Bill Frist to serve on that position.
Finally,
the President tomorrow will be visiting a school in Southeast
Washington, the J.C. Nalle Elementary School, to mark Black History
Month. He will be going there, along with Secretary Paige,
and he will also discuss the importance of reading while he is there.
And with
that, I'd be pleased to take questions.
Q Coverage?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The coverage will be a pool, and we'll have all
the notification out on that.
Q Ari,
can you tell us more about the President's phone call with Chairman
Arafat this morning? Did it happen before or after the
bombing, and what did he say?
MR.
FLEISCHER: It happened early this morning; it was prior to
the bombing. The President made two calls today, one to
Chairman Arafat and the other to Sultan Qaboos of Oman.
Q Do
you know, did he use the phrase with Arafat, the United States is
committed to a "just and lasting peace"?
MR.
FLEISCHER: He talked about promoting peace and stability in
the region and bringing an end to the violence.
Q Can't
say whether he used the phrase, "just and lasting peace"?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not going to get into specifics of a phone
call the President made like that, to a foreign leader. It
would be a private conversation.
Q Can
we visit the defense budget again just for a moment? The Secretary of
Defense reportedly told the Joint Chiefs that there would be no large
additions to the defense budget for the next fiscal
year. And Mary Ellen is quoted as saying that the budget
that is going to go up --
MS.
COUNTRYMAN: Who quoted me as saying that?
Q --
will be President Clinton's budget of $310 billion, which is, as you
know, is $31 billion short of what the President advocated.
A two-point
question: One, if Congress adds on those $31 billion, or
even more billions, will the President sign the bill? And
two, what happens if Congress tacks on weapons systems that the
administration does not want, such as the F-22 or the B-22, et cetera?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I'm not going to discuss any hypotheticals, but
the President's position is very clear, and this is exactly what he
promised to do during the course of the campaign and it's exactly what
he and Secretary Rumsfeld are working shoulder to shoulder on right
now, which is the President has directed the Secretary to begin a force
structure review, which is now underway, and that will help determine
what the shape of future spending decisions will be. The
President believes we need to rebuild our military and the force
structure review is a part of doing that.
In
addition, the President's budget that he will submit will honor the
campaign promises he made to increase pay for men and women who wear
the uniform, as well as to improve the housing for the men and women
who wear the uniform. And that will be an increase above and
beyond what was spent previously.
Q A
follow-up. There's a little confusion, I
believe. If that force structure review is not completed by
the time the budget goes up, what about the possibility of a
supplemental?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The President has said he supports no immediate
supplementals.
Q On
the President's phone calls with foreign leaders, if the foreign
leaders, themselves, quote the President in that phone call, can't we
get some help on this end in telling us whether or not that is
accurate?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The President's intention, when he has this
conversations is he will treat them as private
conversations. I would just urge you to be cautious with
information you hear from others. We'll be happy to try to
help you to the best degree we can, and we may want to discuss that
following this.
Q What
is the President's reaction to Prime Minister-elect Sharon's comments
yesterday about Jerusalem? Did that come up with the
conversation with Mr. Arafat? And does the White House have
any reaction to this first episode of violence in the region -- the car
bombing this morning?
MR.
FLEISCHER: On the first question, the President is not going
to react to every statement made by every foreign leader around the
world. Secondly, on the car bombing, it's another reminder of the need
to create a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, to bring an end
to the cycle of violence.
Q Did
the Sharon comments come up in his conversation with --
MR.
FLEISCHER: I'm not going to get into the topics the two
discussed beyond what I've already indicated.
Q Ari,
on the tax cut, the Democrat leaders are up on the Hill today with a
car and an automobile part, and they're saying that millionaires under
the Bush plan would get a tax cut sufficient to buy a Lexus, and
working people would get a tax cut sufficient to buy a muffler. Is
their arithmetic wrong, or do you disagree with their emphasis and
argument?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think both their arithmetic and their emphasis
is wrong. What the Democrats are proposing is to collect
almost $1 trillion in higher taxes than President Bush has proposed;
that way, they can spend the money on bigger
government. Under the Democrats proposal, the government
will get put in the driver's seat, and the taxpayers get stuck in the
back.
