For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
May 4, 2001
Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
Listen to the Briefing
- Personnel announcements
- Economy
- Human
rights
- Missile
defense
- White House
website
- Tax
cut
- Budget
- China
- North
Korea
- Bipartisanship
- Judicial
nominations
- Sudan
- Japan
1:00 P.M. EDT
MR. FLEISCHER: Good afternoon; a
few announcements and then, to keep every captivated, we'll conclude
today's briefing with a peak at the week ahead.
President Bush today announced his intention
to nominate Matt Fong, of California, to serve as Under Secretary of
the Army. And President Bush today announced his intention
to nominate Ronald Weiser to be Ambassador of the United States to the
Slovak Republic.
With that, I'm pleased to take questions.
Q Ari, could you
elaborate a little more on what you said this morning on the economic
figures? You suggested that the unemployment report was --
there was data that might suggest why there would be a downward
revision in the GDP. But the unemployment report was for
April, which is not first quarter, it's second quarter. What
data were you referring to?
MR. FLEISCHER: Tom, the President
continues to be concerned about the strength of the economy and the
slowness in the economy. He believes that the best way to
protect the economy and get it moving again is for Congress to take
prompt action to pass the budget and to put his tax cut into place,
especially in a retroactive fashion.
What I'm referring to specifically, there have
been a series of private sector studies about GDP rate for the first
quarter that have indicated that they believe growth may be lower than
2 percent points. It's just an ongoing expression of the President's
concern.
Q But there was nothing
in this particular report that raised that alarm, was there?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, it's just
ongoing worries that the President has expressed since you've heard him
talk about it since last fall. Vice President Cheney has
expressed his concern about the strength of the economy. And
there are recent private sector analyses of GDP for the first quarter
that add credence to what I said.
Q Because there were
some revisions from March in the unemployment report that actually went
the other way, they were better than the first version.
Q What are your
concerns about the U.S. losing its seat on the U.N. Human Rights
Commission and why do you think it happened?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, first of all,
it's a disappointment that it took place. Nevertheless, it
will not stop this President from speaking out about the importance of
human rights around the world -- just as he did last night, when the
President gave a speech about religious persecution around the world,
particularly in Sudan.
So it's a disappointment, but it will not stop
this President or this country from speaking out about human rights.
Q But why do you think
it happened?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not in a
position to evaluate other nation's votes. I just will note
that it's -- I think that a human rights commission that doesn't have
the United States and that does have Sudan and Libya on it is not going
to be widely perceived as a most effective human rights
commission. It's a little odd to have the Sudan on there.
Q Is it a concern at
all, though, that Europe wasn't there for us, and that it may in some
sense be a backlash for his position on Kyoto or sort of the aggressive
push for missile defense?
MR. FLEISCHER: Campbell, I'm just
not going to speculate about the reasons why nations vote as they
do. I just do note the fact that it's a human rights
commission that has Libya and Sudan, both of which are nations that
were condemned by this human rights commission. And now they
serve on it. It's a rather odd make up.
Q Based on that, Ari,
is the President concerned that that situation could trigger anger
among people in this country, at the United Nations, look at it as
something as a fraud, and would they be justified in feeling that?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think the
President hopes that Americans will channel their thoughts on this
matter to making certain that the United States sounds the alarm for
human rights around the world. And that is the spirit of
this country. That's how the President approaches it.
Q Does it lesson the
position of the United Nations? I mean, should people feel
less respectful of the United Nations because they have a human rights
commission with Libya and Sudan? MR.
FLEISCHER: That's not the President's point of
view. Having said that about the United Nations, as I
mentioned a couple times now, as for this particular commission, a
commission that purports to speak out on behalf of human rights, that
now has Sudan and Libya as members, and doesn't have the United States
as members, I think may not be perceived as the most powerful advocate
of human rights in the world.
Q Is the administration
concerned that this will give fuel to the people who have criticized
the U.N., many of them members of the President's own party, and
perhaps further impede our paying of dues, our full participation?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, the President
has not given that indication.
Q That was part of my
question, was dues. The other part was, did Sudan directly
replace the United States on this --
MR. FLEISCHER: They serve on
there. I didn't say they replaced us.
