For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
June 12, 2002
Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
12:25 P.M. EDT
MR. FLEISCHER: Good afternoon. Let me give you a report on the
President's day, and I have a phone call to read to you and then an
announcement I want to make about an initiative the President is going
to launch next week concerning physical fitness in our country.
The President had his usual round of briefings --
Q Press fitness -- (laughter.)
MR. FLEISCHER: Oh, believe me, there's a press section of it.
(Laughter.)
Q How about you?
MR. FLEISCHER: Me? You guys run me around enough. (Laughter.)
The President had his usual round of intelligence briefings,
followed by an FBI briefing this morning. Then he signed into law
legislation called the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Response
Act, to help protect America by increasing access and resources for
public health services across the country, and first responders, in the
event of a bioterrorist threat to our nation. This is bipartisan
legislation the President was pleased to sign.
Then he attended a meeting of the Homeland Security Advisory
Council. And later this afternoon, the President will present National
Medals of Science and National Medals of Technology to award winners
who are coming to the White House.
And, finally, the President will meet with members of Congress,
ranking members and chairs of the relevant committees with jurisdiction
over homeland security, to continue to talk to the members of Congress
about the importance of passing legislation to provide for a Department
of Homeland Security.
This morning, President Bush spoke with Prime Minister Aznar of
Spain, and they discussed several issues. They talked about
agricultural and trade issues. Both leaders expressed the hope that
remaining issues concerning the resumption of imports of Spanish
clementines to the United States will be resolved promptly.
And on the Middle East, both leaders discussed the urgent need to
stop terrorist attacks and to develop a way forward toward development
of a peace process.
Finally, a heads-up for you about several events next week which I
think actually are somewhat notable. Nearly half of American adults
report that they do not exercise at all. And seven out of 10 do so
infrequently. Each year, approximately 300,000 deaths occur related to
obesity. In addition, five chronic diseases associated with obesity
-- heart disease, cancer, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease and diabetes -- claim more than 1.7 million American lives
each year and account for more than two-thirds of all U.S. deaths.
Next week, the President will unveil a comprehensive fitness agenda
to help our nation become stronger and healthier.
As part of the agenda -- and I want to explain several of the
items in it to you -- the President is pleased to announce today that
the Department of Interior will host a Healthier U.S. Fee-Free Weekend
in our national parks the weekend of June 22nd to June 23rd, to
encourage Americans to hike, walk or just visit our national
treasures.
As part of what's called the Healthier U.S. Initiative, the
President on Thursday, June 30th, next week, will host a fitness expo
on the South Lawn of the White House. At the fitness expo the
President will introduce new members of the President's Council on
Physical Fitness and Sports, and will discuss more details of his
fitness initiative. There'll be screening booths available for people
on the South Lawn here at the White House who are invited.
On Friday, June 21st, the President will travel to Orlando,
Florida, where he will visit with seniors at a local senior center to
discuss his fitness initiative and the value of age-appropriate
physical activity to promote healthy aging.
On Saturday, June 22nd, an event that the President is very much
looking forward to, the President and the First Lady will host the
President's Fitness Challenge at Fort McNair, for White House staff and
Cabinet. At the Fitness Challenge, the President will lead runners in
a three-mile run, and the First Lady will lead walkers in a 1.5 mile
walk. To participate in the race, participants must commit to donate
hours of service or resources to the community or faith organization of
their choice -- that's in lieu of a typical registration fee that's
collected usually at fun runs and runs of this nature.
And finally, on Sunday, June 23rd, the South Berkeley Little League
Braves of Inwood, West Virginia, will play the Washington, D.C., Cal
Ripken League Cardinals in the second game of this year's White House
T-ball season.
So I just wanted to share all that with you as events for next week
on physical fitness.
Q -- did you say the 30th or the 20th?
MR. FLEISCHER: Twentieth. So it's Thursday, Friday, Saturday,
Sunday of next week.
Q Where's the press --
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, we're trying to figure out if the press wants
to run or chase or cover. (Laughter.) We will give you any number of
options and see which categories you'd like to be in. Which of those
is it, Jean?
Q I dig.