Q But
their numbers are not wrong, are they, that a millionaire will get a
$46,000 tax cut, and that's enough to buy a car?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The numbers are incomplete. The real
numbers are that the biggest percentage gainers in this tax plan are
people at the middle and the low end of the income
scale. They will benefit the most from President Bush's
proposed tax cut. But what you have here is an old issue,
where there are some Democrats who want to keep taxes
high. That way they can spend more money. But I
think what you're going to really see is a growing group -- a smaller
group, it won't be all the Democrats, but there will be a smaller
number of Democrats who want to work with us to cut taxes for all
Americans. And that's how we're going to achieve a
bipartisan government coalition to get taxes cut.
Q One
more question on this. This example has a kind of visceral
appeal, that people would get so much money they could buy this luxury
car. Is it a fair argument to make against the President's
plan, to make an argument on that basis?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think the fairer argument is that there are
some tax-and-spend Democrats who every time they see a car start
thinking about building a toll booth. And that's how they
collect all these taxes. So that's our point of view.
Q Ari,
the President a few days ago said categorically that President Clinton
or whichever President has the constitutional right to pardon
anyone. The Republicans today are holding a hearing on
Capitol Hill exactly about one of the pardons of President
Clinton. Does the President have any opinion on that?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think the Constitution is very clear, that the
President has the power to pardon. The Constitution is also
clear, the Congress has the power to hold hearings.
Q Ari,
on the tax plan, the one that was sent to Congress today does not
include the education IRAs that were in the original tax proposal from
the campaign. Have those been dropped, or are they going to
be sent up in another form?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I'd have to go back and look to see if that was
part of the education package that was sent up.
Q I
think that was part of the original December '99 tax package.
MR.
FLEISCHER: Let me go back and take a look at that.
Q And
also, to follow up, there were some other tax breaks proposed for
health care or low income housing. Are those going to be
sent in other proposals?
MR.
FLEISCHER: As you know, during the course of the campaign,
there were a series of provisions that the President announced that are
fully built into our budget, such as health care and tax provisions,
that allow, for example, people who don't have employer-provided
insurance to get a tax credit of up to $2,000 so they can afford health
insurance. Those were carried under a separate item in our budget that
are not part of the original December, 1999 tax plan.
Q So
the President will propose additional tax cuts in the package that he's
sending today?
MR.
FLEISCHER: He'll have additional initiatives that focus on
health, that focus on housing, that focus on a series of items, and
he'll lay it out just as he did during the course of the campaign.
For
example, let me give you one specific -- the charity tax deduction that
the President has talked about. When the President announced
his faith-based initiative, the proposal to allow 80 million Americans
who are currently denied the right to receive a charitable deduction
was carried as part of his faith-based initiative. In terms
of the budgeting for it, the cost of the faith-based initiative carries
that item.
Q Ari,
why did the President decide it was a bad idea to use the general
revenue surplus to deal with the long-term financing problems of Social
Security and Medicare, where there's a shortfall in revenues?
MR.
FLEISCHER: He has not said that about Social
Security. What he has said is, before we spend more money
from general revenues, or spend any money from general revenues, what's
important is, we focus on how to save and reform Social Security so it
doesn't go broke. So the President expressed an openness to
that idea, but in order to proceed, the first step the President
believes we need to take is to focus on reforming the system itself.
Q But
the reason for reform is the shortfall in the revenues --
MR.
FLEISCHER: No, the reason for the reform is because the
Social Security system, given the demographic changes our nation is
going through, or will shortly to through, will not be
sustainable. And we need to have a system that will be able
to honor the commitments made to our grandparents and to our
grandchildren.
Q Would
it be sustainable if you applied the surplus to the problem?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The solution is to reform the system, not just to
throw more money into a system that is vital.
Q Ari,
how committed is the President to holding the line on the size of his
tax cut? Would he veto anything that went beyond $1.6
trillion?
MR.
FLEISCHER: It's too soon to start talking that type of
language. The President has sent his plan up today, and
there's no -- we see nothing on the horizon that would indicate to us
that we're going to be into that situation. And we'll just
withhold and wait judgment. But the plan went up today, and
we're very encouraged, frankly, by the reaction that we're
getting. I think that you're going to see a sea change in
Washington D.C., where tax relief is on its way to the American
people.
Q He
also suggested that people could use the money that they get back from
their taxes to pay for their higher energy bills. It seems
to suggest, because the effects of the tax cut won't be felt for
sometime to come, that this higher energy costs will be with us for
some time.
MR.
FLEISCHER: And that's another reason the President supports
any effort that would make the tax cut retroactive. That
would put money in people's hands immediately, because they need it.
Q Is
he saying that these high energy costs will be with us for some time to
come?
