[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George W. Bush (2006, Book I)]
[May 22, 2006]
[Pages 979-993]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]
Remarks on the War on Terror and a Question-and-Answer Session in
Chicago, Illinois
May 22, 2006
The President. Thank you all very much. Thanks for the warm welcome.
It's great to be back in Chicago, home of the mighty Chicago White Sox,
world champs. I said that because the mayor
is here--[laughter]--who, by the way, is one of the finest mayors in our
country. Mayor Daley, thank you for being here. He's a huge Chicago
White Sox fan. When I had the White Sox to the White House to
congratulate them on the world championship--winning the world
championship trophy, there was the mayor, beaming.
The other team here isn't doing quite so well these days. [Laughter]
As a matter of fact, I had the honor, though, of throwing out the first
pitch in the Chicago Cubs home opener against Cincinnati, and they won
that game 16 to 7. You know, when you're President, sometimes you get
blamed for a lot of things. [Laughter] So I want to assure all the Cubs
fans here that the last time I saw them play, they were undefeated.
[Laughter]
I really appreciate being invited here by the National Restaurant
Association. Thanks for having me. You know, Laura and I don't eat out as much as we used to. [Laughter]
But we do appreciate your industry's contribution to the country.
I appreciate your leadership in Washington on really important
issues like tort reform and tax relief and immigration reform. I'm going
to spend a little time today talking about immigration reform. But the
main reason I've come today is to talk to you about a watershed event
that took place this weekend in Iraq. On Saturday, in Baghdad, Iraqis
formed a new Government, and the world saw the beginning of something
new--constitutional democracy at the heart of the Middle East.
And if you like, after my remarks, I'd like to answer some of your
questions. So be thinking of them.
But before I get there, I do want to thank Ed Tinsley. He's a west Texan, and like me, he married a
woman from Midland, Texas. It's the best
decision Tinsley ever made, and it's the best decision I ever made.
Laura sends her greetings to you all. She's a
fine First Lady, and I'm lucky she said yes when I asked her to marry
me.
I appreciate Steven Anderson, the
President and CEO of the National Restaurant Association. I appreciate
sharing the stage with Denny Hastert. He
is an excellent Speaker of the House. He is dependable, reliable, smart,
capable. Do you realize that he will have served, come June 1st, longer
than any other Republican Speaker in our Nation's history? And the
reason why, he knows what he's doing.
And I appreciate Congressman Ray LaHood and Congresswoman Judy Biggert for joining us as well, today. They're here looking for
a ride back to Washington on Air Force One. [Laughter] I appreciate all
the State and local officials for coming too.
Our economy is strong, and it's growing. And the restaurant industry
plays a vital role in this prosperity. National unemployment is 4.7
percent. That's lower than the average of the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s.
People are working. We've added over 2 million jobs in the last 2\1/2\
years. And one of the main reasons why is because the National
Restaurant Association members are employing people. The NRA--National
Restaurant Association--estimates that more than 12.5 million people
work at 925,000 restaurants across our country. That makes restaurants
the largest private employer in our land.
[[Page 980]]
You not only help people put food on the table, but you provide many
Americans with their first job, with a start. You teach people the
importance of showing up on time and working hard and meeting the needs
of our customers. You're also America's largest employer of immigrants,
and you know how essential it is that we have an immigration system that
is safe, orderly, and fair. And I agree with you, and that's why I laid
out a vision for comprehensive immigration reform that would accomplish
five key goals.
First, the United States will secure our borders by deploying
thousands of new Border Patrol agents and giving those agents the best
technology available to do their job.
Secondly, you can't secure our border with thousands trying to sneak
in. And therefore, this country needs a temporary-worker program that
will allow foreign workers to enter our country legally on a temporary
basis to meet the needs of our economy and take the pressure off our
border.
Third, we must create a reliable system for verifying documents and
work eligibility so we can better enforce our immigration laws at the
workplace.
Fourth, we will find a rational middle ground to resolve the legal
status of the millions of people who have been here for quite a while,
without granting amnesty.
And fifth, we will uphold the great American tradition of the
melting pot so America can remain what it always has been, one Nation
under God.
The reforms I proposed regarding guest workers are really important
for your industry. Your association estimates that restaurants will
add--will need 1.9 million new workers over the next 10 years, which
means that you need workers--your need for workers will be growing
faster than the American labor force. So you understand why effective
immigration reform must include a practical and lawful way for
businesses to hire foreign workers when they can't fill those jobs with
Americans. The restaurant industry has first-hand experience with
immigrants and immigration law. And I appreciate your strong stand on
Capitol Hill for comprehensive reform.
And here's where we are. The House passed a bill last--an
immigration bill last December, and the Senate is working hard on its
version of the bill. The Senate needs to complete its bill now so that
the House and Senate can work out their differences and pass a
comprehensive reform bill that I can sign into law.
We face challenges at home, and we face challenges abroad. So I've
come to talk to you about an historic event that took place halfway
around the world this weekend. This Saturday in Baghdad, the new Prime
Minister of Iraq announced a national unity
Government. This is a free Government under a democratic Constitution,
and its formation marks a victory for the cause of freedom in the Middle
East.
In three elections last year, millions of Iraqis cast their ballot
in defiance of the terrorists. And now they have a Government of their
own choosing under a Constitution that they drafted and they approved.
As this new unity Government takes office, it carries with it the hopes
of the Iraqi nation and the aspirations of freedom-loving people across
a troubled region.