MR. FLEISCHER: You dig? Oh, you dig. Yes, you do. (Laughter.)
Let the digging begin. Campbell.
Q Ari, you've addressed this before, but I'm hoping you can
elaborate a little bit more on why Padilla was in custody for more than
a month before the administration announced his arrest, especially
given the degree to which Ashcroft underscored the threat, the sort of
ominous warning that came from him the morning the announcement was
made?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the Justice Department can walk you through
the particulars. But, as I understand them, the reasons are the
following: he was detained on May 8th as a result of the information
the government had about him prior to arrival. And then, subsequent to
his detention, the government built up additional information about
him.
There's also a judgment that the law enforcement community makes at
times like this about how long do they want to go for people not to
know -- people who have sent him to this country, not to know that he
has been detained. There can be an advantage in not allowing the
people who have sent him here to have the information that he has been
detained, to see if we can't find anything else out about whatever it
is they may be planning.
There also, in this case, was a legal deadline of 30 days after the
date of detention, by which the Department of Justice had to make some
decisions that entered into when this was going to become public as a
matter of course in any event, when he was transferred to DOD in
connection with a habeas corpus hearing.
Q So how do you now respond to critics who are trying to draw a
link, fair or unfair, between the announcement of that arrest and the
President unveiling his homeland security plan to the intelligence --
MR. FLEISCHER: Look, these very few people who want to make such
an outlandish political accusation represent the most cynical among the
most partisan. And they're not to be taken seriously. The fact of the
matter is our nation has a lot to be proud of by the fact that our law
enforcement community worked well and worked together to protect this
homeland from somebody who came here to do harm to our homeland.
Q Can I ask you a question about the nature of the threat Mr.
Padilla posed? On Monday, in this extraordinary urgent broadcast from
Moscow, the Attorney General said, that the "investigators had
disrupted an unfolding terrorist plot to attack the United States by
exploding a radioactive dirty bomb."
Yesterday, Deputy Secretary of Defense Wolfowitz said, "I don't
think there was actually a plot, beyond some fairly loose talk."
What is it?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think it's also fairer to the Attorney General to
quote everything he said from his remarks from Moscow. And he went on
to say "From information available to the United States government we
know that Abdullah Al Muhajir is an al Qaeda operative and was
exploring a plan to build and explode a radioactive dirty bomb." So I
think you have to quote him in his entirety.
Q But he also said it was an "unfolding terrorist plot."
MR. FLEISCHER: Terry, here's what we know, and that is that Mr.
Padilla received training by the al Qaeda in the art of radiological
material, in the art of detonation of bombs. He came to the United
States to do harm to the United States in some form or other. He is
trained in exactly what Attorney General Ashcroft described. And the
actions that our government took are actions that I think most people
realize are just what the government is looked to to do, to protect us
from people who come here to do us harm.
So you're fair to interpret what they said, but I think you have to
be fair to what they said in a complete context, as well as the
statements that Deputy Thompson and Deputy Wolfowitz made the same day
as the Attorney General, where they talked about the initial planning
stages.
Q Fair enough. Here's why I'm raising the question, though --
MR. FLEISCHER: Right.
Q This contraction in statements raises a question. Given how
much the American people are going to hang on every word about this
kind of threat from the administration, isn't it incumbent on officials
to get the story straight and not to exaggerate?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I think it's incumbent on people who cover
people also to hang on every word, and that's why I walked you back
through everything the Attorney General said. The Attorney General
talked about he was exploring these plans, which is exactly what we
have said.
But, you know, very often in the war on terrorism, we are not going
to have exact down-to-the-detail, precise information. We're going to
have somewhat generalized information about people who have plans,
intentions to bring harm to our country. In this case, because of his
training and because of the evidence we had that was brought forth by
sources and methods which I'm not going to discuss, we have strong
reason to fear the worst. And you heard that articulated.
Q Is the White House satisfied with the way Attorney General
Ashcroft described the threat, as seriously and as ominously as he
did?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think that what you have heard from all the
officials of the government is a fair description of what our
government could have faced, what the American people could have
faced. And, again, I think this is one of these cases where the nation
can breathe a sigh of relief that our law enforcement people were
vigilant outside our borders, to apprehend people when they entered our
country.