MR.
FLEISCHER: He's saying that people need to have money in
their pockets to spend as they see fit. There will be some
families who will use that money to pay for higher energy
costs. Other families, like families we've visited this
week, have said they'll use it to educate their
children. Other families have said they'll use it to take a
vacation. The point is, the money doesn't belong to the
government, it belongs to those people who made it, and it should be
their determination of how to spend it.
Q Ari,
you've said before that the President wants to stick to the $1.6
trillion price tag on the tax plan, and that he also likes the details
that he's outlined. Yet today, again, he strongly endorsed
this idea of retroactivity. That's going to increase the
price tag of his tax cut. Is he going to tell Congress which
pieces he would like to have dropped out so that he can afford that
retroactivity?
MR.
FLEISCHER: It all depends on how the retroactivity is done,
what the phase-ins are, what the effective dates are. But
you can still adhere very close to the spending figures the President
has said, while tweaking the tax cut on the retroactivity
side. It all depends on the final decisions that get made.
Q Do
you have any estimates or cost estimates on retroactivity and how you
can fit it in there without increasing the prices?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Jim, again, it all depends on the decisions that
are made, about what the effective date would be, what the phase-in
rate would be, the acceleration rate of the phase-in. It's a
whole series of decisions that have yet to be made. They all
do impact the cost of a tax cut, and not to a substantial degree, but
they do have a cost impact.
Q But
they do increase --
MR.
FLEISCHER: I've acknowledged they have a cost impact,
absolutely.
Q Is
he getting any pressure -- you said he's committed to the size of a tax
cut -- but in these meetings with members of Congress, from
Republicans, from business leaders like the meeting he had yesterday,
to look at things like reducing capital gains or adding some more cuts
for business owners?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Yes, that does come up. Frankly, in
the meeting with Ways and Means members, the President was talking
about the need to create capital in this country, capital
formation. And he made the case for his marginal and
across-the- board income tax rate cut to create capital. And
a member suggested to him that then we ought to cut capital gains
taxes. And he said, that's not what I'm going to do.
At the
meeting today with some of the high-tech leaders, they talked about
whether or not corporate taxes should be cut. And the
President said, I'm not going to push for that, we don't need to do
that, and in fact, the reaction was rather strong. People
were saying, what we really want is for our customers to have more
money in their hands; that way, they can come out and buy our
products.
So we do
expect to hear that. We expected to hear it from the
Republican side, that we need to do more business provisions, we expect
from the Democrat side to say, don't cut taxes as much as you want to
cut taxes, leave taxes higher. And the President is going to
adhere right to the ground that he has established and fight for the
tax cut that he ran on.
Q In
that meeting last night, in the Ways and Means meeting last night, did
one of the Democrats tell him if a vote were held today that it would
be along party lines?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I'm not going to characterize things that were
said by any of the members in that line.
Q Ari,
on racial profiling, you've denied a report that, in fact, the White
House is going to set up a panel to look at the racial profiling
issue. There is a meeting scheduled next
week. Can you describe what the White House can and should
do on issues like racial profiling and other issues that go to the
trust that Americans have in the police forces around this country?
MR.
FLEISCHER: We'll be working with other people and listening
to the law enforcement community, listening to people who were involved
in this very important and sensitive issue to hear their ideas and
concerns, working with other relevant government agencies and Cabinet
departments. It is an important issue that's something the President
talked about during the campaign, and we are open to ideas.
Q What
are his ideas?
MR.
FLEISCHER: It's a little preliminary right now. That's one
of the reasons we're going to hold meetings with relevant groups, and
as soon as we have more to indicate, we will.
Q Can
you remind us what he talked about during the campaign?
MR.
FLEISCHER: He talked during the campaign about the need to
make sure that people aren't pulled over because of the color of their
skin or because of their ethnic background or their
race. And he said we need to be careful and cognizant of
that. And that's something the government has been wrestling
with for many a year, and we're going to be sensitive to it and work
with the law enforcement community and others involved to help address
it.
Q Is
there a trust problem, do you think, for the police, a credibility
problem for the police around this country?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think we're going to have some meetings and
listen to people from all sides of the issue.
Q Ari,
some black police law enforcement organizations are somewhat upset
because they feel that they should be involved in this initial
meeting. What is the White House saying to those groups that
are saying this?
MR.
FLEISCHER: We're going to continue to have a series of
meetings with many different people to discuss issues and so they'll be
a part of an ongoing series of meetings.