The unity Government has strong leaders that will represent all of
the Iraqi people. I called them this weekend to congratulate them. I
thanked them for being courageous and strong and standing for the belief
that liberty will help transform their troubled nation.
The new Government is led by Prime Minister Maliki. He's a Shi'a. He's an Iraqi patriot who, for years, was part
of the resistance to Saddam Hussein. He's
shown courage and wisdom by surrounding himself with strong leaders who
are committed to serving all the people. Prime Minister Maliki said this
weekend, ``Just as we did
[[Page 981]]
away with the tyrant and the days of oppression and despotism, we will
do away with terrorism and sabotage, backwardness, poverty, and
ignorance.'' The Iraqi people are blessed to have a leader like Prime
Minister Maliki, and I'm proud to call him ally and friend.
Iraq's new Government has another strong leader in its President,
President Talabani. He's a Kurd who
distinguished himself by his service in the transitional government and
in his long fight against Saddam Hussein.
He's proved that he's not afraid to take the lead. He's made clear that
a democratic Iraq must reject sectarian violence as strongly as it
rejects terrorism. He says, ``It's our duty, all of us, to work hand in
hand to protect our people and to support Iraqi unity.''
Iraq's new Government has another able leader in Speaker
Mashhadani. He'll preside over Iraq's
new Council of Representatives. The Speaker is a Sunni who originally
opposed America's presence in Iraq. He rejects the use of violence for
political ends. And by agreeing to serve in a prominent role in this new
unity Government, he's demonstrating leadership and courage. It was said
to me that he wouldn't have taken my phone call a year ago. He's now
taken it twice. He says Iraq's new leaders must govern by common vision.
This common vision is critical to the new Government's success.
Although Iraq's new leaders come from many different ethnic and
religious communities, they've made clear they will govern as Iraqis.
They know that the strategy of the terrorists and the insurgents is to
divide Iraq along sectarian lines. And the only way the enemy will be
defeated is if they stand and act as one.
The Government is still a work in progress, and overcoming
longstanding divisions will take time. Iraq's new leaders know they have
a great deal of work ahead to broaden the base of their Government and
to unite the people. They also understand that representing all Iraqis
and not just narrow sectarian interests, they will be able to make a
decisive break with the past and make a future of progress and
opportunity for all their people a reality. The unity Government must
now seize this moment and pursue a common agenda for the future.
This weekend Prime Minister Maliki laid
out his plan for a new Iraq. He promised to work for a sovereign Iraq
that will assume responsibility for the security of its people. He
committed himself to a free Iraq that will uphold international
standards of human rights and respect the role of women in Iraqi
society. He pledged to work for a prosperous Iraq that welcomes foreign
investments and accelerates reconstruction and lays the foundations for
economic growth and opportunity. He declared he would lead a transparent
Iraq where Government is open and accountable and corruption is not
tolerated. And he vowed to work for a peaceful Iraq that is the enemy of
terror, a friend to its neighbors, and a reliable partner in the
community of nations.
The Prime Minister promised that he will
soon fill the remaining positions in his Government and announced the
details of his plans to build his new country, his new Iraq. As his
Government moves forward, it can draw on many strengths of the Iraqi
nation. Iraqis are among the most highly educated and skilled people in
the Middle East. They have abundant natural resources, including fertile
soil, abundant water, and large reserves of oil. And they're rich in
cultural and historical and religious sites that one day could draw
millions of tourists and pilgrims from across the world. Iraq's new
leaders understand that so long as they remain united, there is no limit
to the potential of their country.
The unity Government opens a new chapter in the relationship between
the United States and Iraq. The new Iraqi Government does not change
America's objectives or our commitment, but it will change how we
achieve those objectives and how
[[Page 982]]
we honor our commitment. And the new Iraqi Government--as the new Iraqi
Government grows in confidence and capability, America will play an
increasingly supporting role. To take advantage of this moment of
opportunity, the United States and our coalition partners will work with
the new Iraqi Government to adjust our methods and strengthen our mutual
efforts to achieve victory over our common enemies.
At my direction, the Secretaries of State and Defense
recently traveled to Baghdad to meet with the Prime Minister and other leaders. And now the new Government has
been formed, I've instructed those Secretaries to engage Iraq's new
leaders as they assess their needs and capabilities, so we will be in
the best position to help them succeed. Iraqis are determined to chart
their own future. And now they have the leadership to do it. And this
unity Government deserves American support, and they will have it.
Our Nation has been through three difficult years in Iraq. And the
way forward will bring more days of challenge and loss. The progress
we've made has been hard-fought, and it's been incremental. There have
been setbacks and missteps--like Abu Ghraib--that were felt immediately
and have been difficult to overcome. Yet we have now reached a turning
point in the struggle between freedom and terror.
Two years ago, Al Qaida's leader in Iraq wrote a letter that said, ``Democracy is coming,'' and
this would mean ``suffocation'' for Al Qaida and its allies. The
terrorists fought this moment with all their hateful power--with suicide
attacks and beheadings and roadside bombs--and now the day they feared
has arrived. And with it has come a moment of great clarity: The
terrorists can kill the innocent, but they cannot stop the advance of
freedom.
The terrorists did not lay down their arms after three elections in
Iraq, and they will continue to fight this new Government. And we can
expect the violence to continue, but something fundamental changed this
weekend. The terrorists are now fighting a free and constitutional
Government. They're at war with the people of Iraq. And the Iraqi people
are determined to defeat this enemy, and so are Iraq's new leaders, and
so is the United States of America.