Steve?
Q Ari, was there any thought that he might have been a bit too
dramatic, though, Ari, the Attorney General in his announcement? Is
there any second-guessing here about that?
MR. FLEISCHER: Listen, I think -- again, I think it's fair to
read the entirety of the Attorney General's statement and the entirety
of the remarks made by all the officials who did their best to share
information with the public, and did so in an accurate and forthright
fashion.
The fact of the matter, again, is a very dangerous man has been
taken off of the streets of the United States, where he will no longer
be in a position to do harm to our citizenry.
Q Ari, can I just follow that? Also, not just what the Attorney
General said, but where he said it and how he said it. Is there any,
sort of, looking back that this could have been handled better? Not
having the Attorney General in sort of a studio in Moscow, as opposed
to just having the two deputies of Justice and Defense coming out and
bringing the story out at that point in time? Any looking back and
saying it could have been handled better?
MR. FLEISCHER: You know, Kelly, I'm not in the second-guessing
business. I'm in the business of explaining to you what the
administration did, why we did it. And, again, I think the
administration looks at this as an issue where the country was
protected, and that's what we're focused on.
Ken?
Q Ari, coming back to the point you made about our obligation to
get this right, within that realm, can you help us understand where
exactly this al Qaeda operative sort of, you know, was ranked, if you
will, in that organization? Are we talking about a Mohammed Atta-type
figure here? Or are we perhaps talking about something much, much less
than even the shoe-bomber? Is there a way to categorize what kind of a
threat he posed and where he stood in the organization?
MR. FLEISCHER: I have not heard any discussions about it in that
sense. Mohammed Atta has been described as a chief operating officer,
one of the most senior planners. Richard Reid I've heard been
described as somebody who was really a foot soldier.
The point is all of these people, whether they are the
orchestrators, the planners or the foot soldiers, have one goal in mind
and that is to bring the war to our soil and to kill Americans once
more. But I have not heard anything about him being an operational or
organizational top of a structure. It's much more that he came here in
another capacity.
Jennifer.
Q Does the President endorse --
MR. FLEISCHER: By the way, welcome to the White House briefing
room. You've been here a few days. This is your first question.
Q Thanks. Does Secretary Powell -- does President Bush
endorse the remarks made by Secretary Powell today to El Hayat -- in
particular, that the administration is working to set up a provisional
Palestinian state and, in fact, calling the Palestinian Authority a
government, and categorically saying that Arafat should be worked with
and not ignored?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the President has been receiving advice from
any number of people and many of these people give him multiple pieces
of advice about the Middle East. And the President is, frankly, very
gratified by the fact that people are now focused on the next steps,
involving political solutions and are offering a variety of ideas about
what the next step toward a political solution is. This is a dramatic
improvement, when events in the Middle East were defined by whether
tanks were pulling out and suicide bombings or homicide bombings were
diminishing.
So the President is still in the process of listening to a variety
of people who have some thoughts to share. He has another important
meeting tomorrow with the Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister, and then the
President may -- may, if he chooses, to have something further to
say.
Q What about those remarks, though, from Powell? They are quite
different than what has been coming out of the White House in recent
days.
MR. FLEISCHER: Again, I think it's reflective of a variety of
pieces of advice that people in the government are paid to listen to
from whatever source they may originally derive.
Q So he agrees with them, or does not?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, he's listening to a variety of the pieces of
advice he gets from many, many sources. And these sources -- it
depends on the people that the President met with. I illustrated one
example of advice that the President welcomes that's 180 degrees apart,
that he received in a 24-hour period. And that was the advice that he
got from President Mubarak about the importance of the '67 borders, and
the advice he got from Prime Minister Sharon about the impact of the
'67 borders would have on the future viability of security.
So welcome to the Middle East. This is the situation where people
get a variety of information, a variety of advice. And if the
President has anything further to indicate, he will.
Q Ari, is the White House satisfied that the tension between
India and Pakistan seems to be lessening?