Q Ari,
House Republicans told The Wall Street Journal today that the White
House has privately promised to block states from using sample numbers
in redrawing congressional districts. Have they been given
this reassurance, and how did the White House reach that decision?
MR.
FLEISCHER: As far as the information that I have, Mike, that
is under review right now, about the final determination of what will
be happening at the Census Department. The Census Department
has more information to be released later on dealing with this issue,
and it is under review by Census, and if we have anything to announce,
we'll let you know.
Q What
guidance have you given the Commerce Department about how they should
proceed, and what's the time frame?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The Commerce Department is proceeding as it sees
fit, and we'll work with the Commerce Department.
Q Are
House Republicans wrong, therefore, when they say and are quoted, as
they were today in The Wall Street Journal, that they believe there is
no way the President will reverse his original intention and allow for
sampling?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I'll have to take a look at that story
specifically before I comment on that.
Q Ari,
the President's been arguing in his tax cut events that high credit
card debt is one reason that people's taxes should be
cut. But does he really believe that the government is
responsible for bailing out people who run up their credit cards?
MR.
FLEISCHER: It's not a question of bailing anybody
out. It's the taxpayers that have been bailing out the
government. This money does not belong to the government, it
belongs to the taxpayers, and it should be theirs to spend as they see
fit. That's the President's view.
Q Ari,
why send up a proposal or a tax plan today as opposed to formal
legislation, and what's the strategy behind that?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Well, again, on a host of initiatives
traditionally done from the Executive in conveyance of legislation up
to the legislature -- it's the exception when you have bill language
sent from the Executive to the legislature. Typically, what
is sent up are a set of specific proposals, which is what you say
today. And today's proposals are, indeed, very, very
specific: double the child credit from $500 to $1,000; lower
the current five rate brackets to four rate brackets at 10 percent, 15
percent, 25 percent and 33 percent. It's hard to get more
specific than that.
Q In
the wake of yesterday's shooting, Ari, is any consideration being given
to a review of security measures around the White House or the
President's movements on the White House grounds?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I'm not going to discuss any of the security
changes, if any, will be made. That's going to be a matter,
of course, dealing with White House security. But the
President, again, expresses his appreciation to the men and women of
law enforcement and the Secret Service who handled the matter the way
they did. But he anticipates no changes in his routine or
activities. He went right back to work yesterday, as I
indicated. So, too, the Vice President. But, no,
he's not going to make any changes.
Q Ari,
on the same subject, what is the latest report you have gotten from the
investigation?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I'm not going to -- as I indicated yesterday, I
speak for the President. I'm not going to get into any of
the specific details of what the investigators are working
on. I would refer you to the Secret Service or to the Park
Police.
Q Ari,
what is the President's position on the use of statistical sampling in
a census?
MR.
FLEISCHER: The President supports an actual head count,
because he believes it's the best and the most accurate way to conduct
the census. And as was indicated by the previous head of the
Census Bureau, I think he indicated that the 2000 census was the most
accurate count ever. And that's the President's
position. What we need to have is the most reliable and
accurate numbers, and he believes that the best way to do that is
through an actual head count.
Q So,
can we safely assume, then, for the 2002 redistricting, that that's
going to be his position there as well?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Well, on the redistricting, there are two
different issues here. You have an issue of redistricting,
the use of census information for redistricting, and the use of census
information for spending decisions. The Supreme Court has
already settled the former matter.
Q At
the high-tech meeting today, did the President talk at all about
taxation on the Internet? The moratorium ends later this
year, and you guys are going to have to make a decision --
MR.
FLEISCHER: Let me refer you to Claire. Claire sat
in on that meeting and I've got a read on it, but I'll refer you to
Claire after this meeting.
Q Ari,
is the President concerned at all that this fellow who was involved in
this incident yesterday outside the White House was able to obtain a
handgun, even though he had a history of mental problems, including a
hospitalization?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I'll refer you to the law enforcement authorities
to determine how that may have taken place. I'm not familiar
with all the history of it. That's for the law enforcement
people to deal with.
Q The
question is what's the President's view.
MR.
FLEISCHER: Again, I think that's a matter for law
enforcement. I haven't discussed it with the President.
Q In
his remarks this morning in the Rose Garden, the President appeared to
be trying to create a sense of urgency about action on the tax cut,
saying there's this warning light about the U.S. economy. Is that an
effort prospectively to insulate the White House from whatever bad
economic information may come about in the coming months, and shift
that focus on to Congress as it deals with this tax
cut? What was the reason for the emphasis on this looming
economic problem?