The path to freedom is always one of struggle and sacrifice. And in
Iraq, our brave men and women in uniform have accepted the struggle and
have made the sacrifice. This moment would not be possible without their
courage. The United States of America is safer because of their success,
and our Nation will always be grateful to their service.
For most Iraqis, a free, democratic, and constitutional Government
will be a new experience. And for the people across the broader Middle
East, a free Iraq will be an inspiration. Iraqis have done more than
form a government; they have proved that the desire for liberty in the
heart of the Middle East is for real. They've shown diverse people can
come together and work out their differences and find a way forward. And
they've demonstrated that democracy is the hope of the Middle East and
the destiny of all mankind.
The triumph of liberty in Iraq is part of a long and familiar story.
The great biographer of American democracy, Alexis de Tocqueville,
wrote: ``Freedom is ordinarily born in the midst of storms. It is
established painfully among civil discords, and only when it is old can
one know its benefits.'' Years from now, people will look back on the
formation of a unity Government in Iraq as a decisive moment in the
story of liberty, a moment when freedom gained a firm foothold in the
Middle East and the forces of terror began their long retreat. Thank you
for having me. [Applause]
Thank you all very much. Thank you. Thank you all. I'll be glad to
answer some questions, if you've got some. Tinsley said it would be
helpful if I answered some questions. [Laughter]
[[Page 983]]
The President. Let's see, you got one? Yes, sir.
Tax Reform
Q. I was just wondering, being a small-business owner, one of the
things we really appreciate about your administration was the tax cuts
for small business. And I was just wondering, are those going to be
permanent, and are we taking action to make them permanent?
The President. His question is about tax cuts and whether they'll be
permanent. First of all, a lot of Americans don't really understand that
when you cut taxes on individuals, you cut taxes on a lot of small
businesses. Many small businesses are subchapter S corporations or
limited partnerships, which end up paying their taxes based upon the
individual income tax rates. And so when you reduce taxes on everybody
who pays taxes, you're really helping the small-business sector. And why
that's--that's an important part of our economic recovery policy,
because small businesses create 70 percent of the new jobs in America.
So thank you for recognizing the--thank you for reminding people
here the importance of those tax cuts for small business. And also, by
the way, there was some incentives in our economic recovery package that
encourage you to buy equipment. And when you buy equipment, somebody has
got to make the equipment. When somebody makes the equipment, it means
somebody is more likely to be able to find a job not only at your place
of work but the equipment manufacturer's place of work.
And so his question was, are you going to allow the tax cuts to
expire? See, they weren't permanent. My answer is, in order to make sure
this economic recovery is lasting and real, the tax cuts need to be made
permanent. And the Speaker agrees with me, you'll be happy to hear. It's
important for Congress to understand that when there is any uncertainty
in the Tax Code, it will make it less likely someone is willing to
invest in a small business and expand their businesses. Uncertainty in
the Tax Code creates uncertainty in the investment community or when
people make investments.
So we're absolutely committed to making the tax cuts permanent. The
argument you'll hear is, well, how can you possibly balance the budget
if you make the tax cuts permanent? I guess the reverse of that is, ``We
want to raise your taxes to balance the budget.'' Unfortunately, that's
not the way Washington works. The way Washington works is they will
raise your taxes and figure out new ways to spend the money and not
balance the budget.
The best way to balance the budget is to keep progrowth economic
policies in place. I think you're going to find a report coming out this
summer to be very interesting. In other words--last year, by the way, we
exceeded the estimated revenues by about $100 billion. The economy is
cranking. When the economy works, people are employing people, and when
people are making money, they pay more taxes. Right now it looks like
that the revenues coming into our Treasury are greater than anticipated
this time around too.
And so the best way to reduce our deficit is to keep progrowth
economic policies in place--hence, permanent tax cuts--as well as being
wise about how we spend your money. And the best way to be wise about
how we spend your money is to set priorities. And my priority is to make
sure our troops have what it takes to defend the United States of
America.
Voluntarism
Q. Mr. President, my daughter's name is Jamie. She's a 16-year-old
girl. What advice or recommendations would you give to her and to other
youth of our country to help make our country a better place?
The President. Thank you. I would say that--to Jamie, listen
carefully to that universal admonition to love a neighbor like you'd
like to be loved yourself. You know,
[[Page 984]]
I get an interesting perspective of America. I, of course, get to see
the incredible folks who wear our Nation's uniform. It's unbelievably
inspiring to meet men and women who have volunteered to serve our
country in a time of war. And not only do I get to meet them, I get to
meet their families. I also get to meet the entrepreneurs of America,
people who are willing to risk time, effort, and money to grow a
business. And as a result, we've got a great--we've got fat wallets
relative to the rest of the world.
But the true strength of the country lies in the hearts and souls of
our citizens. That's the really unbelievable strength of America. I get
to meet people all the time. I met two
youngsters today, Chinese Americans, who
volunteered to go down to help the Katrina victims. Nobody told them to
do it. There was no government law that said, ``You're going to go down
and love your neighbor.'' They heard the call.
And so my advice is to tell your daughter that she can be a part of
a changing America by helping somebody who hurts; feed the hungry; find
shelter for the homeless. America's strength lies in the armies of
compassion that exist all across the United States of America.
And so I thank you for your question.
Yes.
Health Care Reform
Q. Thank you, Mr. President. First, I want to tell you, thank you--
how much we love your brother in the State of Florida.