MR. FLEISCHER: The White House -- the President is pleased with
recent developments in South Asia. Deputy Secretary of State Armitage
has returned from a successful visit to the region. Secretary Rumsfeld
is there now. And the President welcomes indications that the tensions
are being reduced between India and Pakistan. But make no mistake,
there still is tension between India and Pakistan. So there has been
positive developments. The President is fully engaged in making
certain that the trend continues in the right direction, because,
unfortunately, the history of the region is sometimes these trends get
interrupted and return again to a wrong direction. Hence, Secretary
Rumsfeld's presence in the region as we speak.
Q In getting back to the Middle East, are you still expecting
-- I think you said yesterday that the international conference would
take place at the ministerial level. Do you all have more or less a
date in mind? Will it be this summer, come rain or come shine?
MR. FLEISCHER: It is still the date the State Department
originally announced, which is this summer. They're still working
through some of the preliminary issues that are typically required to
make a large gathering of people from many countries successful, so
that it turns into a conference that is productive. Sometimes
conferences, if they're not -- if the groundwork isn't laid carefully
for these type of international conferences, particularly dealing with
the Middle East, sometimes the conferences can have a harmful effect,
because it brings people together to fight, not to agree. And so
there's a lot of groundwork that needs to be laid. But the timetable
remains just as advertised, which is this summer.
John.
Q Ari, back on the Al Hayat issue. Does the President
appreciate his counselor sharing their advice with Al Hayat?
MR. FLEISCHER: Again, I think the Secretary -- if you asked the
Secretary, he would say to you that he is reflecting on some of the
things that we've heard from different people from around the world.
And it's no surprise to you, people from around the world come here to
share what they think should be done with the President or the
Secretary of State.
Q If I could just follow that. His comments didn't seem to be
reflecting what was going on. It seemed to be, this is what we're
thinking about doing.
MR. FLEISCHER: Again, the President receives advice all the time,
that's part of our process. And, as you know, if the President has
something to say, you all in this room will be among the first to hear
it.
Q Going back to Indian subcontinent. The President also said
yesterday that the risk of war is still there, maybe tensions defused.
So what I'm asking is how he's going to control that there is no war in
the future and like Kargil, three years ago, 1999, same situation,
comes back every year or two years. And, number two, when he meets
with the Israeli Prime Minister here, does he talk about Indian and
Pakistan conflict because both are similarity in many ways because same
bombing, same type of people are bombing in Israel and India.
MR. FLEISCHER: On number two, no, the topic of India and Pakistan
did not come up in the President's meetings with the Prime Minister.
On the first point about the ongoing or continued volatility in the
region, that is exactly why the President has dispatched the Secretary
of Defense to the region. It's going to require continual effort,
continual work. But I think that many nations can take pride in the
fact that their diplomacy has led to a trend that is moving in the
right direction, and not the wrong direction. And the world needs to
keep its wheel -- its shoulder to the wheel to make certain that it
keeps turning in the right direction.
Q If I can follow --
MR. FLEISCHER: You only get two. We have many people in the back
rows who are telling me they don't get enough questions.
Q And the side.
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, we know about the side. (Laughter.)
Q Ari, can you shed some light about the possible of deployment
of American troops on the Line of Control?
MR. FLEISCHER: I have nothing new to indicate on that. Keith.
Q What message does the President intend to deliver to the
committee chairmen who are coming here today on homeland security? And
would he be supportive of a kind of super-committee that might
streamline their purview over the issue?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President's message is that this is for the
nation, and we need to do this together. The President is going to
thank the members of Congress for their initially good reaction to the
President's proposal. And I think he will also recognize that this is
a difficult issue for Congress to wrestle with.
There are 88 committees and subcommittees of the Congress, which
are set up under the existing system, all of which have pieces of
jurisdiction over homeland security. And many members of Congress have
worked a long number of years and have built up expertise in issues.
And they want to be able to continue to lend their expertise to issues
involving homeland security.
Nevertheless, in the President's opinion there needs to be a way
found so that the nation knows that we can have a Department of
Homeland Security that's created, that puts the nation first,
recognizing the jurisdictional issues that members of Congress do
legitimately focus on.
So the President is going to issue a call to put the nation first,
to work together, to get the job done.