MR.
FLEISCHER: It's a continuation of the emphasis the President
began when he announced his tax cut in December of 1999, at which time
he said this can be an insurance policy against an economic
downturn. The insurance policy is now coming
due. We are in the middle of an economic
downturn. And so it was the logical extension of the same
remarks the President issued more than a year ago when he first
announced his tax plan.
Q On
this incident, is there any concern here that there is so much media
coverage that it's going to encourage copycats?
MR.
FLEISCHER: There's nothing we can do about media coverage.
It's the right of a free press to cover.
Q Do
you think they overdid it?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I'm not going to delve into that. I
think you all know how to make those judgments for yourselves.
Q Ari,
can I come back to those comments on the economy that Major was asking
about? They really struck me as fairly
dire. Don't you think the President is in danger of
contributing to the very downturn that he fears, like undermining
consumer confidence?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Absolutely not. There is no
possibility that a politician can either talk the economy up or talk
the economy down, despite the attempts by some to try to talk it
up. And I would suggest to you that the only reliable
standard should be accuracy. And what the President has said
and what the President's advisors have said are accurate portrayals
about the strength of the economy. And the evidence is clear
when you take a look at GDP growth and it's down to 1.4 percent for the
last quarter, the statistics speak for themselves. And it
should be the job of a leader, the job of the President to faithfully
and accurately describe the country's economic circumstances.
Q But
you don't think when the President goes in the Rose Garden and talks
about flashing warning signs on dashboards, that people might say,
maybe I shouldn't buy that refrigerator or that Lexus, or whatever it
is that they would buy?
MR.
FLEISCHER: No. Again, I think -- that's my point,
that politicians don't have the power to talk the economy up any more
than they have the power to talk it down. The economy and
the statistics speak for themselves.
Q But
if Congress doesn't act, is it going to be the position of this White
House that the longer it doesn't act, the more Congress -- not the
White House -- is jeopardizing the future of the U.S. economy?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Major, we have full faith that Congress will act,
and we have received encouraging signs from people in both parties that
Congress will, indeed, act.
Q Back
on the tax cuts, I just want to be clear. Every tax cut
proposal President Bush made during the campaign will be sent to the
Hill, including education IRAs, even if it wasn't in today's package?
MR.
FLEISCHER: When you asked that question I told you I'd go
back and take a look at the education provisions. So allow
me to do that.
Q If
the President strongly supports some moving up of the tax cut or
retroactivity, why wasn't there some element of that in the proposal
that he sent?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Because as the President indicated, he supports efforts on the Hill
to make the tax cut retroactive, and he wants to work with members of Congress
on that. And that's --
Q Are you saying he's not going to take a position on that issue in
terms of one kind of -- I mean, he'll take any vehicle?
MR.
FLEISCHER: No, but today, again, the whole process begins
today. Today is the day the legislation was sent up to the
Hill. And of course, now the Ways and Means Committee will
begin a series of hearings -- will begin hearings on it, and then let
the regular legislative process take its course. And we
will, of course, work very closely with Democrats and Republicans as
the legislation gets moved along the legislative process.
Q Does
he have an opinion about what kind of retroactivity or moving up should
occur?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Too soon to say.
Q Is
the President saying to people who earn between $6,000 and $26,000 a
year, you don't need a tax cut?
MR.
FLEISCHER: No. What the President is saying to
people is, we need to take down the toll booth to the middle
class. Under the current tax code, if somebody makes, for
example, $22,000 a year, and has two children --
Q No,
single people between incomes of $6,000 and $26,000 a year, who will
remain in the 15-percent tax bracket, is he saying they don't need a
tax cut?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Actually, under the President's proposal, the
15-percent bracket is lowered to 10 percent for --
Q Not
for those people.
MR.
FLEISCHER: Yes, it is. Yes. If you
look at the back page, the first $6,000 worth of income is lowered to
10 percent. If you make more than $6,000, you get your first
$6,000 of income lowered from 15 percent to 10 percent, I remind you,
as you know, as a progressive income tax code
structure. Your premise is wrong. They would
receive the benefits as low as 10 percent.
Q The
bulk of the money will not receive the lower tax rate.
MR.
FLEISCHER: No, the largest percentage gains will go to those
people at the low end of the scale. And that's because we
lower the rate from 15 percent to 10 percent.
Q But
only for the first $6,000.