Q There were some
reports, though, that they were chosen to replace the United States.
MR. FLEISCHER: I don't have that.
Q Ari, on that, doesn't
the President realize this as a clear demonstration of the moral
bankruptcy of the U.N., or can you think of any justification for this
U.N. decision? And I have a two-part question.
MR. FLEISCHER: No, that question
came up, and I've shared with you the White House's reflections about
what this means for the commission, itself.
And you're not standing
today. (Laughter.)
Q Well, there were a
lot of seats here. (Laughter.) I remember your
telling us earlier this year that the President telephoned Jesse
Jackson to say, you are in my prayers. And my question is,
does this prayerful concern include the President's hope and
expectation that the Reverend Mr. Jackson will pay his mistress child
support, rather than having her take him into court in five
days? Doesn't he believe he should do this, Ari?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think that's a
question that you need to the parties involved, not to the White
House.
Q Well, what does the
President think? That's what I wanted to know.
MR. FLEISCHER: The President thinks
it's a question you should address to the parties involved and not the
White House.
Mr. King.
Q Ari, on the economy,
when you were discussing evidence of slowing in the economy a couple of
months back and asking the Congress to move more quickly on the tax
cuts, you were saying that contrary to what some people thought might
happen, the Treasury was actually running ahead of receipts from last
year. Is that still the case? Has the slowness in
the economy, and as you say, perhaps even a downward revision --
MR. FLEISCHER: Receipts are coming
in generally on a line, what was projected for this
year. I'd have to take a careful look at the exact
analysis. The last two weeks of February are typically the
most important weeks to look at in terms of revenues coming
in. And they did come in, in a fashion that was projected.
Q If you're coming in
on a line projection now, and you were $30 billion ahead early on, as
they come --
MR. FLEISCHER: No, that was $30
billion ahead of last year's collections, given the weakness in the
economy. But you may want to check with Treasury on the
daily fluctuations. There's a daily report that comes out of
Treasury, or a weekly report, I think. There's a daily
report that's summarized and a monthly report that's available from
Treasury.
Q Ari, missile defense
recently, and Kyoto before that, has some U.S. allies worried that this
is an "our way or no way administration" with a unilateralist foreign
policy. What do you say to that?
MR. FLEISCHER: That's precisely why
the President made a series of phone calls to European leaders the day
before he announced the missile defense speech. In addition,
he spoke to the new Prime Minister of Japan the weekend before his
speech. And it's a pledge that the President has made to our
allies, that he will move in a fashion that is consultative, not
unilateral. And I also offer you previous meetings the
President had with a series of leaders -- Prime Minister Blair,
Chancellor Schroeder -- where the President discussed, in a very
constructive fashion, his thoughts about missile defense.
Q So you're saying it's
not unilateralist?
MR. FLEISCHER: It is not
unilateralist.
Q Back to the U.N.
Human Rights Commission. The United States sponsored a
resolution condemning China on human rights this spring, as it often
had. Do we think that China played a role in getting other
countries to vote us off?
MR. FLEISCHER: I couldn't tell
you.
Q There are a lot of
people reporting trouble accessing the White House website
today. Some Internet security firms have reported that
Chinese nationals, hackers were planning to use today for concentrated
attacks on that website. Are we having a -- attack on the
White House websites, or any other kind of hacker attacks in the last
couple of days? Have they had any success --
MR. FLEISCHER: Let me get back to
you on that. I've gotten some preliminary information about
this matter, just in terms of whether the website or any portions of it
may not have been up. I have no idea about the source of
it. But let me try to get back to you on it.
Q But are you saying,
then, that you are aware of a problem, that the White House has been
looking into it?
MR. FLEISCHER: Let me get back to
you. I've got some preliminary information about whether a
portion of our website was up this morning. And I want to evaluate
that information.
Q Ari, Senator Grassley
today said there are not enough votes in the Finance Committee to
support the 33 percent top rate in the tax cut the President
wants. Is the White House at all flexible on the top rate,
particularly since it doesn't look like you have the votes?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, of course, the
top rate was lowered from 39 percent to 33 percent by the House of
Representatives, and there are many senators who do want to lower the
top rate from 39 percent to 33 percent. Chairman Grassley has a very
difficult job. The Finance Committee is, of course, an
evenly-divided committee and he's going to work hard and do his best to
get the tax package as close to the President's plan as is possible.