The President. I had nothing to do with it. [Laughter] Thank my
mother. [Laughter]
Q. He has been very good to the restaurant industry.
The President. He has been eating a lot, I
noticed. [Laughter]
Q. You said that, not me. [Laughter] Mr. President, with mandated
health care beginning to sweep the Nation, and we're seeing it pop up on
the State level, do you see the association health plan passing,
hopefully, before you're out of office? And where do you see mandated
health care going for the business industry?
The President. First of all, I think that the Government has a--the
Federal Government has a responsibility, particularly on two fronts,
when it comes to health care. One is to take care of the elderly. Lyndon
Johnson signed that bill, and it said the Federal Government will
provide health care for the elderly, called Medicare. And thanks to the
Speaker's leadership and others here, we reformed Medicare so it
actually meets the needs of our seniors.
My attitude is, if you made a commitment to the seniors, make it a
good commitment; make it work. And we didn't have prescription drug
benefits as a part of Medicare. And yet we're willing to pay for the
surgery for an ulcer, for example, but not the drugs to prevent the
ulcer from happening in the first place.
Secondly, we got to--made a commitment to the poor, and that's
through Medicaid as well as community health centers. These are
facilities--and the Speaker and I have
been working on this--to expand community health centers throughout
America so the poor and the indigent can get primary care in these
facilities and not at your local emergency rooms.
Now, I also believe--[applause]--but I believe the best health care
system beyond that means making sure we strengthen the doctor-patient
relationship. And that is--that's not a mandate; that's just a practical
way to view medicine.
And so how can you do that? Well, one is to promote health savings
accounts, which we are doing. Health savings accounts are unique
products that enable a small-business owner and/or an individual to be
able to purchase a catastrophic plan--low-premium catastrophic plan,
high-deductible catastrophic plan--coupled with a tax-free savings
account. Now, that's important because it means that you're in control
of your account. The person, the customer,
[[Page 985]]
the consumer is in control of making health care decisions.
One of the problems we have when it comes to cost is that we have
the third-party payer system. Somebody else pays the bills, and
therefore, there is no consumerism, so to speak, involved in health
care.
Secondly, we got to recognize that certain individuals don't have
the capacity to be able to buy health insurance like big companies can
do, and therefore, it erodes the capacity of small businesses to be able
to maintain their purchasing power. In other words, if it costs you a
lot of money to buy the insurance plan, you're not going to pay for your
insurance, see. And right now our small businesses are being penalized
because they're not allowed to pool risk across jurisdictional
boundaries. A solution to that is association health plans. The
Speaker got it passed out of the House. It
got killed by the trial lawyers in the United States Senate.
To answer your question, yes, I hope to get it out. It's a practical
way of making sure that small businesses aren't mandated but have got
choice in the marketplace. That's what I'm trying to tell you. I believe
in choices in the marketplace. I believe in empowering people to make
rational choices. In order to have a health care system that helps
control costs and where people can make rational decisions, there needs
to be transparency in pricing.
I know when I go to restaurants, I got a menu, see, and they say,
here's what it costs you. That's not the case in most health care
decisions, is it? I don't--I haven't seen a lot of price postings. So
we're working--we're using Federal leverage through Medicare and the
Veterans Administration, for example, to say, if you're doing business
with the Federal Government, post your prices and the quality of service
you're getting, so consumers can start making rational decisions in the
marketplace. When you've got rational decisionmaking based upon price,
it's going to help control cost, which is very important for your
industry.
Third, this is an industry--the health care industry is one that's
kind of lagging behind when it comes to information technology--the docs
are still writing out prescriptions with longhand. Or sometimes when
you're in a hospital and you're going from place to place, you're
carrying files, right? And they've been written out in longhand. Well,
it's not a very efficient use of a person's time; plus, most doctors
can't write. [Laughter] And therefore, costs are higher than they should
be in medicine. So we're working to make sure that information
technology is spread throughout the medical industry.
Again, the Federal Government has got a good chance to help leverage
our position. We're a major provider of health care. And therefore, we
ought to be using our position to start off helping the industry write a
common language. Part of the problem in medicine is that there's not a
common language, and therefore, it's hard to have a smooth information
technology system throughout the medical industry. Our goal, by the way,
is for every American to have a electronic medical record, and--but, by
the way, with a guarantee of privacy.
And finally, one reason why you're having trouble buying health care
is because these lawsuits are running good docs out of practice. Do you
realize there are over 1,500 counties in America without an ob-gyn? And
part of the argument is we got a health care system that is accessible
and affordable--then we got to do something about these junk lawsuits.
Again, the Speaker got a good medical
liability bill out of the House of Representatives, but the trial
lawyers defeated it in the United States Senate. And if you really want
to help the country and make sure you've got affordable health care, get
ahold of your United States Senators who are voting against meaningful
medical liability reform, and help us get a bill passed.
[[Page 986]]
That's a long answer--it's a long answer because I wanted to show
you we've got a comprehensive plan that runs the opposite of Federal
Government being the decider at all costs. I don't believe we ought to
federalize medicine; I believe we ought to localize medicine. And the
most local medicine is between the doctor and the patient.
Canada-U.S. Relations/Border Security
Q. Good morning, Mr. President--from Toronto, Canada, and my
question is regarding border restrictions between our two countries.
Given the impact on tourism, do you feel that it's necessary to continue
increasing border restrictions between Canada and the U.S.?