MR.
FLEISCHER: That's correct.
Q So
what about the rest of the other $20,000?
MR.
FLEISCHER: They receive that benefit.
Q For
the first $6,000.
MR.
FLEISCHER: That's correct. That's where the rate
gets lowered to. That means $6,000 of their income is no
longer taxed at 15 percent. For the first time, it's taxed
at 10 percent. They get that benefit.
Q Before
I ask my question, is $6,000 for singles and $12,000 for married
couples, or $6,000 for couples --
MR.
FLEISCHER: It is the last page that you have in the handout,
so I would refer you to that last page.
Q On
the surplus, as you have acknowledged here, it's been consistently
revised upward. As it has been increased by more than a
trillion dollars, why not increase the tax cuts that you proposed
before the surplus was increased?
MR.
FLEISCHER: And I think it's fair to say the President is
going to come under pressure from some people, mostly in the Republican
Party, who are going to call on him to increase the size of the tax
cut. We're already hearing calls on the Hill to increase the size of
the tax cut to $2.2 trillion. And the President believes we
need to resist those calls. He knows that the Democrats want
to collect more money in taxes. The Republicans want to collect
less. The President believes that his $1.6 trillion level is
the appropriate level, and that's what he intends to fight for.
Q But
when he proposed it, he believed it was the appropriate level with a
smaller surplus estimate. Now you have a larger surplus
estimate. Why not a larger tax cut?
MR.
FLEISCHER: And interestingly, the same event took place in
July of 2000, where we at that time also had new estimates coming and
saying the surplus had grown from its previous
projections. And he was asked that question in July, and he
said he was going to continue to adhere to the plan that he proposed at
that time.
And so, the
President has drawn up his plans and he intends, even with these new
increases in the surplus, to adhere to them. It allows us to
pay down debt. It allows us to be fiscally
conservative. It allows for a balanced approach to cutting
taxes, in the President's opinion.
Q Can
you tell me, Ari, whether the President believes people that suffer
from mental illness should be able to have access to handguns? And if
not, what mechanism do you think is appropriate to prevent mentally ill
people from getting weapons?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think there are a series of laws on the books
already dealing with that question, and I'm not aware of anything new
on the federal level that would address that. If you have
anything to bring to my attention, please do and I'll try to review it
for you.
I'll come
back to you. Very nicely done, by the way.
Q There
are a couple of other ideas that are gaining considerable attention
within the Ways and Means Committee and Finance Committee about adding
to this proposal. One deals with accelerating
depreciation. There is a rather large and growing coalition
on K Street involving some high-tech community members who are very
interested in that, believe that would be very beneficial to them and
the larger U.S. economy. There is also this issue that Republicans and
Democrats have believed in their meetings with the President, have
brought up about the alternative minimum tax.
MR.
FLEISCHER: Yes.
Q Are
those two out of bounds, as far as the White House is
concerned? Do you have any signals you want to send to the
Congress about those two issues and whether or not they should be
included in a final package?
MR.
FLEISCHER: On the first point, the signal the President
would like to send is exactly why we need to have a permanent extension
of the research and development tax credit, which is a part of the
President's plan, and we hope the Congress will work with us for the
first time to make the research and development tax credit
permanent. That way, businesses have the tools they need to
innovate and discover new things that can be brought to the
market. That provision has, unfortunately, lapsed several
times in the past, which has created a lot of uncertainty and made it
difficult for corporations to plan, and so that provision directly
addresses that question.
On the
issue of the alternative minimum tax, the President's plan addresses
the alternative minimum tax to the tune of $70 billion, and that's
because he adjusted the child credit so that it does not count against
the alternative minimum tax, protecting families with children from
paying more taxes as a result of the increase in our child credit.
So that's
already partially addressed. As for the rest of it, the
President is very sympathetic about the problems created by the
alternative minimum tax. It is a growing
problem. However, given the list of priorities that the
President has identified, he believes Congress should tackle first
those priorities he has set, such as reducing the marriage penalty,
abolishing death taxes, reducing marginal rates. He believes
those issues, as well as the others in his plan, should come
first. After that is done, we'll take a look and see whether
tax priorities remain. It is a problem; he's sympathetic to
it. But it will have to await other times when those
priorities can come to the floor.
Q I
got three calls this morning from real people who said, why is --
MR.
FLEISCHER: They must not work here
then. (Laughter.)