So the President's approach is to continue to
work constructively with all people who are dedicated to cutting taxes,
and to have a package emerge from the Senate that is as close as
possible to the President's original proposal. And then he
looks forward to working in the House-Senate Conference to have the
final package come out in a way that is even closer to the President's
proposal.
Q There seems to be a
consensus growing on 35 percent rate. The President has said
he doesn't want the average taxpayer to be paying more than 33 percent
of their income for taxes. So is that within the ballpark?
MR. FLEISCHER: They haven't even
passed the budget resolution yet, so I'm not sure the consenses have
been formed on the exact, final decisions in the tax
bill. So I think it's a little early.
Q Speaking of the
budget resolution, is the administration concerned that the votes might
not be there when the House finally does get around to voting on it on
Tuesday?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, I don't think
that's in the cards.
Q There was a lot of
impetus and talk about the need to pass it last night, and then when
there was a glitch and it wasn't passed, was that need misplaced?
MR. FLEISCHER: I've been -- I was
on the Hill for a little while and we've all seen glitches
before. The conference agreement has been signed, so now
it's just a question of presenting it to the full House and to the full
Senate for votes. No phone numbers on the pages this year.
Q Ari, State and DOD
are reviewing U.S.-China policy. What about
USTR? Is there support from the White House for a USTR
review of its policies?
MR. FLEISCHER: You may want to
check with USTR specifically to see what actions or what reviews they
may or may not be taking.
Q But would the
President support such a review?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President, as
part of the national security team's recommendation to him, which he's
accepted, was to have State, DOD take a look, case-by-case, at the
China policies. And any other agencies that may want to take
a look at their policies are doing so with Condoleezza Rice.
Q Is it policies or a
review of contacts?
MR. FLEISCHER: Contacts.
Q So would you state
what it is that the President ordered, so we'll be clear about what he
ordered -- the White House, State, Defense to do?
MR. FLEISCHER: To take a look at
the contacts the various agencies are engaged with, with China, and to
make a determination on a case-by-case basis about which of those
contacts are the most positive and productive for the United States and
which may not be.
The President, himself, shared his thoughts
with you about that yesterday in the Cabinet Room.
Q Ari, on the North
Korea missile test hold, anything today on that? North Korea
is extending its missile test ban --
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, and that would
be a constructive step if that is, indeed, the policy that is carried
about by North Korea. The United States would view that as
constructive.
Q Ari, Democratic
leaders on Capitol Hill seem to growing increasingly strong in their
criticism of what they call a lack of true partisanship at the White
House. I was wondering --
MR. FLEISCHER: Lack of true
partisanship?
Q True
bipartisanship. (Laughter.) Which leads to the
second part of the question. I wanted to --
MR. FLEISCHER: Keep
going. (Laughter.)
Q -- hear your analysis
of the lack of true bipartisanship on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue,
with the Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill, and then your response to
what they're saying about the White House.
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, as you know,
President Bush is determined to help change the tone in
Washington. Evidence of that, beyond the actions he's taken
throughout the year in his carrying out of his duties with members of
Congress and the frequent meetings he's had with members of Congress in
both parties, can be found in the lunch he hosted Monday, where the
President was very gratified by the number of Democrats who accepted
his invitation and came to the White House to join him.
So the President will continue to reach out to
work with the Congress in a bipartisan fashion. And the
proof can be found in many of the votes that have taken
place. Of course, the budget resolution, passed in the
Senate in a highly unusual bipartisan vote, 65-36, very
unusual. And that's a reflection of the powerful bipartisan
ideas that the President presented to Congress that earned those
votes.
It's also a reflection of the manner in which
the President works with Democrats who are willing to work with
him. So he'll continue in that effort. The
education bill is another example of a powerful act of bipartisanship
that's moving forward.