The President. What he's referring to is right after 9/11, the
Congress passed legislation that said there will be a new--border--an
identification card between--travel between our countries. And you can
understand why our Nation reacted the way--I hope you can understand the
way our Nation reacted the way we did after 9/11. I mean, we were--we
analyzed all aspects of our security. We were--we said we were going to
do everything we can within the law to protect ourselves. And Congress
passed some new laws to make sure that we knew who was coming in the
country and who was leaving the country. And I supported those laws.
And now we're working with your Government to make sure that the
identification cards that will be used between our two borders are
compatible not only with our needs but your needs. I spoke to Prime
Minister Harper about this subject. He's very
aware and worried about a identification card that would be difficult to
get into the hands of Canadians; it would make it difficult for Canada
to continue to attract conventions. And so to answer your question, yes,
we ought to have a system that is compatible with both our countries'
needs.
The difference between--and by the way, it's very important for the
Canadians to understand, there's a difference in the debate going on
between the northern border and the southern border. The southern--and
by the way, it's important for Americans to understand, the language of
this debate must never say that Canada and/or Mexico are the enemies of
the United States. They're friends of the United States. They're our
friends and neighbors.
And so the issue this gentleman is referring to really is, how do we
make sure we have a system that enables the legal people to come back
and forth, I guess, is the best way to describe it. And we're working on
it, to make sure that whatever documents are needed will not be
restrictive, but nevertheless, informational, I guess is the best way to
put it.
Thanks.
Yes, sir. Okay, you're next after that. Yes.
Fuel/Energy
Q. President Bush--from Crown Point, Indiana. First of all, I want
to say, you're doing a fine job.
The President. Well, leave it at that, will you? Thank you. That
kind of makes your question not very credible when you say something
like that. [Laughter] But I'll accept it anyway.
Q. My question is, is there a realistic yet aggressive timetable and
strategy to get our reliance off of Middle East oil and go to a
different fuel source or ways that the United States can prosper?
The President. No, that's a great question. One of the things that
should be evident to the American people now is that we live in a global
world, and when demand for hydrocarbons increases in places like China
and India, it causes our gasoline prices to go up. In other words, a
global economy is such that when demand rises faster than international
supply, the price of crude goes up--which is the feedstock for gasoline.
And so the American people
[[Page 987]]
see firsthand what it means to be in a global world which is dependent
upon fossil fuels, hydrocarbon.
And so the realistic timetable is as soon as possible. And I do
think it's realistic. And here's--what he's saying is, how quick can we
get off oil, all right? Well, most oil is consumed in America because of
our automobiles. And the question then is, how quickly can we diversify
the automobile fleet from one that is gasoline-only to one that becomes
a mix, for example, of gasoline and ethanol? And we're making pretty
good progress. If you really think about, for example, the penetration
of ethanol in the Midwest, it's been amazing over the last couple of
years. Indiana people--you're beginning to get E-85 pumps. E-85 means 85
percent of the fuel you buy at an E-85 pump is ethanol. We've put tax
incentives in place to encourage the construction of ethanol refineries,
and they're beginning to grow quite dramatically.
Some people say, well, you've got ethanol pumps, but doesn't it make
it difficult to use it because the cars are not compatible? That's not
true. There are 5 million automobiles on the road today that are flex-
fuel vehicles. In other words, they can use ethanol and/or gasoline or a
combination of the both. So the technologies to make our automobiles
ethanol-compatible are around. As a matter of fact, you may have a flex-
fuel vehicle and just don't know it.
The question then is, how do we--do we have enough feedstock into
the ethanol business to be able to really get major penetration? And
that's where we're spending some money. Because we got corn all right,
but sometimes you got to eat corn. And sometimes your pigs and cows have
got to eat corn. And so pretty soon, we're going to run into a bind when
it comes to corn for ethanol and corn for other means and other needs.
And so we're spending quite a bit of money at the Federal level, and
have been for a couple of years, to see whether or not we can develop
new technologies to make ethanol out of other feedstocks like
switchgrass or wood chips.
They say we're getting pretty close to that. I can't give you a
specific timetable. I know we're getting close to a battery that can go
into a hybrid vehicle. Hybrid vehicles are good things--that switches
between electricity and gasoline. And the next breakthrough is going to
come to a vehicle that doesn't switch between electricity and gasoline
until you've driven your first 40 miles. In other words, you'll have a
battery that will be able to last for 40 miles before your car has to
kick into gas--gasoline. And that's going to help save a lot of--that
will help reduce demand for oil.
Longer term--and this is--this is a longer term--that's within 5
years, they tell me, as well. But over the next 10 years, my hope is
that we have hydrogen become a technology that is commercial and
applicable, so you're really driving automobiles with hydrogen as fuel
source, not gasoline. And we're spending a lot of money on that. We're
spending over a billion dollars to accelerate technologies to do that.
In the short term, in order to--by the way, it doesn't answer your
question, how do you get off oil. But it does answer, how do we help
consumers in America. I view rising gasoline prices as like a tax. It
certainly affects small businesses. And one way to do it is to make sure
we've got ample supplies of gasoline available. You realize, we haven't
built a new refinery since the 1970s. If Congress is that concerned
about the price of gasoline, it seems like they ought to give us
flexibility so we can permit expansions and/or new refineries so that we
can keep the price--[applause]. It's a long-winded answer, but it's a
problem that requires a strategy in which we spend money on research and
development and on a variety of fronts.