Q I wonder if you'd be more specific. Is he --
MR. FLEISCHER: On the congressional committee?
Q Yes. Is he going to have some suggestions about how the do
this?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the President -- it's not the habit of the
President to tell the Congress how it needs to structure itself; one,
in terms of how to receive this proposal, or two, whether the Congress
itself needs to change its committee jurisdictions in appropriation or
other committees and subcommittee jurisdictions, if and when this
department is created. That's a matter for the legislative branch to
deal with.
In 1947, when there was a restructuring on the federal level to
react to the Cold War, Congress I believe at that time did change its
committee structure. But those are calls that the legislative branch
makes, not the executive.
Jean.
Q This morning, the President said that we -- collectively,
the allies and the U.S. -- need to do more at constraining finances
of terrorists. He hasn't mentioned that in a while. Was there
something in the Padilla case or some recent development that prompted
him to raise that issue?
MR. FLEISCHER: Nothing in Padilla that comes to my mind. I can
tell you that, in terms of the war on terrorism, the President has
always talked about the multiple fronts in the war and the financial
front remains a very important front. But what you're seeing around
the world when it comes to the arrests that are being made, the
terrorist warnings that are being issued, is a world that faces the
same issues that we do. Fortunately for the rest of the world, they
have not suffered the same attack that our nation took.
But you're seeing around the world a tremendous cooperation. It
varies from nation to nation. But, for the most part, the President
can say he's very satisfied with the actions that people have taken.
Q Yes, and typically that is what he has said, is that he's very
satisfied. And so today was a little bit different. So was there any
reason for --
MR. FLEISCHER: No, there's nothing that's crossed my radar that
would lead him to have any type of specific information about something
that would make him say that. I think you're just seeing him return to
something that he talked about frequently at the beginning of the war,
particularly about multiple fronts.
And, Jean, if there's anything further, I'll see. But I don't --
there's nothing that I was aware of before he said it.
Ellen.
Q On hate crimes legislation, is the White House -- what's the
President's position on it? And also is there anything the White House
is going to do to get it back on track?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President believes that all violent crimes are
crimes of hate that should be prosecuted vigorously, and that criminals
who commit them should be punished to the full extent of the law. The
President's deeply concerned and troubled by any crime that's motivated
by prejudice or contempt against any group of citizens or individual
citizens in our country.
The Senate has taken the action that it's taken. There are a
number of issues that the Senate and the House are still focused on.
It's not easy to get 60 votes in the Congress; there's an important
vote coming up on death taxes in the Senate, for example, that may or
may not be able to reach 60 votes.
Along the lines of progress, however, I can report that tomorrow
the Senate Finance Committee is going to be taking up legislation on
one of the President's key initiatives, which is the CARE act, or the
faith-based initiative, that at long last looks like it will move in
the Senate, in the Finance Committee. And so the President is pleased
to see action on that part of his domestic agenda.
Larry.
Q Ari, on the comments you made a few minutes ago about
Secretary Powell and the Middle East, it almost sounded as though you
were making the distinction that he was speaking for himself, as
opposed to the administration.
MR. FLEISCHER: No, I think actually, if you ask Secretary Powell
-- and I have a strong sense that reporters have asked the Secretary
today on his airplane about the very same things you're asking me --
what the Secretary indicated to them is that he was sharing with the
magazine or the newspaper that asked him this question about some of
the advice that he is receiving from other leaders.
Q But, Ari, who has recommended a transitional --
MR. FLEISCHER: Larry, go ahead.
Q No, no, but I mean, on that, I mean, it -- because you were
talking before about how the President's receiving all these competing
views. I mean, it almost sounds like you're distancing yourself from
what Powell is saying.
MR. FLEISCHER: No, I'm -- that's why I just walked you through
what the Secretary, himself, is saying about where he is receiving his
information from as well. Because he receives information and advice
from foreign leaders who have different thoughts about what they would
like the President to say. And so the Secretary from time to time will
reflect on the advice that he gets, and do so publicly. Which is his
prerogative, of course.
Q Ari, what can you tell us about these reports of Americans,
people claiming American citizenship detained on the Pakistani-Afghan
border?