The President also recognizes there are going
to be times when some Democrats just choose not to vote for his
policies. That is always their right, and he will be
respectful of them. But throughout this process, what you
will see emerging are bipartisan majorities that are formed in various
numbers on different issues, all of which add up to a Washington, D.C.
culture that is getting things done. And the President will
be pleased to work with people who form those bipartisan majorities and
respect the rights of those who vote outside those bipartisan
majorities.
Q If those votes come
from a few moderate or conservative Democrats, and the President stiffs
the Democratic leadership, does that count as bipartisanship?
MR. FLEISCHER: You say, stiffs the
Democrat leadership. I think that in a democracy the only
thing you can ask for is for civility and for someone's ideas to be
presented, where each individual member of Congress, whether a liberal
a moderate or conservative, can express themselves through their
votes. And the President will be very pleased to create
bipartisan coalitions in a nation that is governed by majority rule, so
that he can sign bills into law, which is what the country wants.
Q I think that's a
yes. Does that mean that he is not going to really work with
the Democratic leadership in forming these policies, as much as
searching for votes with the moderate --
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, of course he
will work with the Democrat leadership. But in the end, the
process always comes down to a question of getting things done for the
American people. And to get things done for the American
people, what counts is the ability to assemble a bipartisan coalition
that is called a majority. And once that's done, then you
can anticipate several signing ceremonies here at the White House,
which I think the American people will very well receive, and will be
grateful to the people who voted yes.
Q But along those
lines, has he found, or is he finding, a group of Democrats with whom
he feels comfortable making regular contacts? I mean,
Senator Breaux has been here a number of times, and the other day in
the photo opportunity I think he mentioned a few others. Is
he going to --
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, of course on
Wednesday of this week, the President -- I think -- yes, Wednesday of
this week, the President hosted a bipartisan meeting here at the White
House to thank the people who helped make the successful completion of
the budget resolution conference agreement a reality. And
that included seven Democrats. Congressman Condit was down
here, Senator Torricelli was down here, Senator Nelson, Senator
Breaux.
So the President is going to continue to work
with members of Congress, of both parties, to assemble governing,
bipartisan coalitions. On some issues, there are going to be many
votes. On some issues, the votes may be
narrower. The point remains in the end, the legislation gets
signed into law, and that's what good government is all about.
Q Speaking of the
search for bipartisanship, what do you make of the argument on the Hill
over judicial nominations and how Republicans and Democrats will or
will not cooperate?
MR. FLEISCHER: Let me take that in
half a second, let me come back, because I'm having fun with this.
On your question, also, about the votes, you
may want to just do your own research, go back and take a look at
several of the actual votes that took place. There have been
a series of votes in the House of Representatives, for example, to
abolish the death tax -- a huge bipartisan vote.
I think you're free to do the vote analysis of
how many people voted with the President, how many did not, who they
may be; on marriage penalty relief; on death tax relief; child
credit. So there have already been a series of test cases
and you can see who was falling within this new bipartisan governing
majority and who was outside of it in a narrower minority.
Q While we're still on
this, is it more important to the President to get a strong bipartisan
vote than it is, say, to get his policies passed? I mean, is
it more important to have a lot of Democrats on board than it is to get
more tax cuts, say, for the American people?
MR. FLEISCHER: Keith, it all begins
with the power of ideas, and that's how the President approaches
it. What's most important is for the power of the
President's ideas, the issues on which he ran, to be enacted into
law. And what creates bipartisanship in the first instance
is those ideas.
You can work the phones, you can be as cordial
and cooperative as you want to be, and often that is reciprocated by
Democrats on the Hill. But if your ideas aren't bipartisan,
it's hard to get bipartisan support. The President's ideas
are powerful, and that's why they're attracting bipartisan
support. Hence, the vote in the House to abolish the death
tax; the vote in the House to double the child credit from $500 to
$1,000; the power of the President's ideas on education reform.
The President certainly understands there may
be some Democrats who, for whatever reasons -- liberal, ideological --
will just not join with him and this new governing bipartisan
majority. He will respect them; that is their
right. But it is the power of his ideas that are attracting
so much powerful support.