Another example is clean coal technologies. It's conceivable that
relatively--well, within a period of time--it's not--in my lifetime;
let's put it that way--that we can have coal-fired plants that have got
[[Page 988]]
zero emissions. Now, that's important for people to know, that it's
possible. We've spent about billions there, as well, to achieve this
breakthrough, because we've got 250-some odd years of coal reserves in
the United States.
I think we ought to be using nuclear power. It is renewable, and it
produces no emissions. We're spending money on technologies to make sure
we can reprocess spent fuels. In other words, we're working on a variety
of fronts. I don't know the timetable--as soon as possible. And the
reason why is, is that our national security issues oftentimes rest with
countries that have got oil, and they don't like us, see.
And so the faster we're off oil, the better off we're going to be
from an economic security perspective and a national--and I probably
surprised you when I got up at my State of the Union and said, ``We've
got a problem; we're addicted to oil.'' You know, I'm from Texas and all
that. But I believe it, and I know it. And so I'm going to work with
members from both political parties to expedite research and development
so we've got new technologies to achieve this important objective.
Yes, ma'am.
U.S. Relations With Latin America
Q. Thank you--Westport, Connecticut. Speaking of oil-producing
countries that are not friendly to the United States right now, I'm very
concerned about what's going on in Venezuela and Bolivia and all--the
coalition of Hugo Chavez. I wondered what your strategy was going to be,
or what you're working on in that respect.
The President. Thank you. I am going to continue to remind our
hemisphere that respect for property rights and human rights is
essential for all countries in order for there to be prosperity and
peace. I'm going to remind our allies and friends in the neighborhood
that the United States of America stands for justice; that when we see
poverty, we care about it, and we do something about it; that we care
for good--we stand for good health care.
I'm going to remind our people that meddling in other elections is--
to achieve a short-term objective is not in the interests of the
neighborhood. I will continue to remind people that trade is the best
way to help people be lifted from poverty; that we can spend money--and
we do in the neighborhood--but the best way for there to be growth is to
encourage commerce and trade and prosperity through the marketplace.
I want to remind people that the United States stands against
corruption at all levels of government, that the United States is
transparent. The United States expects the same from other countries in
the neighborhood, and we'll work toward them.
We'll continue to work with forces like the Central--countries like
the Central American countries, where we passed a free trade agreement
called CAFTA, to remind the people in that area that relations with the
United States will be beneficial to their people. There's a lot of
things we're doing.
Thank you very much. I'm concerned--let me just put it bluntly--I'm
concerned about the erosion of democracy in the countries you mentioned.
Trust in Government
Q. Hi--Orlando, Florida. Let me first say, it's an honor to hear you
speak. And I'm a proud supporter. I just had a quick question.
Yesterday, at the keynote address, Ted Koppel mentioned that there is a
growing lack of trust between government and the American people. How
would you address this statement?
The President. He said there's a growing lack
of trust between our Government and the American people?
Q. Yes, he did.
The President. Well, I think I would say that there's an unease in
America now, and the reason why is because we're at war. And war is
difficult--particularly this kind of war, where it's on our TV screens
every
[[Page 989]]
day. And I can understand why people are uneasy. Americans care about
human life. We have a great compassion for people all around the world.
And so when people read or see that the enemy has run a suicide bomber
into a village or a marketplace and innocent people died, it breaks our
heart. So there is an unease about America.
Hey, listen, we got an amazing economy--it's strong, and yet there's
an uneasiness. And that's what happens in war. And let me just share my
thoughts about this with you. If I didn't think we'd succeed, I wouldn't
stay. And if I didn't think it was important that we succeed, I wouldn't
stay. And the reason it's important is that we must understand that
we're in a global war against a totalitarian group of people who will
kill innocent life, there or here, in order to achieve an objective.
That's just the lessons of September the 11th that I refuse to forget.
In Iraq, the enemy has made it clear--this is their words, not mine;
I quoted the man--the Al Qaida guy in
Iraq--those weren't my--I didn't make up those quotes. That's what he
said. And by the way, you need your President and your Commander in
Chief to take the words of the enemy seriously. And they have said it's
just a matter of time--[applause]. They have said it's a matter of time
for the United States to leave, that democracies are soft, that
capitalist societies are weak. And their view is that if they kill
enough innocent people, we will tire and leave. That's what they said.
They've also said, ``We're going to stop the elections.'' They will
try to sow sectarian violence in order to make it difficult for a
democracy to succeed in Iraq. And the reason why they want us to leave
is because they want safe haven from which to launch attacks--not only
against the United States but modern Muslim nations in the Middle East.
That's what they want to do.
Their vision--they have a vision. They have an ideology that is the
opposite of ours. They don't believe in freedom to dissent and freedom
to worship. Matter of fact, they've taken a great religion and, in my
judgment, have twisted it to meet their own needs.
If somebody said, ``Well, what do you think life would be like with
these folks?'', just remind them what life was like in Afghanistan under
the Taliban. There was no dissent, and if you did, you were whipped.
Young girls didn't go to school. They have a backward vision of the
world, but they do have a vision, and they want to spread that vision.
And we stand in the way of spreading that vision--we and a coalition of
nations that have bound together to promote democracy and freedom.
That's what--and democracy worries them.
My quote in the speech was this guy's words--democracy will be a setback. That's why I said, the
formation of this Government, under a Constitution drafted and approved
by the Iraqis, is a setback, because it's--they've said, ``We will
defeat this democracy.'' But they're not going to defeat the democracy.