Q --
that's true. Nowhere near here. Why is he cutting
the rich people's tax 6.6 percent, and the poor people's tax 5
percent?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I'm not sure where those numbers come from.
Q From
39.6 to 33 percent, and 15 percent to 10 percent.
MR.
FLEISCHER: And the answer to that is, as I've indicated, the
largest gains go to those people who are at the low and moderate end of
the scale. The percentage of taxes that they pay will be
reduced more than the percentage of taxes paid for somebody at the top
end of the scale. And so, those tax cuts --
Q You
need PR, because it's not getting out there.
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think we always need more PR.
Q The
other question is, have you heard the President say anything negative
about the Farmington meeting, in light of new reports that there's some
feeling he was blindsided by Democrats who were too harsh?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think the President appreciated the opportunity
to go there and have the meeting. And it came as no surprise
to him that Democrats asked questions that they wanted to
ask. But that's why he went. That's why he went and reached
out. And again, let me give you what I believe is going to
be an indication of things to come.
I think as
we proceed with our plans on education, our plans on tax cuts up and
down the line, you're going to hear from some of the more liberal
members of the Democrat party nothing but opposition. What
you won't hear is the silence that comes from the rotating coalitions
of Democrats who are going to be prepared to vote with and work with
President Bush. And that's how we are going to put together
the governing, bipartisan coalitions that get this legislation enacted
into law. And that's where the President's focus will be.
We know he
is not going to win the votes of 100 percent of the Democrat
caucus. But we will work hard to win the votes of enough of
the Democrat caucus that we can sign legislation into
law. And the President is going to dedicate himself that.
Q Names? Just
throw out a few names.
MR.
FLEISCHER: We'll wait for the votes.
Q I
understand on the marginal rate cut, the rational for
that. There's one thing that puzzles me,
though. Why would you increase the income cap for the child
credit, the child tax credit, from $110,000 to $200,000, and not also
make it refundable, meaning that those at the bottom end of the scale
would be able to collect that even if they pay no taxes?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Actually, it is partially refundable, in
accordance with the current law that treats the child tax credit that
was established in the 1997 tax act. The child credit in the
1997 tax act is a partially refundable credit. And the
manner in which we've set up the credits, doubling for $500,000,
maintains the partially refundable nature. That was a bipartisan
agreement reached by President Clinton at the time, along with
Democrats in Congress, Republicans in Congress. So what the
President is doing is maintaining something that works, something that
is bipartisan.
Q And
what percentage is refundable?
MR.
FLEISCHER: It depends on the number of children you have.
Q It's
not a per child percentage?
MR.
FLEISCHER: No, it actually depends on -- it's a very
complicated provision of the tax code, actually, and it's determined by
the number of children you have.
Q Only
a Ways and Means guy would know that.
Q Ari,
a group of senators sent this week a letter to the President,
expressing concern about the possible sale of F-16 to Chile. Two
questions. What is the answer of the President to these
senators, and what is his position about arms sales to South America?
MR.
FLEISCHER: If you don't mind, let me refer that to Mary
Ellen and she'll be happy to help you.
Q I
understand your decision not to, as you put it, have the White House
respond to every remark of every foreign leader. But in the
case of Ariel Sharon, here we have a newly-elected Prime Minister of
Israel making some bold statements about the status of
Jerusalem. What's the White House view on what impact that
kind of statement might have on the Middle East peace process?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I've already addressed that question.
Q Ariel
Sharon is planning to come to Washington next month, as part of the
AIPAC policy conference. Will he be meeting with the
President at that time? Is the White House interested in
meeting with him?
MR.
FLEISCHER: As always, as we have announcements to make with
world leaders, we'll keep you informed.
Q Also,
Sharon named three Likud advisors to come to Washington next week to
meet and lay out Sharon's agenda. Who will they be meeting
with in the White House?
MR.
FLEISCHER: You may want to check with the other agencies and
see if there are any meetings set up, or check with us at a later
time. And I don't know if there is anything scheduled. If
there is, I'll do our best to keep you informed.
Q Ari,
they're starting to catch wind out there in Georgia and Virginia and
West Virginia that the President's coming to town. Have you
nailed down anything that we can share with them about his plans?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I'll have some more details to announce tomorrow
on that. The President will be traveling next week to focus
on issues that relate to national defense. And we'll have
some details about that tomorrow.
Q Ari,
one thing on the Pennsylvania Avenue thing, which keeps getting kicked
up by people. It's never clear to me, is this actually under
review by the White House, or is -- just there's no decision has been
made to reverse the current status?