MR. FLEISCHER: Yes, I was asked that this morning. I've been
looking into it ever since then, and I have not been able to come up
with anything that would substantiate the statement about Americans,
people of American origin, being returned here. I'm digging into it,
and I haven't found anything to confirm it.
Q Not necessarily returned to, but detained there.
MR. FLEISCHER: Even so. People of American origin or Americans
-- I followed up from this morning's question, and I have not been able
to obtain any information that would lead me to confirm it.
Q On another subject, give us a sense of what the advisory
council the President convened today will be responsible for. How
broad is their portfolio? Are they focused just on the department
itself? Are they going to make recommendations across the breadth of
government in matters affecting domestic security?
MR. FLEISCHER: Under the executive order that set up the Homeland
Security Council, it contained a call for an advisory panel to be
established for just what its name would imply, advisory purposes. It
assembles some of the sharpest minds in the country who have expertise
in areas involving homeland security. And in this case, the President
asked them to help out in talking to members of the Hill and lending
their expertise so that Congress can fashion legislation to create the
department the President requested.
Q So is their function more to lobby members of Congress than to
advise the President?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, it's both. I mean, in this case the President
has asked them for their help in getting this passed. But it's also to
provide advice, and Tom Ridge receives advice from them on a regular
basis.
Q Some civil rights groups are arguing that holding Jose Padilla
incommunicado is a violation of his constitutional rights. Will he be
allowed to have a lawyer, and when?
MR. FLEISCHER: The actions that were taken, of course were taken
as a result of the advice that the President received from the Attorney
General, from the Department of Defense, from the White House Counsel.
All the legal issues were, of course, looked into and the President
concurred in the recommendation he received.
But in this instance, where somebody has been declared an enemy
combatant, I want to draw your attention -- and enemy belligerent
-- I want to draw your attention to the underlying Supreme Court case
which took place in 1942 involving U.S. citizens who were Nazi
saboteurs, which is the precedent for the action that was taken. And
in that court case, the majority ruled in '42, in a ruling that is
still binding today, "Citizens who associate themselves with the
military arm of the enemy government and with its aid, guidance and
direction enter this country bent on hostile acts, are enemy
belligerents within the meaning of the Hague Convention and the law of
war."
And that is the legal underpinning for the actions that were
taken. And the President's view on this is as a result of these legal
underpinnings. The United States is now safer because somebody who
came here to do us harm is off the streets.
Q But in that case -- can I just follow up on that -- in
that
case, that American citizen was tried and convicted and executed
under the established military commission. Does the President believe
and his advisors believe that the Constitution allows for an American
citizen to be declared an enemy combatant and then held indefinitely
without charge and without any access to --
MR. FLEISCHER: According to the lawyers, under the statute, this
can last for the duration of the war. That's correct, Terry. That's
the word from the attorneys. Correct.
Q You said a while back that many nations could take pride in
the diplomatic efforts that walked India and Pakistan apparently back
from this brink. Perhaps you've addressed this in other briefings and
I just missed it, but could you fit into that diplomatic mosaic where
China would fit in and -- did China play any kind of a role? Was
Beijing asked to --
MR. FLEISCHER: Let me ask that specific question, because I have
not been briefed on any information particular to China. I was
referring specifically to Britain and the efforts through Jack Straw.
The European Union has been involved. And President Putin, of course,
and Russia played an important role.
Q Given China's historic role in the region, and its
long-standing alliance with India, it would be interesting to know what
our strategic thinking might be on the kind of role that China could
play.
MR. FLEISCHER: We'll follow up. We'll get that. I'll see.
Q Ari, there's talk on Capitol Hill that Senator Brownback will
now push for a two year moratorium on human cloning, instead of an
outright ban, because there's discussion that there's not enough votes
to pass the outright ban. Would the President welcome that moratorium
period?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President thinks it's high time the Senate
passed what the House passed with an overwhelming bipartisan vote. The
President thinks that the issues that are presented involving human
cloning are very important, and this is the time for us to draw an
important ethical line which should not be crossed, so that the
developments of science can proceed, but that human cloning is, as it
should be, banned.