Q But he's had to
change those ideas in each case. They weren't so powerful
that he could get them through just as they were. So I guess
what I'm wondering is, I mean, would it be more important to him to
maybe shave $100 billion off his tax cut and get a large vote in
Congress, or to keep that and just win by one vote?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think you'll just
watch different issues, issue by issue. Obviously, he had to
make no changes whatsoever in the child credit, for
example. So you can keep your eye on that and see how the
votes develop. But it's a real sign of how Washington is
changing, that these bipartisan majorities have been formed on
legislation that the President is prepared to sign.
Jim had a question here.
Q In this search for
bipartisanship, what is your judgment about what's happening on the
Hill with regard to judicial nominations, and the argument by
Democrats, the position the Democrats have taken with regard to the
role of senators?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President is
going to be very respectful of the senatorial prerogative on advice and
consent. And I said this morning I will get it to you this
afternoon, the letter that Judge Gonzales has sent up to the Congress
that expresses the President's desire to work with senators to make
certain that his nominations for the judiciary are put through the
Senate.
It's very important to have the judicial
nominations go through. There are vacancies on the
benches. Nobody wants to slow down the wheels of
justice. And certainly, the President would not expect the
Senate to do that. So this letter will make clear to you,
the President intends to work closely, cooperatively with senators.
Q But does that mean
that he will abide by the old policy Democrats claim was enforced
before, that will allow the two home state senators to more or less
exercise a veto over whether or not a judicial nomination --
MR. FLEISCHER: Let me get you the
letter and then you can evaluate that.
Q Back to the United
Nations issue and the human rights issue. Is the Bush
administration willing to look at its own human rights violations? For
instance, our going against the United Nations issues on 23-hour
lockups in prisons, et cetera?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm sorry, say that
again?
Q In other words, we
have violated some of the United Nations agreements on prisoner rights,
et cetera. Are we willing to look at our own human rights --
MR. FLEISCHER: Can you be
specific?
Q Twenty-three-hour
lockups. I believe that that's in violation --
MR. FLEISCHER: Where?
Q Colorado, the maximum
security prison in Colorado.
MR. FLEISCHER: Okay. And
is there a U.N. case pending on this?
Q No. I
don't know whether there's a U.N. case pending, but it's in violation
of an agreement we've signed.
MR. FLEISCHER: If there is a U.N.
case pending on it, bring it to my attention and I'll be happy to take
it.
Q I have a question
about commercialism reaching into areas that were previously off limits
to commercialism. Alcatel, the French telecommunications
firm, has procured the rights to Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream"
speech and they're running ads nationwide to use his speech to sell
telephone equipment.
They've also procured the rights to Lou
Gehrig's farewell speech in Yankee Stadium in 1939, to sell
telecommunications equipment. And I knew the Yankees were
here today and the radio announcers are required to say on a double
play -- there is a Jiffy Lube double play, or on a home run, there's
Coors Light -- the question is, does the President believe that there
are any limits to commercialism in terms of where it can and cannot
go?
MR. FLEISCHER: There are, of
course, a series of laws that govern communications activities and I
think that's a question that you need to address to the Federal
Communications Commission.
Q -- the President's
belief? For example, would he be offended by an oil ad on
the backs of a Texas Ranger shirt?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President
believes that the law needs to be followed within all the bounds of a
free enterprise system.
Q Ari, what is the
White House reaction to The Washington Times report today -- some fear
Ashcroft adrift from conservative base, and The Times publishing of
Ward Connerly's notation that racial preferences are enormously
unpopular among most voters in California and Washington State, but
Republican candidates in 1998 ran away from this
issue. What's your reaction to that, Ari? Would
you deny it?
MR. FLEISCHER: It reminds me of the
people who said that Dick Cheney is not conservative
enough. I mean, there are all kinds of ideas, all kinds of
thoughts. The President has a very strong and powerful
advocate for justice at the -- in the Attorney General.
Q Ari, could you expand
a little bit about our policy toward Sudan? It seemed like last night
the President broke a little ground on our policy, and I'd like to hear
--
MR. FLEISCHER: He
did. He did, and he did because the President is concerned
about human rights, and particularly the religious persecution that has
taken place in Sudan. The war in Sudan has cost an estimated
2 million lives. There are 4 million who have been displaced
from their homes. It's a terrible tragedy, what has taken
place in Sudan. People are being sold into slavery in Sudan
in large and significant numbers. It's one of the worst
human rights situations that's crying out for redressing justice.