MR.
FLEISCHER: There's no decision been made to reverse the
current status. The President has met with the Secret
Service. He's met with Mayor Williams. He's going
to listen to people on all sides of this issue, and then if a decision
-- whenever a decision is reached, we'll keep you informed.
Q Did
this Pickett letter reach the White House? Do you know yet?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Not that I have seen. I haven't seen
it.
Q Have
you checked with all the relevant --
MR.
FLEISCHER: Haven't checked that thoroughly on that, Major.
I just haven't seen it.
Q So
we don't know yet?
MR.
FLEISCHER: That's fair.
Q Ari,
you've had a week to roll out this tax plan. How do you plan
to push it in the future? Because it's going to take several
months for it to go through Congress.
MR.
FLEISCHER: Well, actually, we've had a very aggressive
outreach program all week on the tax plan. In addition, way
beyond the Beltway, there have been a series of things done with local
media, with talk radio, with the Internet. We've worked very
hard to reach the American people in every region of this country on
the importance of cutting taxes. And we will continue it.
It is one
of the President's top priorities, along with education, along with
rebuilding the military. So you're going to see the
President talk about other issues as well. We will always
return to that important issue. Just like tomorrow the
President is going to focus once more on education. So even
at the same time this week, for example, we're talking about taxes
substantially, we will find room for other priorities, because they are
enduring. So, too, with taxes.
Q Can
you please put together a briefing for those of us who have to write
previews for the Mexico trip? Are you thinking about
something?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Yes, we're trying to get arms around how to be
helpful on that. We'll probably have more on that next
week. I'm not sure of the exact manner yet, but let's take
that up next week.
Q Is
the President familiar with the National Taxpayers Union study that
shows on a year-by-year basis that the President's tax cut, inflation
adjusted, is smaller than the tax cut proposed by Tip O'Neill and the
Democrats in 1981?
MR.
FLEISCHER: Oh, I've seen a number of studies indicating --
and I may have this backwards, but one study indicates that the
President's proposed tax cut is one-third the size of Kennedy's and
one-half the size of Reagan's, or vice versa. So we are
cognizant of that. Let me give you some perspective.
Over the
next 10 years the federal government will collect just a little over
$25 trillion in taxes. And we're proposing a tax cut of $1.6
trillion at a time when we have a surplus of $5.6
trillion. So, again, only in Washington and only among some
people in the opposing party can think that $25 trillion in taxes over
the next 10 years is not enough, they want to collect more.
Let me
belabor this and give you some statistics that I've seen
here. For the President's proposed tax cut, those who make
over $200,000 a year currently pay 41.8 percent of
taxes. Under the Bush plan they will receive 26.9 percent of
the tax cut. Those who make between $30,000 to $40,000 in
taxes pay only 3 percent of all taxes. We have a very
progressive tax code. People who make that amount of money, that's the
amount of taxes they pay, they will get a tax cut that is almost twice
the size of the percentage that they pay in.
Q Ari,
if the President doesn't like the analogy that Tom Daschle used about
the car and the auto part, which car does he think is appropriate and
which auto part is appropriate?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think I've already driven this metaphor off the
road. (Laughter.)
Q Ari,
with regard to the President's outreach to black leaders and the
response that he's gotten from black leaders, as well as private
responses from the black community in general, is he satisfied that the
initiatives have been successful? And have those outreach
efforts been enough to compensate in the minds of black leaders for the
exploration of the Office on One America?
MR.
FLEISCHER: I think it remains very early in this
administration, and that it's only fair to let people watch the
President and come to their observations over time. And I
think with some communities, that may take longer. And the
President is aware of that and is going to be sensitive to
that. And he's pleased to let that process begin and he's
going to continue to work hard to reach out to the African American
community. He's cognizant of the fact that he only got 9
percent of the black vote in the last election and he would like to
build on that. He's going to do his best to make that happen.
I remind
you that something similar happened when he ran for governor of
Texas. In 1994, he received a percentage a little bit higher
than that -- if I recall, it was about 14 percent. And then
when he ran for reelection, he doubled that, he received almost 30
percent of the African American vote in the state of
Texas. He wished he had done better. But I think it's also
fair to say that a lot of Republicans don't start out doing well, but
over the course of governing, people have a chance to observe and to
come to their own conclusions. And if the past is any guide,
he's going to stand in very good shape.
Thank you.
END 2:50 P.M. EST
#13-02/08
|