The only way they defeat the democracy is if we let them defeat the
democracy, we don't stand with this young Government.
Again, I know that--I know there's concern about--from the American
people that we can't win. See, most Americans want us to win. Most
Americans want to succeed. And there's questions about whether or not
the strategy will do so.
And I can understand why people are concerned about whether or not
our strategy can succeed, because our progress is incremental. Freedom
is moving, but it's in incremental steps. And the enemy's progress is
almost instant, on their TV screens. And of course, I get briefings from
our commanders on the ground. I want to assure you that the
information--I make my mind up based not upon politics or political
opinion polls but based upon what the commanders on the ground tell me
is going on.
[[Page 990]]
I do want to share with you--thanks for bringing this up. It's not
exactly the question. [Laughter] I'll share with you some of my thoughts
about why it's important to have a democracy--liberty prevail in the
Middle East. You know, our policy up until now was, let's just hope
everything's fine. If it looked okay on the surface, then let's just
don't rock the boat. Let's get our energy sources and everything will be
all right.
But that's not what was happening. Beneath the surface, there was
a--discontent and hopelessness and despair was beginning to take hold.
And as a result, this group of killers sprung up, and they were able to
recruit and train sophisticated suiciders. And they killed over 3,000 of
our people.
I felt it was important for us to address not only the short-term
needs of the country--which means, stay on the offensive and bring them
to justice before they hurt us again--but also the longer term needs of
the country, by addressing the root cause of the resentment and hatred.
And in my judgment, the best way to defeat the totalitarian vision of
the enemy is with an ideology that has worked, that is bright and it's
hopeful, called freedom and liberty, expressed through democracy.
Now, I know there are some people in our country who say, why worry?
Well, the reason ``why worry'' is because we have a duty to lay the
foundation of peace for a generation to come. And I'm confident we can
succeed. And I will tell you two examples of this--of why I'm confident.
One, think of all the lives lost in Europe during World War I and World
War II, American lives lost. You all know some of them. You know
neighbors who had a grandfather or a father who went over--called up,
went overseas to--and fought in Europe and lost their lives. But today,
after nearly a century of violence and death and destruction, Europe is
whole, free, and at peace. And it's important for America to ask the
question, why is that the case? Well, democracies don't war with each
other, and democracies have taken hold in Europe.
The second example I like to bring up is from World War II as well,
and that is what's happened to our former enemy, the Japanese. Prime
Minister Koizumi is coming to our country
soon. I'll be sitting down at the table with a friend talking about
issues like North Korea or thanking him for having 1,000 troops in Iraq
or worrying about the spread of pandemic disease or talking about how we
can help the young democracy, Afghanistan. And I find it amazing that
the President of the United States is sitting down talking about peace
with the head of a country that my dad went
to war with and your dads and grandads went to war with.
And what happened between the brutal attack on our country--that, by
the way, killed fewer people at Pearl Harbor than we lost on September
the 11th--and today, when we're talking about keeping the peace? Japan
adopted a Japanese-style democracy. One thing history teaches--and by
the way, if you look back at some of the written word, when Harry Truman
had the vision of helping this country recover from the war and become a
democracy, a lot of people were saying, it's a waste of his time;
hopelessly idealistic, they would say. But he had faith in certain
fundamental truths. One truth is, everybody desires to be free. Freedom
is universal. It's not just a right for America.
And the second truth is, proven after 60 years of time, that freedom
has the capacity to convert an enemy to a friend. And as I said in my
remarks, I believe that this is an historic moment in Iraq, and that
someday people will be looking back on this period of time saying, thank
goodness the United States of America didn't lose its faith in certain
fundamental values and we laid the foundation of peace.
And it's hard work. It's hard work to go from a tyranny to a
democracy. And I understand why people are concerned; I understand it.
Listen, I meet with--the
[[Page 991]]
hardest job of the President is to meet with families of the fallen. And
it's a--it's my duty. But almost to a person, they say, ``Whatever you
do, Mr. President, complete the mission; lay the foundation of peace so
my child had not died in vain.'' And I give them that assurance every
time I'm with them.
Yell it.
Federal Response to Catastrophic Events
Q. I'm from Munster, Indiana. I was wondering, sir, if we were to be
attacked by a biological weapon or if there was an outbreak of the avian
flu, would we be prepared?
The President. Good question. We are working to be prepared. His
question is, if there is a catastrophic event that is beyond the
magnitude of a natural event, such as a biological attack and/or a
attack of pandemic flu, would we be prepared?
Well, first step is to recognize that it's a possibility and start
preparing, which we're doing at the Federal level. Yes, we've got a good
strategy--now, whether or not it would work to perfection, you hope you
never have to find out.
One of the classic cases--one of the classic dilemmas we're trying
to resolve is that most--it's against the law to put Federal troops in
to enforce the law. It's posse comitatus, you know? I'm not a lawyer,
but nevertheless, that's what the lawyers tell me. However, States can
use their Guard to do law enforcement activities. And the fundamental
question is, if there's an event big enough, should the Federal
Government be able to prevent State authority--should there be an
automatic declaration of a state of emergency that will enable me to
rally Federal troops to keep the law?
We haven't resolved that issue yet, but that's one of the dilemmas
on a catastrophic event that ends up exceeding the boundaries of--that
would make it not a local event. But we're working hard on it. We've
spent a lot of time on pandemic flu, which, by the way, has got the
same--a biological attack would have the same applications as to how
you--how do you isolate the incident; how do you isolate the spread of
disease; how do you rally local authorities to make the right decisions
about public facilities.