Q Given that as the President's position, would he welcome a
two-year moratorium as an alternative, if they can't muster up the
other votes?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President supports the Senate doing what the
House easily did in a bipartisan way.
John.
Q Ari, who recommends a transitional Palestinian state? The
Palestinians have always been suspect of that; they want a state and
they view anything short of that as a half-measure. And Prime Minister
Sharon said he doesn't even want to consider the issue of statehood
until there's no violence and no Arafat. If the Secretary is recycling
advice, where does it come from?
MR. FLEISCHER: John, as you know, it's my longtime habit to speak
for the President, and if receives advice from other people in closed
sessions, it's not my position to share with others what other people's
advice is.
Q -- recycling advice --
MR. FLEISCHER: Again, you're asking me to indicate to you who was
sharing advice in private consultations with the administration. The
purpose of them coming here is to consult and to give us their
thoughts, and I have to respect their privacy.
Q On the faith-based initiative, last week it really looked as
though it was bottled up in committee, and there were calls for the
President to contact some of the members of Finance to try to make an
appeal to them. Did he do that? Did he lobby them?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'll have to take a look and see if he made any
phone calls. I know he's had so many meetings with so many different
members of Congress, and at these meetings it's not unusual for the
President to raise other issues while the members are there. Very
often he'll kind of walk around the room as he says hello to everybody
and he'll talk to them about something specific. So it's entirely
possible that it happened out of my ear-shot.
Connie, and then Deb.
Q Thank you. With all these new terrorist threats, will the
White House move to implement immediately the inspection of cargo and
luggage that's checked on planes? Why is there this delay of several
months before that's implemented?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, under the transportation security law that
was passed last year to improve security, there are a series of
deadlines built into the law. And, as you know, the Department of
Transportation said that they are moving to fulfill those right on time
and right on schedule. And so this requires the purchasing of
tremendous amounts of equipment, the deployment of this equipment to
airports around the country, and we're in the middle of that, so that
all baggage can be checked aboard aircraft.
Q Can something be done before then? This is a very clear and
present danger.
MR. FLEISCHER: It's moving as rapidly as it can, Connie. This is
a large nation with a lot of travelers and it requires physical
infrastructure, physical equipment which has to be purchased and
therefore brought on line, and we are moving through it rather quickly,
directly in accordance with the law.
Deb and then Paula. And then Les. You've all been warned.
(Laughter.)
Q Ari, I wanted to go back to Secretary Powell's statement.
What he said was that he was referring to the President's vision of two
states. And he said, the President has not set one foot back from that
vision, and he knows that to get to that vision, it may be necessary to
have a provisional state, an interim step. Is that an accurate
reflection of the President's thinking?
MR. FLEISCHER: That's an accurate statement about what some people
have advised the President that he should do, and he is aware of the
advice that he's gotten.
Paula.
Q On the Senate vote today on estate taxes, as a compromise,
Democrats might offer an amendment to exempt estates up to $4 million.
Their argument is, if you do that, that would exclude farmers and small
businesses from that tax. Why would the administration be opposed to
that amendment?
MR. FLEISCHER: You know, if it's wrong to tax people because they
died, it's wrong to tax people because they died, at whatever amount of
income they have. And it's an artificial distinction to say that
people who are $1 on one side of the line should suffer the burden of
an unfair tax that is imposed simply by virtue of the fact that someone
is dead. As opposed to saying, if you're $1 on the other side of the
line, you'll have to suffer the tax.
So the President believes that it is wrong, that it should be
abolished. Congress has passed legislation to abolish the death tax.
It will indeed be abolished in 2010. But as a result of a quirk in the
tax laws, actually a quirk in the budget procedures in the Senate, the
repeal will become undone in 2011. And that's why the President is
calling on the Senate to act. There is a clear majority for it.
Whether or not there are 60 votes for it is another matter. But this
will be an interesting vote and we hope that -- the President hopes
that senators will vote to abolish something that is also one of the
greatest complications in the tax code.
One of the reasons that a lot of lawyers and a lot of accountants
are involved in helping people to pay less taxes is because they figure
out ways around the death tax. And it's probably a law that is so
complicated, takes up so much space in the Internal Revenue Code, that
this is one of the greatest simplification steps that can possibly be
taken.