And one of the reasons the President last
night appointed the special humanitarian coordinator is to help bring
more relief to the people who are suffering on the ground in Sudan, to
coordinate the activities of the United States with various other
bodies that are trying to bring relief to the people who need
help. And to do so in the face of a difficult situation
where the government is not always in the best, most reliable position
to get the help to the people. And that's why he chose to
speak out.
Q Can I ask you a
somewhat oddball question, I acknowledge.
MR. FLEISCHER: It would be a first
in this press room.
Q Yes, I know --
(laughter) -- while we were in that portion of the briefing --
(laughter) --
Q And I have a
follow-up. (Laughter.)
MR. FLEISCHER: I encourage you all
to leave early, to watch the helicopter.
Q I do not have a
follow-up.
Q What do you make of
the fact that North Korean leader Kim Jong Il's son slipped into Japan
on a false passport to go to Tokyo Disneyland? (Laughter.)
MR. FLEISCHER: I think that's an
issue that the Japanese are dealing with.
Q They've already dealt
with it.
Q Ari, yesterday the
Japanese Economics Minister, Takenaka, said that after -- said that
during a meeting with the head of the CEA that the administration
believes that the economic slowdown will be check-marked
shaped. By that he meant, there will be a sharp downturn at
the beginning, followed by steady, moderate growth going
out. Is that the current thinking, because there's been
debate about a V-shaped downturn --
MR. FLEISCHER: Or a U-shaped. Or a check-marked
shape.
Q Is a check mark what the viewpoint is now?
MR. FLEISCHER: You know, the
President, as I mentioned at the beginning, in response to the first
question, is concerned about a slowdown in the economy. I
don't think his crystal ball or anybody's crystal ball is precise
enough to tell you whether it's going to be a check mark, a V or a
U. The point that the President wants to emphasize is
whether it is a check mark, a V or a U, it needs to go back up
again. And the best way to make it go back up again is by
the Congress taking action on his tax relief plan.
Q On a much lighter
note, you can put your Yankees hat back on if you'd like. We
see the President at these sporting events. He clearly has a
good time. He's bringing the T-ball field to the White
House, and they'll have the game over the weekend. What
about behind the scenes? Is he a sports-page-first guy in
the morning, and when he says he's in bed reading the briefing books,
is he really watching Sportscenter? (Laughter.)
MR. FLEISCHER: The President is a
sports fan. He enjoys sports. He's a good athlete,
himself. And I think in that he finds a camaraderie with
hundreds of millions of Americans. He does enjoy watching
Baseball Tonight. He's been known to go back to the
Residence and turn that on and get the latest scores, especially for
the Rangers. He reads the sports pages. I would
never, in a roomful of journalists, indicate to you the order in which
he reads the paper. Of course, he reads the news section
first, unless the sports scores are really good and newsworthy.
(Laughter.)
Would you like the week ahead?
On Monday, the President will meet with the
Premier of Bahrain in the Oval Office. He will participate
in a photo opportunity with the multiple sclerosis mother and father of
the year. And he will also make remarks to the council of
America's 31st annual conference at the Department of State.
On Tuesday, the President will make remarks in
a ceremony honoring the small business person of the
year. He will make remarks at the electronic industries
alliance dinner at Washington, D.C.
On Thursday, the President will participate in
an event --
Q What happened to
Wednesday?
MR. FLEISCHER: No public events
scheduled at this point. That's subject to change.
And on Thursday, the President will
participate in a photo opportunity
with the NCAA men's hockey champions.
And on Friday, the President will meet with
the President of Nigeria in the Oval Office, and participate in a photo
opportunity with the Potomac School first grade class. He
will then depart for Camp David until Sunday.
There will be several other announcements that
I will be able to give you indication on next week.
Q Does Wednesday
possibly mean a press conference, if there are no public events?
MR. FLEISCHER: Good try,
Connie. Thank you.
END 1:27
P.M. EDT
|