Mike Leavitt is in charge of this,
the health aspect of this response. He's been traveling the country,
working with local and State response plans, and it's a big job to get
ready for it. I appreciate your question.
Q. From Arlington, Texas.
The President. Oh, yes.
Q. Home of your Texas Rangers.
The President. Mighty Rangers. They never--they still don't have----
Q. They're in first place; that's good. My question is about----
The President. I thought with change of ownership they'd go all the
way, you know? [Laughter]
Health Care Reform/Global Warming
Q. My question is about health care reform.
The President. Yes.
Q. You mentioned health care reform, catastrophic health care
reform, Americans with disabilities as well. Under the umbrella of that,
it doesn't seem that there is much addressed in terms of dental care,
even though that is part of health care, I would think.
And the second part of that question is, will you see Al Gore's new
movie? [Laughter]
The President. Doubt it. [Laughter] But I will say this about the
environmental debate, that my answer to the energy question also is an
answer to how you deal with the greenhouse gas issue, and that is, new
technologies will change how we live and how we drive our cars, which
all will have the beneficial effect of improving the environment.
And in my judgment, we need to set aside whether or not greenhouse
gases have
[[Page 992]]
been caused by mankind or because of natural effects and focus on the
technologies that will enable us to live better lives and, at the same
time, protect the environment.
Not sure how to answer your question on dentistry, frankly. I'll
take a look at it. Yes, drop your address off.
Chef, how are you doing, buddy?
Q. Doing very good. I'm doing very good, sir.
The President. You know how I could tell you were chef?
Q. I don't know. [Laughter]
The President. Yes.
Q. Thank you. On behalf of--I'm from Tampa, Florida. And on behalf
of all the cooks and chefs in our country, I have to say, you're running
the country the way a chef would run the country, and we're proud of
you, first of all.
The President. Thank you, sir.
Governor Jeb Bush of Florida/Public Service
Q. You have created a lot of jobs, and our industry is just, like
you said, it's cranking, and we're loving every minute of it. My biggest
concern, sir, is 2008 is coming. Do you have a plan for--to keep your
policies in place and keep them going?
And would Jeb ever consider--we like him--even though we're the home
of the Tampa Bay Devil Rays--we don't have everything, but would Jeb
ever consider----
The President. Playing for the Tampa Bay Devil Rays?
Q. Hell no. [Laughter] For our country--for our country, sir.
The President. You better ask Jeb. Look, I said something about it
the other day. Somebody asked me about him. I said, look, I think he'd
be a great President. But it's--he said he's not going to run in 2008,
and I think you've got to take him for his word. He's been in public
life now for 8 years, and I think he wants a breather.
But thank you for your kind words. You go back and write him a
letter, you know. He's a good man. Look, my--here's the thing about
Washington that--the rhetoric needs, in my judgment, toned down up there
so that we're able to attract good people, both Republican and Democrat,
to run for public office. You know, it's one thing to disagree, but it's
another thing to disparage people. And we just--we don't need that kind
of language, in my judgment--in order to attract good people to public
service.
And there's too much politics in Washington these days. There really
is. And so my worry is, not so much about Jeb, but when people take a
look at Washington and say, ``Why mess with it? Why do I want to put my
family through it all?'' And my advice to them is, one, it's worth it.
But my advice, also, to all of us in public office is not to demean
somebody because you don't agree with them. At least, in the debate, be
considerate of the other person's point of view.
And the immigration debate is one where America needs to start, in
my judgment. I'm very worried about the tone of this debate. We are a
land of immigrants. One of the great things about America is we've been
able to assimilate people from all around the world into becoming
Americans. And that debate--if that debate tends to divide this country
or cause people to wonder about their worth as an individual, it will be
a debate of--it will be a debate that will be harmful.
Now, I understand the emotions of this issue. It's a tough issue for
Members to vote on. I happen to believe my comprehensive plan is the way
to go. But if somebody doesn't agree with me, I'm not going to debase
them in the public arena. And so whether the debate is immigration or
tax or Iraq, it's really important, in my judgment, for us to conduct
this debate with dignity. And that will help answer your question as to
whether or not people are going to be wanting to run for office.
You know, my buddies in Texas take a look at Washington and say,
``Why are you
[[Page 993]]
even up there, man? Come on home.'' [Laughter] ``What are you doing that
for?'' My answer is, I love my country. Public service is noble and
necessary. I'm glad I ran for President. And I'll try to do my part to
elevate the tone and hold people--and treat people with respect whether
they agree with me or not.
I've got to go back to Washington. God bless. Thanks for coming.
Note: The President spoke at 10:37 a.m. at the Arie Crown Theater at
Lakeside Center--McCormick Place. In his remarks, he referred to Mayor
Richard M. Daley of Chicago, IL; Edward R. Tinsley III, chairman of the
board of directors, National Restaurant Association, and his wife,
Meredith; Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, former President Saddam
Hussein, President Jalal Talabani, and Speaker of the Council of
Representatives Mahmoud al-Mashhadani of Iraq; senior Al Qaida associate
Abu Musab Al Zarqawi; Prime Minister Stephen Harper of Canada; and Prime
Minister Junichiro Koizumi of Japan. Participants referred to President
Hugo Chavez Frias of Venezuela; Ted Koppel, former anchor, ABC News; and
former Vice President Al Gore.