Paula, you get a follow-up.
Q And then?
MR. FLEISCHER: And then, as promised, Les.
Q It's also considered --
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm hoping we can still discuss the Internal
Revenue Code. (Laughter.)
Q It's also considered the most expensive provision, and --
MR. FLEISCHER: To administer.
Q If the estate tax is no longer available, that's revenue
that's lost, that the government otherwise would have. And another
argument being made is that with Social Security and Medicare coming up
in terms of baby boomers retiring, the country can't afford this
provision.
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, Congress has already spoken to repeal the
death tax. So there obviously was a majority of the Congress that
repealed it, saw fit to repeal it. What's happening now is much more a
parliamentary maneuver to keep it from being repealed as a result of
the 60-vote requirement in the Senate. So there is a majority will to
repeal it, because people think it's wrong.
Lester.
Q The President is not only a national role model, but a
father. And he's taken numerous stands on behalf of good morality.
Now, the Baltimore's Cardinal Archbishop, William Keeler, has taken a
strong stance supporting zero tolerance of pedophile priests. And my
question: as a devout Christian and father, the President agrees with
the Cardinal on this, doesn't he, Ari?
MR. FLEISCHER: Lester, you've heard the President speak about this
himself, where he -- where the President --
Q So he does agree --
MR. FLEISCHER: -- where the President, as he talked to the Pope
about as well, expressed his faith that the Church is going to be able
to move forward to address what's been a very sensitive and important
issue.
Q The Wall Street Journal, in an extensive article yesterday
asked, in Peru, President Bush raised the case of Lori Berenson. If an
American woman convicted of aiding guerrillas is worthy of the
President's expressed concern, shouldn't he be able to say something
about the two daughters of Pat Roush of Illinois, who, after she was
given custody of these daughters when divorcing her Saudi Arabian
husband, he kidnapped these two daughters and took them to Saudi
Arabia. My question is, surely the President won't ignore this, will
he, Ari?
MR. FLEISCHER: Lester, as happens in nine times out of 10 on your
questions, that's the first I've heard of this. If I have any
information --
Q It's a huge article, Ari.
MR. FLEISCHER: If I have any information, I'll try to share it.
Q Will you take the question and come back with this?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'll let you know if I take the question.
Q Ari, I have a question on the Middle East.
MR. FLEISCHER: Ken.
Q There's a report in the Israeli press today that Prime
Minister Sharon has left a couple of top officials behind, to make sure
that the President keeps his word about some things that the two of
them discussed. I have two -- actually, and one of those -- one of
the points they make --
MR. FLEISCHER: What paper reported this?
Q Ha'aretz, believe it or not. And that's not an editorial
comment. (Laughter.)
MR. FLEISCHER: I could tell. (Laughter.)
Q One of the points they make is that Prime Minister Sharon
indicated he can no longer guarantee Arafat's safety. And the article
implies that the President went along with that. I have two
questions. Number one, what would the President say, if he had heard
-- if he heard that the Israelis were leaving someone behind to lean
on him, to make sure he keeps his word? And, secondly, is that in fact
true, that he does not think that --
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, number one, I have no idea about the
itinerary of any Israelis who did not return with the Prime Minister.
Whether that's accurate or not accurate, I have no idea what the
itinerary of Israelis who did not return with the Prime Minister, or
whether that's accurate or not accurate. I have no idea. I do know
about the President's schedule and I haven't seen any meetings like
that on the President's schedule.
But in terms of harm to Arafat, the President has made perfectly
plain that he does not think that would be a constructive step. And he
is satisfied that Israel understands that.
Q Ari, one more on the Middle East. Is it fair to say that the
President is considering supporting a transitional or temporary
Palestinian state, or has he ruled that out?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think it's fair to say that if the President has
any thoughts about the Middle East, he will share them.
Q Under consideration? Is it fair to say he's considering
that?
MR. FLEISCHER: It's always important for you to show up to work to
find out what the President may do on any given time or day.
Q Thank you.
MR. FLEISCHER: Thank you.
END 1:02 P.M. EDT
|